January 22nd, 2010 | 
Author: 
So I was browsing the tubes and I stumbled onto some Ghostbusters 3 stuff and said to myself “Really f’ing 3D?” Yes we all know it’s been a growing trend in this new age of tech but, enough already. Here’s my issue. Clearly Hollywood is milking this thing for all it’s worth. Every new movie I practically read about now has some form of f’ing 3D in it now. The ironic thing about this “gimmick” and it is just that a gimmick. Hollywood and the studios obviously feel this is a format that’s going to be around for a while and TV makers are jumping on the bandwagon. With that said I’m tired of the gimmick I don’t need to have things flying at my head to enjoy a good movie. This new trend in Hollywood obviously is a tactic being used to gain movie goers. It’s almost like Hollywood saying “Yeah we know the movie is a turd but, it’s in 3-D and your going to love it because it’s 3-D. While films have been released in 3-D and not in 3-D. How long is it before every film we see at a theater is going to be in 3-D? Just because it’s the new big thing to do in films doesn’t make it great. Maybe with Hollywood’s claims of piracy running the industry into the ground. Is this possibly just Hollywood’s attempt to curb piracy by adding this technology to films now? Hhhmmm…..
-Rob
My dearest Rob.
God damn.
3D has been around since Lillian Gish was still hot. Over 1100 movies came out last year, and all of 17 were available in 3D. The only new gimmick is the ColorCode anachrome stuff (JD’s Chuck 3D used it), and that only serves to make content more watchable without the glasses.
Also, Ghostbusters will likely disappoint you now matter how many dimensions they use.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t want to jump on the 3D bandwagon, but aren’t we almost past the point of us calling it a gimmick-when everybody is doing it? Like you said, TV manufacturers like Sony, Panasonic, are putting this technology into their products (which I’m not sure what the technology is considering it’s based on how the source material was shot). I mean, I have a 6 year old HDTV and I watched “Chuck” in 3D as long as I picked up my “Chuck 3D glasses” at the “Shop-n-Save”. Now if this technology allows us not to wear the uncomfortable glasses then, they maybe onto something. Avatar’s use of 3D never felt like a gimmick to me. Sure My Bloody Valentine “used it” that way, but if directors start using it just to ad more “depth” to their worlds and we don’t need glasses, then I won’t mind this new format. If I have to keep dodging things flying at me, then I will say that this is a Gimmick that has gone too far.
On a side note, if TV manages to bring 3D home and eliminates the need for 3D Glasses, then the film companies who are using this as a gimmick to get people “back in the theater seats”, are in a world of hurt and better start looking into something else. Why would I pay extra to sit in a theater wearing those goofy glasses when I could watch it in glorious 3D-HD in my home?
That’s just my opinion.