 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
71.108.142.163
In Reply to: RE: "It really needs to be seen on the big screen in 3D" --why? posted by Jazz Inmate on February 27, 2012 at 10:55:30
it is one of the best examples of 3D done right, that is used to accomplish artistic ends - and if I had not already seen it in 3D, I would see it before it leaves the 3d theaters. And I may actually see it again that way. 3D is not always great, and sometimes it even detracts, but when done right, it is a treat.
Edits: 02/27/12 02/27/12Follow Ups:
(nt)
In my very unscientific survey, acquaintances who failed to get into the story and had significant criticisms saw the 3D version and those who thoroughly enjoyed all aspects of the film saw the 2D version. I'm sure the 3D was very nice, and done right, but I'm watching it now and the picture has excellent depth and conveys the elevated cinematographic achievement perfectly in "2D".
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
I saw it with my friend, who was a film studies major in college. We saw it in 3D and enjoyed it thoroughly.
If you are dead set against 3D as a technology, it's your own choice. I love the technology of 3D imaging and have always been fascinated by it, even back to silly red-green comic books as a kid. I am with Oliver Sacks, who writes in his latest book of his long interest in stereo imagery and the very sad loss that he suffered when he lost most of the vision in one eye due to cancer.
And if you had that interest, Hugo would be on the short list of modern accomplishments in the art. But of course, we all have different interests and enjoyments in life.
It's not that I'm against it. I just see it as a frill, and not a viable replacement for traditional approaches to film. I'm sure Scorsese did a better job than Cameron, but the option of putting glasses over my glasses to access what I consider a gimmick is not why I wanted to see this film. For me, it was very profound, personal experience to watch Hugo and 3D wasn't going to add to that experience in a meaningful way. That doesn't mean I have anything technically against 3D or that I oppose it. It's just not for me.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
Edits: 02/28/12
...and have no clue what you're talking about, but you have a strong opionion about both the film, seen in 2D, and what it might be like in 3D.
Not surprising.
Do you also have a strong opinion on the Magnepan 3.7 speakers you haven't heard, but may have seen a picture of?
LOL!
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
...was about the 3D presentation you did not see.
No, you moron, learn to read. I was commenting on my opinion of 3D in a more general way as a gimmick, and I acknowledged right up top that Scorsese's handling of 3D must be exceptional.
Do you enjoy wearing glasses over your glasses? I don't.
Beyond that, you are holding a grudge like Khomeini. Lose it.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
...communication skills haven't improved a bit since your wife stopped letting you post on Outside.
Thankfully we no longer have to put up with you there.
you carry a grudge. Sad. Really.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
...did enjoy it on the big screen in 3D, the way it was meant to be seen, I'd have to say it was probably the 4th or 5th best film I saw this year.
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
