Zombie_61
Master Member
I've been saying something similar for years now: I've never seen a movie that was improved by the use of 3D. Then Avatar came along, and...I'll say this, I've never seen a movie in 2D and thought, "That movie could have been better if it had used 3D."
I have to agree that the 3D effects in Avatar were among the best I've seen. But as a movie, I liked it better when it was called Dances With Wolves. The story in Avatar has been told repeatedly in movies over the years, and I'm convinced that the impressive 3D effects are the only reason the movie was as popular as it was--audiences were so "wowed" by the effects that they didn't notice it was just a run-of-the-mill, and rather boring, sci-fi movie.I think 3D has its place in cinema. Some of the best effects films I've seen were in 3D. I thought "Avatar" with its intense colours and dense set pieces worked brilliantly...
That being said, I consider 3D to be nothing more than a flawed gimmick. I'll be more impressed when they can make flawless 3D effects without the need for special eyewear. Of course, this is nothing more than my opinion. If you prefer 3D movies, that's fine by me; more power to you. Me, I'll take 2D over 3D every time.