I just saw this and I have to say that Blu-Ray may have won the war, but I don’t think there is anything special about 3D. I hate all things 3D, just yesterday I was at Best Buy buying something for work (no seriously) and I came across two guys with 3D glasses on playing a basketball game…my only question is: What is the appeal?
Does the 3D aspect really give you that much better of an experience? (OK, so I had another question).
The only movie that I’ve paid to see in 3D was Resident Evil: Afterlife, which was OK, the Resident Evil movie series has been mediocre at best, but I walked away with a headache and my eyes were hurting like hell. 3D is not my idea of a good time. I am also highly angered at the amount of 3D movies that are currently in production that will be coming out next summer. Not happy about that and I feel like it is such a waste of time (Pirates, Transformers, I think even the final Harry Potter and that’s not including the entire Star Wars Saga that will be coming out in the next few years).
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, I really think this is a fad and once Hollywood (and entertainment) has over exposed and over saturated the market with crap, people will stop ogling over it when it comes out.
Here is an article from joblo.com:
Will 3D save Blu-Ray?
by: Paul Tassi Jan. 4, 2011
If you thought the format war was over when Blu-Ray killed HD-DVD, you were wrong, as now a far greater battle is taking place: streaming and downloads vs. physical media. On one side we have services like Netflix which offer hi-def movies streaming straight to a consumer’s DVD, which is a welcome alternative to $35 Blu-rays.
But there could be a light on the horizon for the format, and it comes in the form of…sigh, 3D. Currently there are only 30 3D Blu-ray titles on the market right now, but that number is increasing rapidly due to everyone agreeing on the process of formatting 3D on the disc.
“I don’t think I’ve ever seen an association turn out a spec in such rapid time,” Blu-ray exec Parsons said. “The alternative would have been two or three different ways to do 3D on a disc — and that’s death to a format. Everyone understood that could happen. We avoided what could have been an ugly, messy situation.”
But is home 3D really the revolution analysts are claiming it will be? I recently had the displasure of viewing a Sony 3D TV with $100 shutter glasses. I watched a movie about fish for a few minutes, the depth looked fine, but it wasn’t anything to make me shell out $3-5K for the TV and $40 for the Blu-ray. Afterwards though? I felt incredibly dizzy and nauseous, something that’s never once happened to me watching 3D in the theater. I literally had to sit down I was so disoriented, and after my internal mechanisms righted themselves after ten minutes, I was thoroughly turned off to the idea. That was ust my personal experience, but I wonder if others have been affected the same way.
Do you think home 3D will eventually become mainstream, or will 3D TVs need to go glasses free first? And will you spend $40 to buy a new movie on 3D Blu-ray? That’s 2/3rds of a video game at that point, which offers anywhere from 5x to 50x the number of hours of entertainment.
Extra Tidbit: Also 3D TV does NOT look like any of the pictures you see of things coming out of the screen. it just gives the picture a mild amount of depth. It’s not like holograms come out of your TV and circle around you.
