It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
I just found out that in cinema in my city there's going to be Prometheus in 3D only. That literally pissed me off, since I can't see 3D, have terrible headache after the movie and other health problems.

And now I have a question for you: Is there anyone here who has similar problems? How much everyone really likes the 3D experience in their cinemas?
I don't get headaches, but I do wear glasses (don''t like contacts) which, as you can probably imagine, is kind of annoying with 3D glasses. I also just don't particularly like 3D..
avatar
Gazoinks: I don't get headaches, but I do wear glasses (don''t like contacts) which, as you can probably imagine, is kind of annoying with 3D glasses. I also just don't particularly like 3D..
All of this. No headaches, glasses makes wearing it unconfortable (my nose hurts), and I don't enjoy 3D too much.
I wouldn't know, I don't have a 3D television or 3DS and I don't go to the cinema because I hate people.
Only good looking 3D movie I have seen yet is Avatar. Any others I have seen, wern't worth wearing the glasses for.
avatar
GraveTone: snip
I only went to see a cinema 3D once. And never again. I also get headaches, but even worse than those are the eye-aches. My eyes hurt for days after seeing it.
Have seen Alice in 3D and had no problems at all (wearing glasses myself + the 3D Glasses). Was quite funny, but I think the additional price just because it is 3D is not worth it.
I don't have any health problems concerning that, but it's annoying for me that you have a good look only at what's in focus, thus rendering two thirds of the picture blurry and useless and as a bonus it costs 50% more than a regular screening.
I tend to avoid 3D movies, because I don't really enjoy the experience despite having to pay a higher entrance fee.

I don't like having to put fat-rimmed glasses on top of my own delicate ones, which are annoying enough but at least I'm used to them (not sure if I'd enjoy 3D slightly more if I was wearing contact lenses).

I haven't watched a single movie yet that really needed the 3D effects and was better because of them. I have to admit that I'm generally more interested in stories and photography, not action and special effects, but I've also got this suspicion that 3D isn't really suited for fast paced action because 3D requires you to focus on certain parts of the screen while the things in the background are blurry, so if there's something moving quickly across the screen you can't focus your eyes on it quickly enough and it becomes blurry, too. So my impression is 3D might be good for impressive panorama views, but bad for quick movements and most blockbuster movies have more of the latter than the first.

The screen becomes slightly darker, and in some movies it felt to me like it was farer away and as if the picture consisted of several flat layers behind one another, not like one plastic, truly 3D image.

I have no idea if these things are connected to myopia, choosing the wrong seats in the cinema or watching the wrong movies, all I can say is that so far I have never really enjoyed the experience when I watched one in 3D and that I prefer to have the choice to watch them in 2D for a less expensive ticket.
Post edited July 25, 2012 by Leroux
That's interesting, because if many people don't pay for 3D movie, then why do cinemas put it instead of 2D? I can't understand that, especially in Poland. Avengers were only in 3D, now Prometheus (although the latter was supposed to be in 3D and 2D, I got the info month ago from cinema Helios' website). I just don't get it. I understand, that the price is higher, but how many folks really choose the "spectacular" version over the normal?
avatar
GraveTone: That's interesting, because if many people don't pay for 3D movie
Apparantly they do. Lots of people don't seem to mind it or even like it. And if there are no alternatives, they don't make a fuss about it. A few grouchy and bespectacled cineasts from the GOG community (which is famous for its niche preferences) doesn't mean "many" yet, and maybe they're even worth ignoring (I'll spare you any DRM analogies). ;)
Post edited July 25, 2012 by Leroux
I don't get headaches, but I generally avoid 3D movies because they don't look very 3D to me.

I watched Avatar and Alice in Wonderland in 3D and it didn't really impress me in either one. The only time I really felt that it was 3D was when a tea cup was thrown toward the screen in Alice in Wonderland. (My wife also shares this opinion.)

I watched Captain EO a long time ago, but I don't remember if I thought it was 3D. I also matched Muppet*Vision 3D at Disney's MGM back in the 90's and thought that was great.

I guess the only times I notice 3D are when it's exaggerated for comedic effect.
avatar
GraveTone: That's interesting, because if many people don't pay for 3D movie, then why do cinemas put it instead of 2D? I can't understand that, especially in Poland. Avengers were only in 3D, now Prometheus (although the latter was supposed to be in 3D and 2D, I got the info month ago from cinema Helios' website). I just don't get it. I understand, that the price is higher, but how many folks really choose the "spectacular" version over the normal?
Well, while there's a lot of people complaining about it most do cave in and go to a 3D screening because it's the only one. At least that was me for Prometheus, I really didn't want to wait a whole year for the DVD to come out.
avatar
GraveTone: snip
Do you have a colour vision problem, as in "greenblindness"? That could be the issue.
. I don't get a headache, and only minor eye-strain, but I can, for the most part, not even see the 3D effects. Most of the time it just looks flat & 2D to me.
Post edited July 25, 2012 by AFnord