What age kids is it appropriate for?
it’s a story where the protagonist villian discovers that he has a heart after all, where love can turn even the most despicable person around. it’s beauty and the beast. i also find the treatment of three girls being adopted by a lone man as a non-issue refreshing in a father-phobic culture.
Regarding 3D in general, I think such films cause the eye to move unnaturally to keep focus. When you want to focus on an object moving toward you in the real world, your eyes do two things: (1) rotate inward slightly to follow the object, and (2) change the shape of the eyeball lens to bring it into focus. With 3D, your eyes really only do (1) and the focus stays at the (fixed distance) screen. I think (especially for older viewers) that this unusual combination of eye movements can be stressful or perhaps even nauseating.
Additionally, Jim Emerson at his “Scanners” blog pointed out another problem with 3D Take a look at this image from “Avatar” where the background character is out of focus, i.e. the close-up was shot at shallow depth. In the real world, our eyes can switch easily between objects at different distances. Since this is impossible in a 2-D movie, directors will instead use focus-blurring to direct the viewer’s attention (or, a la Orson Wells, use deep focus and direct attention by mise en scene). This blurring seems out of place in a 3D film like “Avatar”–if it’s in 3D, why can’t my eyes jump between foreground and background like in the real world? This may also be a reason some folks found the film stressful–though for my money it’s just a poor directing choice.
It’s not an issue of comfort; it’s an issue of the 3D effect simply not being compatible with the eyeglass prescription (which appears to be a common but not universal phenomenon).
It’s not just the deficiencies of the technology (the current version of 3D has a different set of deficiencies from previous ones, which is not the same thing as fewer deficiencies overall). What really kills it is when directors with no sense of restraint start pushing their new toy to its limits.
But in the case of say, Pixar 3D movies, the 3D is subtle, atmospheric, for depth. It adds an extra level of depth to the imagery without being distracting in any way (IMO).
I saw this today and liked it a lot. As far as non-Pixar, non-DreamWorks CGI films go, I’d put it behind Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs. Agnes is freaking adorable and funny and I really want a doll of her- looking online, the licensed doll isn’t as cute as it could be- for one thing, it appears to lack a nose and mouth.
In one of the scenes where Gru is putting the kids to bed, there’s a framed blueprint for a minion on the wall, which makes me think that perhaps he and/or Dr. Nefario intentionally built them for the purposes of being minons.
“We were adopted by a bald guy? I was hoping it would be more like Annie.”
“Goodbye, recorded message!”
The movie looks appealing but I’ve heard a lot of people say it really is a kid’s film and not the usual Pixar “Family” movie (where everyone can enjoy it), so I’m hesitant about going.
As for the 3D thing: Whether you like it or not (even because of medical reasons etc) there are simply too many people with too much money and technology invested in 3D movies for it to go away. Having seen 3D TVs at an overseas Trade Expo recently, I can tell you that it’s only a matter of time before someone works out how to do 3D Cinema without the glasses. And you can bet that the 3D Movie people are aware of the “But I can’t see the 3D because [insert reason]” and will be working on something to fix that, too.
My wife and I, aged 24 and 23 respectively, saw it by ourselves and we both laughed a lot during the entire thing. But ymmv.
Where I am the 3D movies are $3 per ticket more expensive and there were more showing of Despicable Me. That alone will pump up the gross.
Sweet. While Gru may be a remanufactured CGI replicate of Dr Evil…in a light-hearted movie such as this one I just don’t care.
Its a fucking cartoon, and a good one. If you can’t suspend your disbelief for animation, then I don’t know what to say.
I’ve never had an issue - to me it feels like wearing my sunglasses, which are meant to go over glasses. I can see the 3D just fine and the glasses stop being noticeable after a couple minutes. What’s currently cracking me up is how even the “This preview has been approved for audiences” screens have 3D applied to them.
Never made that connection. The one that popped out at me was Agnes being the same character as Boo from Monsters Inc.
The few minutes I saw of 3D (the previews attached to Up) before giving up on Up had objects alternately ten millimeters and ten parsecs from my face. That’s presumably a result in the bugs in the 3D system, but the bottom line is that what people actually see, not what the directed intended for them to see, is what determines the fate of the product.
Eh, people invested a lot of money in 8-track technology back in the day.
Not on the same scale as modern 3D Cinema, though. Australia’s not exactly on the cutting edge of cultural trends (despite what people in Sydney and Melbourne might try and tell you) but there are heaps of 3D Cinemas here (Most cineplexes in major cities now have at least one 3D screen, it seems, and I know that the gear for them isn’t cheap. They wouldn’t be investing in it if they weren’t sure it wasn’t going to be around for the foreseeable future, basically.
I liked the movie. Simplistic plot, that followed the lines, but still pretty funny, and I loved the Twinkie things. I want a Twinkie minion!
Oh, and i don’t watch 3D either, and have not yet been impressed by it.
Ah, you shouldn’t have given up on Up (that sounds weird, eh?). I’ve noticed that the previews of 3D movies can often contain much more “in your face” effects than the actual movie itself. Up was a good example of that.
Up was pretty much equally good in 3D or 2D though. 3D did not really add much though it was one of the better ones.
I really want a squid gun.
OMG yes. I love the scene where the squid actually rolls its eyes at Vector.
So did Mr Perkins (the evil banker) remind anyone else of W.A. Thornhump, the old Cartoon Syndicate Boss character from Bloom County? (I’d post an image link, if I could find one…)