to quote red letter media “the franchise is as popular as 3D movies!”

If you ask me, How to Train Your Dragon was an absolutely amazing 3d film, and how you SHOULD make a 3d film!

I think one of the problems was oversaturation. With 3D projection technology in so many movie theatres, the studios felt they had to shoehorn 3D into as many movies as possible. And as you pointed out, the movie theatres also tried to force people to pay for the more expensive 3D screenings by only showing 2D screenings at inconvenient times. I think it will live on at theme parks, and we'll probably see the the movie industry try to push it again in the 2040s.

I saw the Incredibles 2 in 3D. But it is sad to see how empty the 3D glasses recycling bin is now.

Avatar was the greatest 3D experience I had in theatre. No theatrical films had made me feel that same way yet.

"Chicken Little will forever be in the history books" Everything is as it should be...

I still only go see 3D if available and import 3D Blu Ray from overseas if not available in the US

3d is pretty much the only reason i would go to a movie theater., Otherwise I will simply wait for it to be released on video and watch it at home.

It's a shame... Avatar and Coraline, was life changing for me . I left the theater in shear awe. The 3D experience for those movies, for me, was extraordinary .

When I was in high school, I was a writer for my high schools newspaper. Shortly after the premiere of Alpha and Omega (in 2010), I wrote an opinion piece called "3-D movies aren't cool anymore". I basically summed up that most move studios tacked on 3-D just to increase ticket sales, with little thought process on the visual representation of it. They saw how well Avatar did at the box office, and they decided every movie needed to be in 3-D, without considering that Avatar was a 3-D spectacle, and Cameron took the time to make it not feel like a gimmick. However, I had ended my opinion piece with the hopes that within a year, cheap post conversion 3-D would die out, and more impressive use of 3-D would follow. Fast forward 9 years later, and with the exceptions of Gravity and the HTTYD series, I can't name very many movies that are "MUST SEE" in 3-D. You know 3-D is poorly implemented in most films when "My Bloody Valentine" makes my list for best uses of 3-D.

My favorite movie in 3D that I remember seeing was "The Lion King" when it was re-released in 2011. The 3D effects were well done and a nice touch, but I was mostly happy to see the movie again in theaters.

3D glasses are especially a pain in the ass when you have to put them right on top of your regular glasses. 😓

I remember how 3D glasses used to have red and blue color before going into those plastic-like glasses. I guess they don't do that anymore for movies.

I worked in VFX converting film to stereoscopics. It was the sort of artform where you only notice it when it's done wrong. There was a lot of pixel fucking (directors and supervisors finding tiny problems that the audience won't notice). And there've been very few Stereoscopic films where the 2D and 3D experiences are a different experience. (Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter would be an exception. I wish I worked on that.) And there are a few I could think of where it was enhanced it (Ant-Man comes to mind since the shift in size and perspective was pretty crazy). But for the most part, the general audience doesn't care, and even though I've developed an eye to appreciate it, I only watch a steteoscopic film because my friends worked on it. I think what's sad is that you have all these opportunities to do something interesting and surreal with 3D but the producers tend to stiffle that.

Imagine how stupid he feels now that 3D is making another come back 💀

Y’ALL SEEN BO PEEP TOY STORY 4 NEW CHARACTER DESIGN??

One of my favourite movies I watched in 3D was 'Life of Pi'. They did extraordinary with their use of the technology.

I remember watching Chicken Little in 3D at the El Capitan Theater in Hollywood. I think it was the day it came out, but I'm not really sure. I just remember the 3D glasses looked like the glasses that Chicken Little wore in the movie. Kind of wish I would have kept them now that I found out that it was the first digital 3D movie.

How come can 3D be dead? I live in Finland and I saw 3D movie in theater just the other day. Almost all my theater going experiences are 3D movies. Almost of all the big blockbuster films are still released in 3D. Almost all Blu-Rays I buy are 3D versions of NEW films. I watch them in our home theater with our HD-3D projector. I just love the illusion of them. The Incredibles 2 isn’t available in 3D Blu-Ray here in Finland and that is the FIRST film for me not to have 3D-version that I wanted. And even that one I can buy from UK so even that is not a big deal for now. Maybe 3D is slowly dying but surely it is not dead yet!

People need to understand what 3D is, or something. This concept that it's a "gimmick" or "fad" is laughable. It's not a FEATURE of a movie - it's a way to SEE or VIEW a movie... the way it is shot and displayed. Just like movie sound went from mono, to stereo, to multitrack surround... we have TWO EARS, and we HEAR stereoscopic sound all our lives. Nobody considered sound advancements "gimmickery" as the industry made the soundtracks more realistic to life. Now here we are with TWO EYES - and people cannot fathom how the next advancement (too long coming, as far as I'm concerned) is the actual PICTURE becoming stereoscopic as the norm? Why is this so hard for people to adopt? There should be NO movie "made for 3D" ... every single movie should be shot stereoscopically, and presented stereoscopically as we progress forward. Whether it's a blockbuster action flick... or a dumb romantic comedy. 3D is not a FEATURE to "make the movie cooler" ... and any producer/director worth his salt should just *ignore* the "3D" presentation aspect, and make the movie with whatever shots and content he/she normally would. Tell and present the same story, as normal. Yes, there was once a time when 3D was a "feature" of the movie... back in the 70's and 80's... where "pop out" content was *intentionally* put in the movie. Yes, stupid and fad-like. That is NOT what we are talking about with 3D now. The image quality and tech of trying to display 3D content (back then) was awful. Just wasn't there. We don't have that problem now. With modern IMAX , IMAX Digital, and Barco DLP 4K, 6K, and 8K projectors - and some polarized glasses - you lose no color, lose no clarity, lose no brightness... just perfect stereoscopic vision for your two eyes. The movies aren't meant to be a "gimmick" - they are meant to be a normal movie, telling a normal story as intended - EXCEPT you see the scenes stereoscopically... You can see the depths into the settings, like real life. If you're up above the clouds, you can "tell" the city is way the hell down there, thousands of feet below. You can see a horizon is miles away. You can see the size of any room. Completely natural depth perception. You're watching "in stereo" - like your eyes see everything, every day. Why people think this is a gimmick, or a feature being flaunted by the movie, is beyond me. It's simply a way of PRESENTATION. Superior presentation. Like going from mono to stereo - for your eyes. People decrying or downplaying 3D picture as something that is dead or should die... I chuckle to think you are the same types that must not understand the sound as well. Let's go back from DTS and Dolby Digital ... to stereo or mono. Why bother allowing your two ears to be given more information to process. LOL I'm cheering the industry moves forward into 3D... to the point where in 10-20 years I hope EVERY SCREEN and EVERY FEATURE is presented that way. Even standard television shows. And 3D is never mentioned... once. It's just the way we view footage. That is where this SHOULD BE going. Flat 2D video still standard 30 years from now? If that is where we still are, we're stuck somehow. Just my opinion.

The best movie i saw in 3d is spider man Into the spider verse

It surprises me that 3D wasn’t successful like VR is. I think it’s bc of how much studios exploited it. It’s good in small amounts imo. I prefer that only some movies now are released in 3D bc sometimes I like to re visit the format

"chicken little will be forever in the history books." "let that sink in" xD xD xD

i can't remember the last time a movie was in 3d

I feel the same way because most of the time when I watch a movie in theater in 3D It doesn’t feel like I can touch them and eye popping. And it’s kinda just there.

Dredd 3D deserved an honerable mention

Why is this lad's voice so high pitched?

Another big money-making merchandising trend that was in its prime with movies during the 2000’s and early 2010’s was that nearly every family movie had a video game. Especially animated, action and fantasy movies. Yes, I know that the best movies and sequels, even good and mediocre ones got video games in the 80’s and 90’s like Jurassic Park, Aladdin, Terminator and Toy Story in the Genesis and SNES era and Hercules, Fifth Element, A Bug’s Life, Lost World Jurassic Park in the PlayStation 1 era, but during the PS2 - early PS4 era, however (including XBOX, XBOX 360 and Nintendo DS, 3DS and Wii), there were unexpected video game tie-ins like Happy Feet the video game, Coraline the video game, Space Chimps the video game, Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs he video game, The Lego Movie video game and much more. The movies that nearly always had video game tie-in were the Disney movies, like Chicken Little (One's based on the main movie, the other is a spin-off called Ace in Action, which is based on the movie's finale), Meet the Robinsons, Bolt, Princess and the Frog, Tangled and Wreck It Ralph (The last 3 were exclusively released for the Wii and the latter being released on 3DS as well). Although all Disney Renaissance and most post renaissance movies had video games and spinoff titles on PS1, PS2, PC, N64, Sega DreamCast, Gameboy Colour and Gameboy Advance as well. Plus pixar movies from Toy Story to Brave had video game tie-ins until Disney Infinity came along and went. And a lot of DreamWorks movies got video game releases and fantasy movies like Spiderwick Chronicles and Harry Potter. This js definitely a topic that Animat should discuss.

14:50 Oh man, do I miss when Jim Henson did the voice for Kermit! Classic!

I think 3D is good for somethings such as live action special effects but I really wish they would bring back 2D animated movies. But if people are tired of 3D animated movies, would they ever bring back 2D animated movies again?

*ElectricDragon:* All of the movies in CGI doesn't really work at all. *MCU:* Hold my beer

Avatar isn't really Pocahontas in Space. It's Pocahontas, and Dances with Wolves, and Fern Gully, and The Last Samurai, and even Surf Ninjas. The foundational story is a classic, and has been used over and over again - it's even the story of Paul in the bible: Character from evil empire goes to fight against the good guys, sees how good they are, switches side, fights against the forces they once served. The most recent example that comes to mind is the She-Ra remake series.

Aniamt, continue Walt Disney Animation lookback!!!!!!

I saw Gravity in 3D. I'm so glad I did, because it was awesome.

When I was a little kid, around the early to mid-2000s, I used to be excited watching movies in 3D because it was a rare thing at the time like Spy Kids 3D Game Over. Now these days, I've grown tired of 3D since people have been making too many 3D movies and are no longer special. So yeah, I think the gimmick has overstayed its welcome.

They gave up on actually filming in 3D. They sent it to a video shop to cut a 2d apart and make it gimmicky 3D. Note it is 2022 and Thor - Love and Thunder is in 3D - July 8, 2022.

The Muppets, always way ahead of the times 😊 God bless them

I bought a LG 3D TV 42inch and 3D player bundle for about $900 and that was at the height of 3D craze. Most of my blu ray collection is 3D editions. My last few 3D blu rays were Moana, Avengers Infinity War, AntMan and the Wasp, Ready Player One. For me I think movies look great in 3D if they are done correctly. Now that 4k is the norm, maybe I will need to upgrade 🙁 I will still buy 3D movies if the movie is good and if they make them.

You know as a kid, I always thought that Avatar was just a Smurfs version of Pocahontas, XD!

The great thing about Fozzie's "cheap 3D trick" is that it really is a trick, because puppets don't breathe. The guy playing Sweetums can't really see the rubber ball all that well, either.

The LEGO Movie 2 - Excited How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World - HYPED!!! Wonder Park - Wondering if I should pay to go on this ride. Missing Link - May finally try to see a Laika film at the cinema. Uglydolls - Fitting name. Shaun the Sheep Movie: Farmagedon - Name alone is worth it. The Secret Life of Pets 2 - Goodbye, Illumination. Toy Story 4 - I'm scared. The Angry Birds Movie 2 - The first film marked the point where I stopped following the franchise, but I may end up seeing this. Playmobil: The Movie - yea no Spies in Disguise - Ahh, Blue Sky with their abstract ideas. Abominable - DreamWorks, so yes. Adamms Family - Skeptical. Frozen 2 - Must see it before it drives me insane.

Best 3D films, IMO (alphaborder): • Creature from the Blagoon • Dial M for Murder • Gravity • My Bloody Valentine • Nightmare Before Christmas Dial M for Murder is absolutely amazing, though. But, if you want the best 3D experience? Buy a Vive and play _Elite: Dangerous_ .

I do remember watching chicken little in 3d as a kid. But what I remember most about the experience was how the glasses we wore looked like the glasses the main character was wearing. And that's the most I remember about watching the movie.

1:16 Spoiler Alert

6:35 *Endgame has entered the chat*

I think there are exceptions to make the film more immersive using 3D, Avatar, A Christmas Carol, and Star Wars come to mind. I think space themed films to show the dimensions in space work well. The last 3D film I went to see was The last Jedi and I enjoyed the 3D , but besides that I think it’s mostly useless.

The reason why the 3D Star Wars Saga was cancelled was because after Disney bought Lucasfilm, they wanted to focus on The Force Awakens rather then the 3D conversions. But the 3D versions of Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith were shown of at Star Wars Celebration. But The Original Trilogy has never got the upgrade. #Theoriginal3in3D.

I only Pay for a movie if ITS 3d

My love for 3D has been going strong for years now! And 3D 360 VR is awesome! To me 3D is more than a fad - it’s a passion!

For me, the first movie I saw in 3D was actually Avatar and it was amazing at the time even if it's gimmicky they were really doing to film for the intention of 3D experience. Later don't really recall anything much except Transformers Dark side of the moon and the scenes that are in space was really amazing and immersive, it really felt like actual space. for scenes like that I like 3D effect yeah it doesn't add anything to the story, but in certain scenes, it makes more immersive. Rogue One space battle, Valerian and the city of thousand planets chase scene in space still planing re-watch Gravity on my projector that has 3D. just for that immersion of space for those times when executed correctly 3D brings more to the viewing experience. and I am not talking about cheap tricks when just objects a thrown at you but whole surroundings make it more intense.

6:43 Animat predected the Endgame.

The 3d comeback is without the glasses. Yes I love 3D.

11:13 This is true from my experience. I remember going to see many RealD films with my aunt and having her tell us not to put our glasses in the recycling bins on the way out because she didn't like having to pay extra for a new pair every time. (She's always been pretty cheap, so it never surprised me to hear her say that.) I've honestly gotten tired of 3D movies over time. Back in the 90s and early 2000s, when I was still a small boy, they only came out once every few years, and it was exciting when it happened. Now, it isn't exciting anymore because almost every film seems to have it. Just as many people look forward to Christmas more simply by virtue of it being only once a year, the same is true of me and 3D movies; the longer you have to wait for one, the more interesting and novel it is. Even then, it rarely seems to significantly enhance my viewing experience either. Bottom line, it's just a way for movie theaters and studios to jack up prices at a time when movie tickets are already expensive.

Not for me... I watch at home and I enjoy it a lot

3D is never dead, it just returns to the coffin for another 30 year slumber ready to emerge again to cast its shadow and haunt multiplexes once again.

The problem is that not only studios didn't care about 3D, but creators themselves did not develop an "3D artistic language".

Regardless of hundreds of youtubers and articles hating and bashing 3D (an OPTIONAL feature) in every possible way - don't you think it's a little weird that *_ALL_* tv makers (and Nvidia with its 3D vision) killed the technology almost all at once in 2017? Not even some niche products with higher prices, NOTHING. It was some kind of agreement, can't figure out otherwise. If not, a really stupid decision, it's like VW decided to kill Bentley factory because they wouldn't sell them as often as Polos and Golfs... To see depth on a 2D screen was, is and it will be totally fascinating! 🤓

Erm.... 3D needs a big screen for the effect to work properly, that's one of the main reason it flopped in consumer grade electronics, the second being that no matter how good your TV was, most of them had some degree of ghosting, passive 3D glasses like what LG used, were cheaper, but when activated halved the screen resolution, in a 1080p era, having half of that was a big deal, it would certainly be less noticeable in 4K screens. Active 3D glasses, like what Sony used, had a better effect, but the glasses were heavier, required new batteries or charging now and then, and were crazy expensive. Then let's take, for example, the Nintendo 3DS, again having the screen size problem, but it went beyond that, when activaded, 3D would drain the battery faster and more importantly: decrease the frame rate. That alone was reason enough for gamers to turn it off and never use it again. In movie theaters, you have a BIG screen, and you have to possibility of having high grade and well calibrated glasses for better perfomance and less ghosting. Some had bad quality stuff and badcalibration, some were good like most Imax theaters. But still, some movies just don't benefit from 3D, others like Avatar, How to train your dragon, Dr Strange, etc, are 5X less exciting in 2D. That's how good they implemented the effect.

Remember when every animated movie between 2009 and 2011 always put characters way too close to the screen.

*"3D is dead ... For now."* Well said.

I absolutely love 3D. I can't stand watching a movie in 2D anymore. I play all my Xbox and ps4 games in 3D and am happy to pay an extra few bucks to see a 3D movie in the cinema. Those extra few dollars are nothing compared to the additional depth, thrill and joy I get experiencing a big 3D movie in IMAX. I want all movies to be in 3D. It is the next step in the evolution of entertainment. As was sound and colour. I'd be devastated if in 5 years there were no 3D movies in the cinema anymore. I think the up and coming Avatar saga will kick off the power of 3D entertainment just as the first film did in 2009. And by the way, 3D is NOT a gimmick as this guy says. Watching a movie in 3D is scientifically proven to stimulate the brain far more than a 2D film. It's more engaging and makes any film more beautiful and exciting. As 3D technology improves, soon you won't even need to wear 3D glasses at all. People say 3d is about throwing things at you but it's the complete opposite. It's about pulling you into the film and giving a sense of experiencing a movie rather than just watching it. Those who dislike 3D are generally very cinicle and have lost their inner child and sense of wonder. It's a shame. Generally speaking. Some peoples eyes and brain just can't handle the 3d which is fair enough.

3D is the ONLY way I watch movies in the cinema and I LOVE IT! I have a 58" 4K TV in the living room so if I can't get to see something in 3D at the movies I'll just wait for the bluray and watch it in the comfort of my own home. I've watched a few things in 3D at home now too, I love my Vive!

I used to like 3D but I got tired of having to wear glasses as I got older. I don't like wearing glasses in general to begin with, so by the age of 8, 9 or 10, I got annoyed that I had to wear the glasses just to see it in 3D.

Well with Avatar The Way of Water, 3D Is coming back with a VENGENCE!

Avatar was a very good movie; regardless of whether or not it had 3D. The graphics were great, the story was well-written, and it was easy to emerse into the movie without 3D; especially with HDMI. Avatar is probably one movie that does not quite support your claim regarding 3D being a distraction from the quality of a film. Apart from that, however, you're basically on the ball.

Funny, when you were talking about 3D, I was just thinking about that Fozzie line from the Muppet Vision 3D!

I remember experiencing the 3d movie era. It was cool at one point but as time went on it started to hurt my eyes.

First 3D movie I saw was Avatar. When the bluray came out, I was blown away by the difference in colors. It was like a whole new better movie without 3D. Second movie I saw was The Force Awakens. I was blown away that the colors were still muted. What have they been doing the past few years?

My issue is that it's oversaturated and is used as an excuse to not be creative with their medium. Also with the stupid mentality of cartoons are for kids and 3D are for big boys. I would love to have a 2d cartoon movie again showing in theaters because I'm so sick and tired of all these 3D nonsense that literally has nothing to them with no heart and no passion. Especially so with the evil empire that is Disney

Well, actually, 3d films have to be shot using two cameras, so it's not an afterthought, but beforethought. I think the biggest problem is that you can't really do much with 3D. There're not a lot of tricks enhancing the experience because oh my, oh my, we don't perceive the world in 3d either, but rather in two 2d images. We can't really say if it's a giant 2000 ft away or is it a dwarf 15 feet away. We only perceive 3D effect very close to our eyes, so the only thing that we can do in 3D movies is making smth passing by, coming close to our eyes, and... that's it. But even then screens are wrong because they do not account for perennial vision. Dolby Digital and 3D sound works because it actually uses something that we don't otherwise.

Man I love Muppet vision 3D. It's a shame that Disney got rid of it in Disneyland.

Unlike the rest of the world China, continues to convert it's theatres to 3d. Many international releases are released exclusively in 3d.

Its 2022 and I am still collecting and enjoying 3D blurays and watching at home with a digital projector on a 15 foot screen. Admittedly there are plenty of bad 3D conversions that came out during the post-Avatar boom, but when done properly, 3D enhances a movie and immerses the viewer in the filmmakers world. And yes, the initial home 3DTV roll out was expensive, confusing and convoluted. If the manufacturer's got their shit together, it could've worked. But like I said, I prefer wat hing 3D to any other format and there are certain things that are arguably pointless to watch in 2D. Have you seen the newest Dr. Strange and the multiverse of Madness? It is a far superior visual experience in 3D. (See also:every other Matvel movie since 2014) Sadly public interest waned just as the format was reaching its potential-- most of the best 3d films have been released since 2015 imo. As for the added ticket cost, a quality 3D conversion costs around $100,000 per minute approximately, so an extra $3 isnt asking a lot in the grand scheme of things. Maybe Avatar 2 will reignite interest in the medium, or maybe once glasses-free 4k 3D becomes a reality, but frankly, 3D is the superior format. And people will realize this truth eventually.

Are you seriously suggesting that HTTYD was only acclaimed because of its use of 3D...

I think the best 3-D screenings I went to were probably for Toy Story 3 and the re-release of Finding Nemo. Toy Story 3 was awesome because it was actually cheaper to see in 3D as oppose to 2D and we got a wonderful Pixar short in the beginning that took full advantage of the 3D technology without being gimmicky. Finding Nemo because not only was it filled with older teens and adults but because when the seagulls were saying "mine" the theater joined in by imitating them with this one guy saying "who's" and everyone yelling "mine!" In their voices. Other than that I can't remember anytime I went that it was better than the first time seeing it. It's not gonna stop me from splurging to see The Lego Movie 2 in 3D though. That's gonna be awesome!

Do you guys think that Shrek 4D took the vision name as a nod to Muppet Vision? Ogre Vision glasses = Muppet Vision

Remember KZfaq's 3D feature? Yeah, no one remembers...

Only one I remember working in 3D was Meet The Robinsons back in 2007 Worst one I saw in 3D was Solo, good movie but the 3D was seriously headache inducing

They just need to stop charging people extra. It used to be a free upgrade.

went to see Beauty and the Beast in 3D back in March 2017 and honestly the entire film itself was actually really dark. it was honestly unbearable to watch it in 3D cause of how dark it was, adding on to the film's nature.

I love 3D. It's a shame the industry is so fixated on increasing ticket prices and BluRay prices with the ever demanding 4K BluRay and then HDR, and then again Dolby Vision (and what next), just buy all your hardware and whole movie libriry again, rather than trying to just cater for the art. The most depressing thing is : active 3DTVs are 99% the same as regular 2DTVs, only a few lines of code, and a sync port on the back (if you want to do it the minimalist way) Passive 3DTVs require a little bit more but those could still be made on a smaller volume for the 3D Fans (passive 4K TVs were the best 3DTVs ever made) For movies, the BluRay 3D format was designed specifically to be backwards compatible with 2D players and 2DTVs (it would just play in 2D completely transparently), but big studios insisted on making two distinct products to charge a lot more for the 3D version of the exact same movie which is already in 3D. It went to the absurd when studios programmed their 3D releases to lock up on purpose when played in 2D players (even though if you use software to bypass the 3D compatibility message, the movie plays just fine in 2D) There is nothing preventing TV manufacturers to make the current 4K TVs compatible with 3D again, and keep the small market of 3D fans happy... except their own greed. The industry is unfortunately more interested in profit than the art.

Electricdragon505's arguments are impertinent. To top that, he misses the most important downfall of 3D of all, which is 3D cross-talk. A lot of his information is skewed, like when he discusses the cost of Bluray 3D, pointing to televisions having active 3D glasses. I got my 55-inch Sony active-3D television for $1,000--half of the cost he presented. And, truly, those Sony glasses run about $55, but cheap models made by H.P. cost $15! My girlfriend bought her 55-inch LG passive-3D television for $1,000--again half the cost he presented--but passive glasses are about $5, and they are universal to all passive-3D televisions and 3D cinemas. Certainly, one could convert the extra cost of seeing a movie in 3D at the cinema into a home video theater by bringing home the passive glasses from the cinema to save money at home. This chops down his main argument, which pertains to cost. Notably, active and passive systems have their own advantages, and why isn't this in his video? Passive systems cost less and have less cross-talk, but the color gamut is halved; and, with active systems, glasses are much costlier, specific to the television, and have more cross-talk, although colors are full-range. My t.v. is Ultra HD (4K), HDR, and active-3D compatible, which means that 3D images are much brighter than with non-HDR televisions, and the television even has control of brightness in the glasses. This is a fact that strikes down another one of his main arguments, which is that 3D televisions are too dimly lit due to the restrictive glasses. His most impertinent argument is that 3D costs more, because what does this have to do with appreciating cinematic quality? Nothing. 3D isn't some passing fad. It's been used by cinema's greatest auteurs, including Martin Scorsese, Alfred Hitchcock, Steven Spielberg, Ridley Scott, Guillermo del Toro, Ang Lee, Robert Zemeckis, Ron Howard, Denis Villeneuve, Alfonso Cuaron, Doug Liman, Baz Luhrmann, Zhang Yimou, Luc Besson, Tim Burton, Peter Jackson, J.J. Abrams, and, of course, James Cameron. So, this is not just some passing fad anymore. If it was one, it isn't now. It's gotten too serious. Marvel Studios has released all of its 20 movies thus far in 3D--except for its first three--and they've made more money on a single franchise than any other in history. Every one of the highest-grossing movies of all time includes a 3D theatrical run: "Avatar," "Titanic," "Star Wars: The Force Awakens," "Avengers: Infinity War," "Jurassic World," "The Avengers," "Furious 7," "Avengers: Age of Ultron," "Black Panther," and "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2." And, these are only the top ten. Adjusted for inflation, three of the top ten-highest earners were theatrically released in 3D. 3D is here to stay, and anyone who says that 3D is dead is ignorantly skewing the results. It is based on one fact alone: t.v. manufacturers have stopped producing 3D televisions. But, he would be more believable to say that this has happened for manufacturers to avoid marketing confusion with 4K (UHD) home video. And, why doesn't he make that claim? Maybe it is because he is biased against 3D cinema. The people espousing the "3D is dead" hypothesis are quick to point out what manufacturers are doing in home video, while ignoring what movie studios are doing in theaters in U.S. and especially in foreign sales, backed up by ignoramuses saying that they can't remember the last time a movie got released in 3D, ignoring the massive lineup of 3D movies already out and those coming out. Home video companies, in perhaps a slowing venture, are still manufacturing movies on Bluray 3Ds in the United States or, if not in the United States, in the United Kingdom and elsewhere, in Region A or Region-Free editions. Even his taking notice saying "Chicken Little" holds a world record for first digital 3D film is irrelevant. Wikipedia says that the earliest confirmed 3D film shown to an out-of-house audience was "The Power of Love," released 1922. That was before magnetic sound. But, so what? Many firsts come from things virtually-nobody's heard of or that weren't any good. Electricdragon505 thinks "Muppet-Vision 3D" is a "show that can debatably [sic] be ahead of its time for how it completely satires [sic] the technology." I think he means that the show is debatable and that it satirizes the technology, although he's a little misinformed in his grammar. Where it does satirize, it does so through the use of 3D technology itself, assigning 3D with a purpose.

I'm not spending more money just to put another pair of glasses over my own glasses, to see a darker version of a movie where I can pretend to touch the rocks flying out at me.

I never thought of gas as expense because I used to live three blocks away from a movie theater.

I wish this was the case with the 3D-ANIMATED movies, because it was a long time since I saw a 2D-animated movie on the big screen.

I've been trying to get a decent 3D TV for ages. It's better than a VR headset. Some 3D conversions are bad, but I'm a lover of the format. Also, It's kind of the only marketable advantage theatres have left.

Glad you mentioned How to Train Your Dragon, the best use of 3D in a film ever. However, for me that was so much the exception considering I find that your vision gradually comes to ignore the 3D effect, especially for post-production 3D (or as Roger Ebert used to call it: 2.5D) and that makes it that much more a waste of money.

I miss watching movies in 3D. My family decided to stop watching 3D movies in 2012. I also read that Spider-Man Into the Spider-Verse is one of the few important films to watch in 3D.

Those movies have always confused my eyes.... they don’t understand them XD Also I *hate* 4D movies they are terrible and the smells in them tend to mix by the end and create a terrible smells XD and in some of them with bubbles or water spraying in the theater it is just uncomfortable XD and the bubbles leave a sticky liquid XD

I have noticed that 3D is not present anymore in modern cinema. At least with advertising, but used more as an option. Not a fan of 3D anyway. But the coloured 3D glasses are cool, just to see the world in two different colour pantone overlays. As for 3D in cinema, I can barely notice it sometimes. I sometimes do see some effective moments in films where 3D actually worked, but for the most part, it doesn’t do it as much for me.

And people said that 4k would kill 35mm...boy they were right...

If I've said it once, I've said it 1000 times. TRON: Legacy has the best use of 3-D. Because, unlike Avatar, many of the shots are still immersive in 2-D, along with TRON: Legacy actually being good.

Hey, The Phantom Menace was awesome!!!!!

3D isn’t Dead

Here's an example of 3D actually making a movie worse. When I went to see Pacific Rim in cinemas back in 2013 the 3D effect actually hindered the experience. The battle scenes in the rain were rather difficult to make out at times, and it appears I wasn't the only one who had this complaint as when I looked at later reviews for the movie that problem with the 3D was also mentioned.

Why couldn't some modern Blu-ray releases would just include an anaglyphic 3D version bundled with retro plastic glasses, so that viewers at home won't have to sacrifice the budget of buying 3D-compatible equipment in order to watch them? A good example of this would be the Blu-ray 2-Disc Collector's Edition of Coraline.

Say what you will. I have found that the Real 3D effect in most of the films today is an extraordinary effect when done properly! Titanic, Avatar, Godzilla 2014, Dr. Strange, Star Trek, Jurassic World and its sequel, the recent Star Wars movies, .... I love the 3D illusion in each of them! I own the 3D copies of them on BluRay and others, because I love and can appreciate this medium so much! I say 3D will return! It will NEVER die! In one form or another, it will make a comeback! And, why shouldn't it be so? Stereo optic vision is just natural! Think I'm wrong? There is a rumor that James Cameron and his associates are working on bringing movies to theatre screens in 3D WITHOUT glasses! 3D dead???? Not on your life!

I’m a 3D fan and I was expecting to hate this video, but I ended up agreeing with it. LOL

You forgot about that downgraded resolution and the headaches

I love 3D movies! I bought a 3D HD projector, got the glasses (4 pair) and pay the extra $5 for the 3D Blu ray. And I own most of the movies shown here. I even got some classic films (Creature from the Black Lagoon, It Came from Outer Space, Dial M for Murder) in 3D. Many films (Disney) are not sold on Blu ray 3D in the states these days, but I can get them from the Amazon UK. A great time at the movies. Long live 3D movies!