Bullets 'n' Babes

An increasing amount of new films seem to be in the 3D format,and with the success of Avatar it's only going to increase.to me it's a gimmick,just like it was 50 years ago.But a look at new and up-coming films reveals movie studios are obsessed-Alice In Wonderland,Toy Story 3,How To Train Your Dragon,Clash Of The Titans,Harry Potter are examples.And of course cinemas charge extra to see these movies in the format. For home cinema,new televisions are coming which if you wanted to get into the format is going to cost a bomb. the few movies i've tried at home on BD using the admittedly old fashioned process have been pretty underwhelming plus it's crap for a glasses wearer like me. So it's a thumbs down from me Your Thoughts?...it's not just new movies...look what they've done to Nosferatu...why?

http://10kbullets.com/reviews/n/orlok-t ... nosferatu/

Every 30 years they come out with this "ooh, it's 3-D" shit. The fad lasts for a couple of years and then buries itself again to be rediscovered by a new generation of geeks. See also circa 1953 and 1983.

Markgway wrote:Every 30 years they come out with this "ooh, it's 3-D" shit. The fad lasts for a couple of years and then buries itself again to be rediscovered by a new generation of geeks. See also circa 1953 and 1983.

Agreed but this time with new televisions and even tv channels coming i think they are making a serious attempt at making it permanent.

Unlike past iterations, the technology is now advanced enough to make it worthwhile rather than just a gimmick, it's totally here to stay. Whilst I'm not obsessed with 3D films, I certainly have no desire to see Avatar in 2D. My cinema doesn't charge extra for 3D films by the way.

You're lucky Gas. Most do. Seeing a 3D film costs loads.

So far I've seen a grand total of zero, basically because they've all looked like films not for me (cartoons and Avatar). I tried to see Avatar loads of times but every time I never made it. It looks rubbish to me. I'm going to see Alice in Wonderland in 3D tomorrow evening. I see it this way, would Schindler's List work in 3D? No way. It works with action films, just about but is otherwise very much a gimmick. As I've not actually seen any though, I figure I should at least give it a try.

Oddly all my local cinemas are now virtually only showing it in 2D. So I'm having to make a trip. I'm not sure why they've suddenly switched to the 2D version.

3D Glasses will cost about £100
3D HDTV £2000
3D Blu-ray Player £350

That's nearly £2,500 but given that TV prices quickly come down in price, give it 2-3 years and they'll be much more reasonable. I got into HD as it made sense, a a natural progression but I've zero interest in buying yet another HD TV (save for 1080p when my TV dies) and yet another Blu-ray player. I've not had these long really.

Schindler's List in 3D. Wouldn't that be the height of bad taste? You could also screen it with smell-o-rama and gas the audience.

I watched Alice in Wonderland today and the 3D is pretty much a non-entity - it's just about there but so restrained that its blatantly obvious that it was an afterthought after the film was made. It adds nothing to the enjoyment of the film and if anything detracts from the experience because there are a few shots where an object or character is in the foreground out of focus whilst the camera focuses on Alice in the background, then the fcous switches to the foreground object/character. These shots simply don't work in faux-3D and place quite a bit of strain on your eyes.

The film's crap as well, pretty much no narrative to speak of and the lead actress has clearly been cast for her look as she makes a young Keanu Reeves seem extremely expressive, while the characters are so fucking bland that the film should be prescribed to insomniacs. Bonham-Carter's performance is about the only decent thing about it.

So the next Bond film is going to be 3D as well, christ could you imagine the horror of Bourne/QoS style shakey-cam, staccato action in 3D?

It sounds like Avatar is the only film (outside of animation) where it's seriously meant to be shown in 3D. I'm now going tonight to see Alcie in Wonderland in 3D. So will give my verdict tomorrow. If it doesn't work, I doubt I'll be seeing any more 3D films. Clash of the Titans is the only film on the horizon which I might want to see and is in 3D too but frankly it looks average at best and rubbish at worst.

Clash Of The Titans apparently had 3-D added after filming finished,it wasn't filmed originally that way so i imagine it'll look pants.

Shingster wrote:I watched Alice in Wonderland today and the 3D is pretty much a non-entity - it's just about there but so restrained that its blatantly obvious that it was an afterthought after the film was made. It adds nothing to the enjoyment of the film and if anything detracts from the experience because there are a few shots where an object or character is in the foreground out of focus whilst the camera focuses on Alice in the background, then the fcous switches to the foreground object/character. These shots simply don't work in faux-3D and place quite a bit of strain on your eyes.

The film's crap as well, pretty much no narrative to speak of and the lead actress has clearly been cast for her look as she makes a young Keanu Reeves seem extremely expressive, while the characters are so fucking bland that the film should be prescribed to insomniacs. Bonham-Carter's performance is about the only decent thing about it.

So the next Bond film is going to be 3D as well, christ could you imagine the horror of Bourne/QoS style shakey-cam, staccato action in 3D?

Agree about the use of 3-D in Alice Shing, the film was all right (3/5) for me but the use of 3-D added nothing to the film and didnt do much IMO.

Well I have seen pretty much all the 3D films released so far, bar a few that looked shit (Alice in Burton Land is my idea of Hell), many of them were shown on the biggest and best screen in our area (now the 3D films Hog the best screens sadly ). When it works, it works amazingly well, but hell the films are on the whole average to shite
I have yet to see anything close to a classic in 3D yet, with only Avatar what I would call a great film. I have been back to see that a fair few times so far in the cinema in 3D, as no way I will ever experience that in my home in my lifetime (but hey TV makers suprise me please!).

People should not even comment on 3D until they have seen Avatar, as frankly you have zero idea at all what the new age digital 3D effect looks like at all, there is no way to imagine it to be honest. So best to see one and them come back and lay into them still it is irratating me now adding it as an afterthought and really its a pain in the arse wearing uncomfortable glasses to watch a film. I have seen 3 3D films in a row in our cinema, it did not do my head in so I guess I am OK with the effect, but I know many who get pain and it is just not even an option for them anymore.

I am off to see Clash of the Titans tommrow, I still have not decided for sure which version I will be seeing, but 2D at the moment is what I am wanting to go to, depends if I get outvoted on the night.

Has anyone done 3-D porn yet?

3-D nipples might even get me into a cinema.

But there might be drawbacks... I wonder what it's like getting poked in the eye with some dude's erect knob?

Brad, what's it like?

Markgway wrote:Has anyone done 3-D porn yet?

3-D nipples might even get me into a cinema.

But there might be drawbacks... I wonder what it's like getting poked in the eye with some dude's erect knob?

Brad, what's it like?

They have done many 3D pornos, all shit I am sure

Closest thing to 3D porn I saw so far was My Bloody Valentine 3D, which had an eye popping naked scene! a woman completely naked and pretty much pushing her tits and fanny at the screen in 3D, it worked put it that way haha and is about the only thing I remember about that shit film. It also went on for about 10 minutes, so you got to see plenty thats for damn sure.

I think thats a case of romerojpg exaggeration again...

The thing about Avatar for me, sure the 3D maybe amazing but that's just the same as saying "the special effects were amazing". It doesn't stop the film being shit and for me Avatar looks shit. Most people who've seen it seem to be saying "great special effects/3D but otherwise poor, okay or average".

It's the Special Effects/3D that people love about Avatar and those for me so don't make a movie.

IronMonkey wrote:I think thats a case of romerojpg exaggeration again...

What are you on about

@ Everyone (except Romero) whose seen My Bloody Valentine. Is he exaggerating or is what he said, exactly correct? Some how I doubt it.

Question - One of things that jumped out at me wasn't even the violence, it was that you have this character played by Betsy Rue who is naked for almost all of her scenes. And not just naked but explicitly full frontal nude.

Directors Response - We shot the sex scene deliberately long, and once we cut that out they let us get away with everything else. One of the things about Betsy in that sequence is that you start out very cognizant that she's naked, but by the end but because you're so keyed into her terror you've forgotten that she's naked. It speaks to the power of her performance.

http://www.chud.com/articles/articles/1 ... Page1.html

The scene is alot like Eastern Promises with Viggo Mortensen with his knob out for an entire sequence, but this time in 3D.

As I said an entire sequence! what are you smokin there is no "Hardly" about it

Ohh Brad you deleted your comment out

romerojpg wrote:
People should not even comment on 3D until they have seen Avatar, as frankly you have zero idea at all what the new age digital 3D effect looks like at all, there is no way to imagine it to be honest. So best to see one and them come back and lay into them

I was seein 3-D films in the Cinema back in the early 80's,when you probably still in nappies Sure,technology has improved since then but the basic concept is the same- glasses in the 80's, glasses in 2010 sure i'll probably go and catch a 3-D movie in the Cinema when one takes my fancy, However it won't be Avatar which just doesn't interest me in any way,shape or form.

romerojpg wrote:depends if I get outvoted on the night.

You mean you'll concede to the majority

bradavon wrote:@ Everyone (except Romero) whose seen My Bloody Valentine. Is he exaggerating or is what he said, exactly correct? Some how I doubt it.

No he's not exaggerating,it's a pretty lengthy sequence and very gratuitous

saltysam wrote:I was seein 3-D films in the Cinema back in the early 80's,when you probably still in nappies Sure,technology has improved since then but the basic concept is the same- glasses in the 80's, glasses in 2010 sure i'll probably go and catch a 3-D movie in the Cinema when one takes my fancy, However it won't be Avatar which just doesn't interest me in any way,shape or form.

bradavon wrote:@ Everyone (except Romero) whose seen My Bloody Valentine. Is he exaggerating or is what he said, exactly correct? Some how I doubt it.

No he's not exaggerating,it's a pretty lengthy sequence and very gratuitous

So have you not seen a new Digital 3D film yet then? I thought you had seen one, must have mixed you up with someone else then

I have seen a few old style 3D films in the cinema, frankly they are 100% worthless for me and seriously did my noggin in Digital 3D now it is nothing at all like that old effect, one works, one does not I have so many films at home with old style 3D glasses, I would rather never use them in my lifetime unless I had to

As for My Bloody Valentine, clips always get taken off Youtube of that naked scene, but they pop up once in a while if not reported. Mind you she is only acctually on screen in the scenes for just over 3 minutes it seems once you edit out all scenes around her. So the entire scene will be hacked down to just over 3 if you only want to see her nakedness haha
Still this shows an edited couple of clips at number 6
http://www.mrskin.com/Mr-Skins-Best-Nud ... -v816.html

But you loose a bit without the 3D

I can't see there being much in the way of Digital 3D porn yet as I can't see many porn cinemas upgrading to a digital screen and porn producers faffing about with the extra costs of converting their films for 3D. I'm dure there's loads on DVD though featuring the old colour lenses system and I'm sure there'll be a selection of porn films ready for the launch of the upcoming new home video 3D format.

Reminds me of the way Porn companys (and many Hollywood) all went mental over DVD when it first came out with the amazing thing that was Multi Angle porn dvds, they sucked in the end
Digital 3D porn (at home) I guess some will try to say it is the next advance in Porn, but hey we all know that will never catch on

Ordered this one,it's a little small,i'll put it in the bedroom.
http://www.electrocentreltd.com/viewpro ... p?pid=5914

saltysam wrote:Ordered this one,it's a little small,i'll put it in the bedroom.
http://www.electrocentreltd.com/viewpro ... p?pid=5914

Interesting you will have to find plenty of 3D things to get on it now then.