Quote Originally Posted by pixelthis
Basically I think Eberts problem with 3D movies is that they tend to be as shallow
as a mud puddle, amusment park rides, basically.
A good movie with a real plot, about real people, even sci fi, won't need
3D, basically.
Not a fan of the 3D, but going to see one and expectng a real movie is like expecting a
talky thread to make sense.
Funny Pix, but I think a shallow movie would be right up your ally given with less than one brain cell firing, that would be the best you could comprehend.

Interesting thing is that too many folks are evaluating 3D as a seperate component of the movie experience. One you just look at the story line of Avatar as a separate element from everything else, it fails. When you compile the great visuals and sound along with the storyline(no matter how shallow it is) it entertains. Avatars dead Benjamin haul proves this. I saw Alice in Wonderland in 2D, and while I still liked the movie, the 3D just enhanced the experience, and that is all that is expected of 3D

I am willing to bet good money that when Iosono sound hits theaters folks are going to complain that its too distracting, it to this, its to that. When it comes to new technology for the theater, its the same ole drum over and over again.

Richard, I think various home brew implementations of Dolby noise reduction( A and B) did take away some of the highs from music. However the theater version of Dolby A and B did not do that. As a matter of fact, I would put Dolby SR and 3" tape at 30fps against every sound format(including vinyl) any day. It falls short when compared to DXD and 24/192khz digital audio, but beats the crap out of everything else.