If a movie intrigues me enough that I’m paying theater prices for it, then I’ll splurge for the 3-D if that’s how it was meant to be seen by the director.
I wear glasses, and the 3-D glasses fit in front of them. I’ve worn my polarized sunglasses that fit over my glasses, too, but they don’t work with every kind of 3-D.
Depends on the kind of movie and if the 3D effects are good enough.
If it’s a movie with a lot of special effects like Avatar, and the 3D effects are good, then I’m all in, despite the fact that I get dizzy everytime I watch it. Otherwise no. I just don’t want to watch a 3D romance. And I have seen a movie whose 3D effects are only used for the first 15 minutes. Totally a waste of my time.
I don’t. But I watch anyway especially the big special fx movies. Reason why I don’t enjoy it is it darkens the screen. If they fix that, that will be cool.
No. I am blind in one eye so I am incapable of seeing 3d effects. A 3d movie looks identical to a 2d movie to me, except the definition is not so good.
I never go to the 3D version anymore. The novelty long ago wore off for me. I don’t like to pay the extra ticket cost, and who needs the headache. Also, I don’t like having to wear the glasses over my regular ones.
I have a 3D-equipped large screen TV and I doubt I’ve used the feature more than three times in two years.
No. 3D is basically dead. Sure, they still offer it at theaters as they always have, but the 3D TV market is a bust. Nobody wants to wear an expensive and ridiculous pair of glasses to watch a movie, especially if it gives them a headache.
No, it seems less realistic and too much in your face. I don’t like wearing the glasses either, because they hurt the bridge of my nose. It seems to gimmicky.
I usually go to animated 3D movies that are made specifically to be shown in 3D, but I’ve seen some good live-action ones too. Most post converted 3D movies look awful.
The best looking 3D movies I’ve ever seen are Coraline, Life of Pi, Titanic, and The Lego Movie,