“He says his opinion of 3D is in sync with recent comments by Roger Ebert”
then it must be wrong, sorry. ebert is incapable of facts. 3D wins by ebert.
http://www.explore3dtv.com/blog/entry/14085/Roger-Ebert-Hates-3D/
Usually we like what Roger Ebert has to say — especially on his extremely entertaining Twitter account. However, the infamous film critic does not have very nice things to say about 3D.
In fact, he just wrote a piece for Newsweek titled, “Why I Hate 3-D (And You Should Too).” Wow, Roger; tell us how you really feel.
He wastes no time laying into the technology. Here is the commentary’s opener:
“3-D is a waste of a perfectly good dimension. Hollywood’s current crazy stampede toward it is suicidal. It adds nothing essential to the moviegoing experience. For some, it is an annoying distraction. For others, it creates nausea and headaches. It is driven largely to sell expensive projection equipment and add a $5 to $7.50 surcharge on already expensive movie tickets. Its image is noticeably darker than standard 2-D. It is unsuitable for grown-up films of any seriousness. It limits the freedom of directors to make films as they choose. For moviegoers in the PG-13 and R ranges, it only rarely provides an experience worth paying a premium for.”
Ebert definitely has a few good points. We agree that Up in the Air probably wouldn’t have made a great 3D outing. Of course, we don’t need 3D to tell a story. In the case of Clash of the Titans, however, it probably helped the film’s box-office take.
Bottom line: Why spoil the fun for everyone? You don’t have to pay the premium. Alice in Wonderland and every other 3D movie is available in 2D for all. No one is forcing you to go — unless you are an infamous movie critic, anyway.