Film critic Roger Ebert weighs in on the current 3D movie craze, and why it’s a failure, at least from the technical side. I always wondered why it feels so odd when I don the glasses, now I have an explanation.
I really couldn’t care less whether a film is 3D or not. It doesn’t give me headaches or anything, but I only notice the 3D part maybe twice per movie — once at the beginning, once in the particular scene the director put in just to highlight the 3D aspect. And I have to put up with the glasses on top of that. Forcing me to pay extra for this dubious honor just annoys me. GoddessJ and I make a point of going to 2D showings whenever we have a choice. Hollywood, call me when you’ve got real 3D, then I’ll probably reconsider.
On the other hand, I hear that it has caused a lot of beneficial changes in the film industry by forcing it to finally go digital, so I’m not going to complain too loudly.
If there’s anything more gimicky than 3d movies, it was the thankfully brief 3d phone craze. (The most popular one being the Sprint HTC Evo 3d.) It made the phones more bulky (two big cameras etc), and probably made the overall visual quality worse. The HTC Sensation, the 3d-less version of the phone, had a terrific case and was thin, the 3d version not so.
I hadn’t even heard about that one. Sounds like I should be thankful for that omission. 😉
It wasn’t a totally horrible phone, it was a top of the line HTC Android phone after all, but it suffered some from the 3d camera and parallelex screen in my mind in comparison to the version without it. (It did not require glasses at least for its 3d effects, thankfully.)
It turns out, due to it’s similarity (sans 3d) hardware-wise to the Touchpad, the HTC Evo 3d is the first non-HPalm handset to have webOS. Maybe I’ll have to change my evaluation of this phone. 😉
http://www.theverge.com/2011/12/9/2624350/webos-hacked-together-for-htcs-evo-3d-a-proof-of-concept-for-the-time