Just clicked on link for The Hobbit movie, and discovered that Vue cinemas have it all ready set up in their Coming Soon section - in 3D. But not in not-3D. The only cinema listed on their site as showing it in 2D is in Birmingham
( Read more... )
I share your frustration. Am blind in one eye... 3D movies are a boring waste of money for me. I have problems watching them through the glasses with my good eye, so I end up having to take them off so I don't get a massive headache... which means that the film is a lot blurrier than usual, and rarely has good dialogue or soundtrack to make up for it. *sigh* I'm very lucky that my husband is understanding.
though IMAX is worse... just because it's bigger doesn't make it better! - in face it is usually worse, because you sit further away from the screen! And is even more expensive than 3D. Also - I have NO peripheral vision... ...so I end up walking out with a headache and a cricked neck.
I hope it's just Vue's website needing a kick! The nearest Odeon is Exeter, which would be rather a trek just to see a film, but I suppose it's closer than Birmingham!
Checking on my local Vue, they do have The Hobbit - 2D up but no dates yet. And they only have the preview dates up for the 3D version. It may be that it will only be available for preview in 3D.
I hate 3D intensely, except for iMax nature documentaries about extinct animals and occasionally animated movies, which as you might imagine is a very small subset of movies. Mostly it's gratuitous, makes everything murky, and is uncomfortable over glasses as well as nausea-inducing for a large percentage of people. Filmmakers and theaters are pushing it for profit reasons, but I'm not convinced the public really wants it that much.
I will be very cranky if it's a choice of seeing The Hobbit in 3D or waiting for DVD...
I don't think we have IMAX anywhere near, so I have yet to encounter that. The one thing I did see in 3D was Avatar, and I was a bit meh about the whole 3D thing even before it started giving me nausea :-/
Mind, I imprinted on the dome IMAXes, not the ones that are just big screens. They're also often bad for people prone to movie-induced nausea, but no one's trying to replace ALL MOVIES with them.
(I hated Avatar the movie so much I could not comment on the 3D, except I guess in general 3D doesn't blow me away. There's some argument that filmmakers are treating 3D like 2D, i.e. keeping the shallow planes of focus instead of trying to replicate the 100% clarity of the real world that the human eye sees, but I'm not sure even taking more advantage of the medium would help. Those shallow planes of focus get used so much in story-telling. Plus, you know, glasses, nausea, gimmicks.)
At the time, I thought Avatar was just a bit predictable and tedious, but now I've had time to mull it over, I'm coming down on the side of 'creepy and a bit ick'.
You _could_ buy two pairs of these and then switch over one of the lenses, so that one pair of glasses has two "left" lenses, and one has two "right" lenses, which means that it will look 2D to you.
A bit of a pain, but might work out cheaper than driving huge distances for the 2D version!
I'm still hoping it might be a booking system glitch rather than a policy. But if we are moving to a nightmare* world of enforced 3D perhaps Glasses of Correctitude would be a wise investment.
*well, OK - bit of an overstatement really. 'Mildly annoying' would probably be more accurate.
I really hope things don't go that way. I love 3D, but there are enough people out there that don't like it (or cope with it) that there should be showings for them too!
Comments 29
Am blind in one eye... 3D movies are a boring waste of money for me.
I have problems watching them through the glasses with my good eye, so I end up having to take them off so I don't get a massive headache... which means that the film is a lot blurrier than usual, and rarely has good dialogue or soundtrack to make up for it.
*sigh*
I'm very lucky that my husband is understanding.
Reply
Reply
though IMAX is worse... just because it's bigger doesn't make it better! - in face it is usually worse, because you sit further away from the screen!
And is even more expensive than 3D.
Also - I have NO peripheral vision...
...so I end up walking out with a headache and a cricked neck.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
I wonder how many 2D 'prints' are available to cinemas, as Vue are generally good about getting in the 2D audience.
Reply
Reply
Reply
I will be very cranky if it's a choice of seeing The Hobbit in 3D or waiting for DVD...
Reply
Reply
(I hated Avatar the movie so much I could not comment on the 3D, except I guess in general 3D doesn't blow me away. There's some argument that filmmakers are treating 3D like 2D, i.e. keeping the shallow planes of focus instead of trying to replicate the 100% clarity of the real world that the human eye sees, but I'm not sure even taking more advantage of the medium would help. Those shallow planes of focus get used so much in story-telling. Plus, you know, glasses, nausea, gimmicks.)
Reply
Reply
A bit of a pain, but might work out cheaper than driving huge distances for the 2D version!
Reply
*well, OK - bit of an overstatement really. 'Mildly annoying' would probably be more accurate.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment