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 =(
view the rest of the comments →
[–] 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.