To help with the all important question
"Is it worth seeing it in 3D?"
Is it Real or Fake 3D? lists it as fake 3D (post-production addition of 3D). So it seems like it may not be worth it.
Update: Cinemablend - To 3D or Not To 3D?
"little to no eye-popping elements"
"possesses more depth in 3D picture than the last Marvel film did"
"some of the sequences move too fast for the eye to properly register the image"
But I'm looking for other peoples opinions and a general consensus.
I also think it would help if studios listed the amount of 3D footage present in a movie, since you're primarily paying the difference for that extra footage.
P.S. Apologies for formatting: 'Return' doesn't make a new line for me ; third quote won't go into the box =(
Sort: Top
[–] Citizen_Kong 0 points 8 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago (edited ago)
Cinemablend does reviews of the 3D-quality here, but the one for Ant Man isn't up yet.
EDIT: Aaand there it is. And it seems to be in favour of the 2D version.
[–] michaelmenace [S] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I tried finding it on Cinemablend (google brought me there), but nothing there yet. You'd think they'd have it up before the release tomorrow.
[–] EnemyGoat 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
The last 3D movie I saw in theaters was The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. The 3D experience ruined the movie more me. Later, I watched the movie in 2D and changed my mind. The characters didn't look as cheesy and their movements didn't look so bizarre. I liked it. The Hobbit was listed under the 'real' 3D movie list too. So I think any movie listed under 'fake' 3D would be a bad idea. But ultimately I don't think any movie would be worth seeing in 3D.
[–] michaelmenace [S] 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
In my experience 3D movies usually don't add much, or seem to make the objects any better. I can't think of any movie I've seen where it has. Hopefully it'll improve.
[–] GoddammitMrNoodle 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
There's the odd film where 3D improves the experience. Dredd comes to mind, and possibly Fury Road but I haven't seen it in 2D yet to compare. Oh and Avatar of course, the 3D was the only reason to see that film.
Otherwise it's mostly just a distraction.
[–] Spiderio ago
Gravity in 3D was stunning.
Mostly, though, I'd say that if you notice the 3D, they're doing it wrong.
[–] EvoloZz 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I saw the new Terminator in 3D and it wasn't that bad, it was also listed under "fake 3D"...
[–] Citizen_Kong ago
That it looked fake had probably more to do with the fact that it was shown in HFR. The higher framerate does weird things like making it look like a cheap TV production and make scenes seem sped up. It's mainly our brain not being used to seeing so much visual information in movies.
[–] noit ago
I haven't seen many 3D movies but Life of Pi and Pacific Rim were movies I saw that were worth seeing in 3D.
[–] brcreeker 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
For some reason, it really pisses me off that Marvel/Disney makes over a bazillion dollars off of these movies, and they cannot manage to properly film them in 3D. James Cameron needs to hurry up and give the industry another kick in the ass.
[–] Cool_Breeze 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Personally, I only like to watch 3D movies if they were filmed with 3D in mind or with 3D cameras. When 3D is applied in post, it feels forced and more blurry. I think the last 3D movie I watched (and liked the effects of) was Transformers 3.
I try to avoid it because bad 3D pulls me out of the movie.
[–] Exist2Resist 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
The reason it looks blurry is because the director is not filming it properly. The thing with 3D is that you can not pan and scan as fast as you can with 2D. I remember sitting in on a panel of directors and the one thing they noted is that you have to change your direcorial style for 3D or you will destroy the convergence and create a problem for the viewers eyes. Also they noted that directing in 3D is more like a theatrical play than a movie, your shots have to be long and well thought out, versus quick and jerky.
[–] Cool_Breeze 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
Exactly. You have to film the movie with 3D in mind. Most don't, and the 3d effects are added in post.
[–] Golconda 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I am going to see it in 3D tonight and I will give you feedback. I have usually enjoyed the Marvel films in 3D. I used to get headaches but I find that if you sit right it isn't nearly as bad.
[–] michaelmenace [S] ago
That's the other problem with 3D - headaches
[–] mmofan ago
I don't believe this film was shot in 3D.
For some people, they've gotten used to 3D just adding another dimension period, even without 'eye-popping effects." I have friends who watch nearly all 2D shows in 3D. That being said, most 3D movies are just conversions. Though conversions and technology have come a long way, there is a big difference between a conversion and a film shot on 3D.
[–] noit 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
What do you mean by, "2D shows in 3D"?
[–] mmofan ago
Some 3D televisions will allow you to watch 2D content in 3D. It's not quite as good as actual 3D, but it's fairly impressive what they can do.
[–] Exist2Resist ago
You can look up any technical specification of a movie on imdb just follow the ttxxxxxxx with /technical
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0478970/technical
[–] michaelmenace [S] ago
Cool to know I guess, but that stuff doesn't mean anything to me really
[–] Ucibius ago
The last movie I saw that made good use of 3D was Avatar. Everything since has seemed like a gimmicky way to increase ticket prices.