10.22.09 EBERT HATES 3D TOO
(Biff’s buddy can’t catch a break)
If you’ve been paying any attention to the film industry for the past year, you know 3D is the next big thing. Avatar is supposed to be a “game changer“, Jeffrey Katzenberg says Dreamsworks will be all 3D from now on, and even Iron Man 2 was toying with the idea of 3D. I’ve bitched about 3D being an annoying gimmick a few times, and my opinion is usually enough for me. But it’s nice to see a world-famous film critic agree with me, and now, Roger Ebert has weighed in. (Actually it was two weeks ago, but who’s counting.):
Simply put, has anyone ever attended a 2-D movie and thought, ‘If only it were in 3-D’? I doubt it, because 2-D creates a perfectly effective illusion of depth and dimension. When I see Lawrence growing from a dot far across the desert sands, it never occurs to me that I’m watching a 2-D image. When I watch 3-D, however, I’m constantly reminded that it’s in 3-D. Objects approach and recede alarmingly, drawing you out of the actual film.
Characters seem more concerned to demonstrate their dimensions than their personalities. And, by its nature, the entire 3-D image must be in focus at all times, depriving cinematographers of the use of focal planes. The process is an annoyance and a distraction. [via Spectator UK]
Yeah! What he said! Though, in the interests of being fair and balanced, I should point out that critic Pete Hammond calls 3-D “the funniest innovation of the year!”, while Ben Lyons says it’s “the wave of the future, homey.”
![[image]](http://cdn.fd.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2009/11/aliceinwonderland-shopped-150x150.jpg)
![[image]](http://cdn.fd.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2009/10/michaeljackson-timemachine-150x150.jpg)
![[image]](http://cdn.fd.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2009/10/jesus-drmanhattan-150x150.jpg)
There are 17 comments about:
EBERT HATES 3D TOO
I can still enjoy a 3D movie.
As long as there are no gays there.
I prefer 36D movies.
Yeah! What GenePool said.
* except I take mine in the DDD variety
I resent that you used a picture with Billy Zane in it. That’s no way for me to begin my day, Vince.
Looking back at it, it’s amazing how much that movie accurately predicted the future.
*Cracks knuckles in fingerless gloves*
Remember when Ebert reviewed Ratatouille? He called it a “rambunctious cocktease.”
You know, Ratatouille 3D.
Soon we’ll have an entire generation of young moviegoers who say to themselves as they leave the theater after seeing a 3D movie “I wish real life was in 3D, that would be so cool.”
These are also the people that think a character not having a Blackberry or iPhone is considered a plot hole.
As long as it’s not 4D, I’m okay. The only time I watched one, I kept getting transported Jersey Mike’s for some reason. Took fucking forever.
Ebert later added, “OH SNAP SON, OH SNAP!!!”.
The Mighty Feklahr never knew a young Captain Kirk used to run with Biff Tannen, but it does help explain a few things.
Furthermore, He never knew Geordi had a little white cousin!
Give Biff some Ray Bans and he’d be modern hipster scum.
Doesn’t Mr. World-famous film critic mean “when I see SHARIF ALI growing from a dot far across the desert”? Eesh.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvBcl40QOhQ
That’s not Cpt. Kirk…that’s Ensign McMichael. Unfortunately he was shot by a Romulan disrutor and didn’t make it back with the rest of the away team.
Not pictured: Data inappropriately touching Counselor Troy.
3D activates one of my phobias, things flying at my eyes. It really isn’t a laughing matter. I hate it, it really puts a damper on my social life at the gay bars.
Comment on this post:
You must be logged in to post a comment. Not yet a member, register for free.