Why Does Roger Ebert Hate 3D Movies?
Taking a page from McLuhan, who charged modern electronic media with not leaving anything to imagination, Roger Ebert lays it all out for you when it comes to his distaste of 3D movies. They aim to make that which was supposed to be kept in our minds “real” (and they fail), they add nothing to the experience, they can give you headaches, and, most importantly, they dim the screen. Now, there you go.
3-D is a waste of a perfectly good dimension. Hollywood’s current crazy stampede toward it is suicidal. It adds nothing essential to the moviegoing experience. For some, it is an annoying distraction. For others, it creates nausea and headaches. It is driven largely to sell expensive projection equipment and add a $5 to $7.50 surcharge on already expensive movie tickets. Its image is noticeably darker than standard 2-D. It is unsuitable for grown-up films of any seriousness. It limits the freedom of directors to make films as they choose. For moviegoers in the PG-13 and R ranges, it only rarely provides an experience worth paying a premium for.
Related articles
- Ebert: Don’t Watch the new Harry Potter Flick in 3D [Movies] (gizmodo.com)
- Special Quote of the Day: Roger Ebert on Today’s Republican Party (themoderatevoice.com)
- Roger Ebert is Great at Pissing People off (manolith.com)
