| Oh look, Roger Ebert. The ultimate hipster. The same man who says games will never count as art. He's just scared the entertainment industry is changing. I've watched literally dozens of 3D movies and have never once had any kind of side effect. I think it's a self-fulfilling prophecy for most people - they expect to feel something, so they do. The brightness issue is exactly why 3D screens have higher powered projectors and more reflective screens. I saw a 3D film in the 1990s and that was dark; modern ones are not. Strobing is a side effect of crappy framerates (24fps should not be acceptable for anything, ever), not 3D. I'm not even going to bother with the focus 'issue' as so many people, me included, don't even experience it, but yes, it is resolvable. As for immersion, meh, he can speak for himself, the most immersive experiences I've had were 3D, and the main immersion-breaker is other people moving around, making noises, eating, etc. What annoys me the most is badly done 3D movies though, as they look bad and ruin the overall perception. A movie made in native 3D will always look better than a postproduction kludge like Clash Of The Titans or most things Disney did. I also hate it when 3D is used an excuse for cheap effects like having things fly directly at the viewer or hover in front of them, as that ruins both the credibility of the quality of the effect and the seriousness of how it can be used. When audio was added to movies, people said it ruined them; then colour; 3D is just the next step of that iteration. |