To 3-D or not 3-D, that is the question when it comes to “Shrek: Forever After.”
CinemaBlend has an interesting article weighing whether or not its worth seeing the latest “Shrek” installment in 3-D or just sticking to the 2-D version.
You can check out the breakdown, that includes all aspects of what makes for a good viewing experience in 3-D (the review doesn’t delve into the artistic merit of the film). If you’re wondering whether it’s worth the extra price tag to see it in 3-D, you definitely want to check out the article HERE.
I will be seeing in 3D. Animation really pops visually in 3D.
QUOTE: You can check out the breakdown, that includes all aspects of what makes for a good viewing experience in 3-D UNQUOTE
That should be ” … includes all aspects of what THE REVIEWER THINKS makes for a good …”
I don’t agree with his reasoning.
As long as I get the same story I could care less if it’s in 3D. Paying an extra $2.50 at the movie theater to wear 3D glasses which aren’t worth $2.50 and have to be given back at the end of the movie is just a Hollywood gimmick to make more money.
As long as people are dumb enough to keep paying…Hollywood will keep milking it for everything they can.
I had a discussion about this with my wife the other day when looking around Best Buy. We agreed that the only 3-D movies/presentations we enjoy are the IMAX documentaries — particularly the space station one — and the Disneyland rides like “A Bug’s Life in 4-D.”
By the by, we tried the 3-D TV at Best Buy. That’s 30 seconds of my life I’ll never get back.