‘Avatar 2’ Renews Push for 3D Format in Movie Theaters (1 Viewer)

[Dick]

Gee, ya know, I've never seen a quote regarding just how much manufacturers had to pay for the chip and circuitry to produce 3D, but I'm guessing it wasn't all that friggin' much. The higher cost of the displays ought to have easily covered it, and could again. Let's just do it right this time:

One fuckin' system, preferably active. No more bullshit promotional tie-ins that hold a title like AVATAR hostage for a year by one t.v. manufacturer. Advertise the hell out of any new system and its subsequent software. Get Hollywood to make decent, thoughtful and appropriate 3D movies, not crap thrillers and hyperactive sci-fi. Get movie studios and rights holders to begin working with Blu-ray movie companies to get out the remaining, unreleased classic titles.

Get Di$ney to start offering 3D again, not only in theaters, but on Blu-ray, including ones that have been shown in 3D in theaters, but were skipped over on disc, such as PETE'S DRAGON, RAYA AND THE LAST DRAGON, ENCANTO and MULAN, and more recent Pixar films, such as SOUL, TURNING RED and LUCA, plus a few released in 3D only in Europe, like ONWARD and STAR WARS: THE RISE OF SKYWALKER (although these can be had easily and cheaply on the American market).

Yes, I believe, and always have, that the slow demise of the relatively long-lasting wave of 3D during the 2000's was due to poor marketing and a disinterest on the part of display manufacturers. A really clever and effective advertising campaign and a return of hardware support can get this format back to viability, but it must reflect all the learning that has gone on during the past two decades. TV manufacturers sold us out first, then Disney, then everything fell like dominos. C'mon back, boys...the water's fine!

P.S.
I only noticed, two days after the edit option vanished, that I had meant to say I preferred "passive" 3-D displays, not "active," as I stated above. Charging glasses turning them on for everyone and a much more darkened-down image using my old active Panny plasma was not a fun experience, and I had a lot more cross-talk than when I upgraded to the LG OLED passive system, which I love and will defend to the real last days of the format (which haven't arrived).

 

[Stephen_J_H]

P.S.
I only noticed, two days after the edit option vanished, that I had meant to say I preferred "passive" 3-D displays, not "active," as I stated above. Charging glasses turning them on for everyone and a much more darkened-down image using my old active Panny plasma was not a fun experience, and I had a lot more cross-talk than when I upgraded to the LG OLED passive system, which I love and will defend to the real last days of the format (which haven't arrived).

It should now be possible, with 8K displays now widely available, to offer not only passive 1080p 3D, but passive 4K 3D. It won’t be cheap at first, but it could kickstart the next wave of 3D with a sufficient push.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

There were just too many little obstacles, both necessary (due to available tech) and unnecessary (due to corporate greed, plain stupidity/shortsightedness, etc), me thinks.

Personally, I generally don't mind paying a little more for 3D, if it's indeed all that good, but what I've seen (albeit not likely the best examples of course) just didn't seem worthwhile to bother much for the most part -- I wear glasses (though nothing thick), so that might be part of the issue... although some fans here also wear glasses. I do buy the 3D BD on occasion when it's not substantially more expensive (or difficult to get), so I have a handful or so... though forgot to redeem my Panasonic offer for free Avatar 3D BD, LOL, which was a bummer...

I'll probably give Avatar 2 a try in 3D (and maybe also the original, if there's a good theatrical rerelease).

IF 3D, especially in HT, does actually have a good resurgence, I'll finally get some glasses for that I guess. But otherwise...

_Man_

 

[Dick]

There were just too many little obstacles, both necessary (due to available tech) and unnecessary (due to corporate greed, plain stupidity/shortsightedness, etc), me thinks.

Personally, I generally don't mind paying a little more for 3D, if it's indeed all that good, but what I've seen (albeit not likely the best examples of course) just didn't seem worthwhile to bother much for the most part -- I wear glasses (though nothing thick), so that might be part of the issue... although some fans here also wear glasses. I do buy the 3D BD on occasion when it's not substantially more expensive (or difficult to get), so I have a handful or so... though forgot to redeem my Panasonic offer for free Avatar 3D BD, LOL, which was a bummer...

I'll probably give Avatar 2 a try in 3D (and maybe also the original, if there's a good theatrical rerelease).

IF 3D, especially in HT, does actually have a good resurgence, I'll finally get some glasses for that I guess. But otherwise...

_Man_

There are numerous, really excellent 3D Blu-rays out there, some converted*, that provide great depth, and some even with occasional (i.e. not overused) forward projection. They also happen to have good stories!:

THE WALK*
THE WIZARD OF OZ*
GRAVITY*
A TURTLE'S TALE (1 & 2)
LIFE OF PI
THE JUNGLE BOOK (2016)
EVEREST (may have been converted)
HUGO
HOUSE OF WAX
AVATAR
MADAGASCAR 2: EUROPE'S MOST WANTED
MINISCULE
IT CAME FROM OUTER SPACE
JURASSIC PARK*
A CHRISMAS CAROL (ANIMATED)
CORALINE
THE MARTIAN
FRANKENWEENIE
DAMN NEAR EVERYTHING FROM 3D FILM ARCHIVES

It's worth buying a decent 3D display, preferably an OLED if you can find one, for the above titles alone. Everyone, of course, has their favorites.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

It should now be possible, with 8K displays now widely available, to offer not only passive 1080p 3D, but passive 4K 3D. It won’t be cheap at first, but it could kickstart the next wave of 3D with a sufficient push.

It’s theoretically possible but I don’t really see it happening. At present time, there is no spec for 4K in 3D. All theatrical 3D presentations come from 2K DCPs, even if the 2D version of the film is mastered in 4K. (There is a minor exception for Ang Lee’s experimental HFR productions, but only an extremely limited number of theaters were capable of playing them at higher resolutions and the audience has thus far not responded to them.)

I just don’t see, with the limited demand for the format, any appetite for creating a new spec that would ultimately cost a significant amount to widely implement, drive up post production costs considerably, and which would be unlikely to make the format more popular even if it was.

 

[Sky King]

P.S.
I only noticed, two days after the edit option vanished, that I had meant to say I preferred "passive" 3-D displays, not "active," as I stated above. Charging glasses turning them on for everyone and a much more darkened-down image using my old active Panny plasma was not a fun experience, and I had a lot more cross-talk than when I upgraded to the LG OLED passive system, which I love and will defend to the real last days of the format (which haven't arrived).

I haven’t had any issues with my Panasonic 3D plasma or the active 3D glasses. No crosstalk and found they hold a charge for quite a long time.

John

 

[Artanis]

Being an avid theatrical 3D goer, when I watched 3D movies on a flat panel HD set, I simply was not that thrilled. At all. Some of the issues brought up here that people experience were very apparent to me watching 3D on a TV set. But once I made the move to a projection system, it was 180 degree shift. Many of those issues watching the same disc on a projector were no longer prevalent. It was basically a night and day comparison. But a bad release like Jaws 3D, nothing will fix until a complete remaster. If anybody is sitting on the fence, I'd encourage them to make the jump.

 

[Sega]

I will keep my No D. 4K Tv and be happy.

 

[John Dirk]

I haven’t had any issues with my Panasonic 3D plasma or the active 3D glasses. No crosstalk and found they hold a charge for quite a long time.

John

I pulled mine out after a year or so and both sets refused to pair with my Epson projector. One was an obvious battery issue but the other seemed normal. Anyway, I trashed them and ordered these, which work perfectly.

See on Amazon

 

[John Dirk]

Being an avid theatrical 3D goer, when I watched 3D movies on a flat panel HD set, I simply was not that thrilled. At all. Some of the issues brought up here that people experience were very apparent to me watching 3D on a TV set. But once I made the move to a projection system, it was 180 degree shift. Many of those issues watching the same disc on a projector were no longer prevalent. It was basically a night and day comparison. But a bad release like Jaws 3D, nothing will fix until a complete remaster. If anybody is sitting on the fence, I'd encourage them to make the jump.

I couldn't agree more but sadly I also think this is precisely why the format will never be viable for the home. Truly impressive 3D requires a light-controlled [preferably dedicated] room and a large screen, not to mention a capable playback device and appropriate source material. The investment can be substantial. I therefore believe the 3D market will always be a sort of subset of the projector [and perhaps eventually mega-TV] market. Like many superior formats before it, without mainstream acceptance it just doesn't make good business sense, at least not yet.

 

[TJPC]

Nothing beats IMAX 3D, of course, but my 65" Sony 3D set, (I was just about ready to replace this when 3D sets stopped being available),with its active glasses certainly beats almost every showing of "Real 3D" I have seen, with the possible exception of Dr. Strange 2.

The problem as I see it, is 3D viewing does not mesh with the casual viewer. The one good offshoot of my cataract surgery, was that I no longer need glasses for long distance viewing. My 3D glasses are uncomfortable with prescription glasses, which is why my wife will not watch home 3D. She likes to use her iPad and glance at the TV from time to time when necessary -- basically making it "assisted radio" like putting Roosevelts picture above the radio to glance at during his fireside chats (!).

Stereo viewing requires it being an event, when we put aside out other interests and just watch. I do this with every main stream movie that produces a 3D Blu I can get my hands on, but I wait to see them when she is out with friends -- not a forbidden activity on my part, but one she is not interested in. She still talks about watching "It Came From Outer Space" with me and feeling like the top of her head was being squeezed off and the bridge of her nose being broken by the glasses. This is an experience she does not want to repeat.

On another note, some of the best home 3D I have ever seen, is on the converted "Titanic".

 

[Sam Posten]

Nothing beats IMAX 3D

Dolby Cinema 3D beats imax3d IMO…

 

[Noel Aguirre]

If it doesn't renew interest in bringing back 3D tv's then I have no interest.

My Sony 4K 3D set is still going strong- just watched Dune the other night. And always up for a spin of Kiss Me Kate!

 

[Hartwig Hanser]

Industry needs a new marketing argument after 4k to sell new TVs. It could be either 8k or 4k/3D. IMO the latter offers more of a distinction and advantage for most people. Especially since screen sizes have increased which makes for a better 3D experience. Therefore I would expect a possible switch back to 3D, if Avatar 2 proves to be a similar gigantic success and 3D advancement as the first one.

 

[Stephen_J_H]

But a bad release like Jaws 3D, nothing will fix until a complete remaster.

It’s debatable whether a complete remaster would fix Jaws 3D, as the chromatic aberrations are baked in, courtesy of the problematic ArriVision rig. The best looking shots are the underwater shots done with Chris Condon’s rig.

 

[TJPC]

Dolby Cinema 3D beats imax3d IMO…

I live in the home country for IMAX. I don’t think we have any Dolby ones.

 

[GerardoHP]

I think 3D is the least of the potential Avatar concerns. The trailer doesn't seem to offer much that is new to the human eye, in fact, it looks pretty much like any other current sci-fi movie. I hope Cameron has a couple of tricks up his sleeve to make this a step beyond as he has done in the past with all his movies.

 

[Sam Posten]

Some people appear gleeful that some theaters will not project 3D films.

It’s true. Some of us are hoping that Avatar’s 3D is a failure so that we never have to talk about why almost nobody cares about 3D missing from panels ever again.

 

[Lord Dalek]

It’s true. Some of us are hoping that Avatar’s 3D is a failure so that we never have to talk about why almost nobody cares about 3D missing from panels ever again.

Well when you put it THAT way...

 

[Peter Apruzzese]

Still trying to figure out why people who have no interest in 3D are intent on not allowing other people to enjoy 3D, especially since it does impact them in the slightest.