.jpg)
Okay, enough with early 90’s phrases. Here is the nineteenth entry (almost 20 FTW… after about 7 months >.>), but first, let me take a moment to share with you, a most cherished feature of my blog. Something that Im sure equals the saying that ‘love makes the world go around’… responding to comments.
Arrmand- Nice… that’s exactly what I like hearing, so thanx ^^
I’ve seen your blog when I get free moments, and it too is good. Better I’d say, so all I can really say is keep on doing yo thang (and my amount of respect has dropped to an all-time low… fail)
Abby Lever- Hmm…. your probably right about the pictures, so… I fail at taking camera shots. But in my defence, I did only write that unofficial entry on the night that we got back, AND the day I released it, so there’s bound to be more than one error… as Oliver Smith has pointed out to before… whatever
Anyway, nao that that’s done with, its time for an always lovable anger rant, delivered by your angst-ish Onlooker. With this one… Im sorry, but to me, there’s actually barely nothing that can possibly redeem this topic… this, is my opinion, on 3d
Your probably now thinking (I imagine)
‘How the hell can you not like 3d. Are you serious’
Theres a very good (and obviously lengthy) reason… well reasons. I suppose I’ll start with my lesser reasons and just get them out of the way first
FIRST FREAKING REASON
Why are there two types of 3d?
You know what I mean. There’s this type of 3d
In videogames, where its generally awesome and is almost required for most games today. Then… there’s this
That… other kind of 3d. The usually cr***ier version that’s exciting for one minute, and then fails the next. Yeah… I think you get it
Why the hell are they both called 3d. I mean… why can’t they be distinguished verbally. Seriously, while it usually doesn’t cause a problem as to what you’re referring to in my life, I still hope for a name change. There’s always bound to be that type of problem come up in somebody’s life, and sure there are other completely different things that have the same name (I actually don’t like that… I want unique names, damnit), but I think this is actually one of those issues that needs to be taken care of. In fact… just for the sake of this entry, Im going to change the name of movie 3d, into 4d. I mean… why not. I don’t think 4d has been taken yet. And if Im wrong, may god stri-
……….
Hmm…um, okay sorry peoplez. Turns out that God did in fact strike me down, only to tell me that 4d is actually 3d movie graphics combined with physical effects like smoke. While this has caused me to become even more confused and psychologically wasted, he did in fact send me back down to Earth. I think every part of me is here, let me check…
Yeah, everything is the same… except I’ve got a mouth growing on my back that’s telling me to resurrect Hitler… nothing surgery can’t fix (I hope…). But Bt3
Anyway… so 3d is taken, I guess. Then… how about 3.5d. Being that it isn’t exactly as good as 3d, but can’t retain copyright over 4d. There, will that please you, my lordy lord
I’m waiting…
Okay… it must be good… phew. Anyway… it still does p*** me off that I have to refer to both things through the same name, because I really just don’t want to. I… really really REALLY don’t… but I guess I have to if I want to make sense.
SECOND FREAKING REASON
It isn’t that impressive
Now, this one I can successfully argued against, but I do have a point
I think I can fairly say that most films cannot take full advantage of 3.5d (okay, I’ll use it for this review). Sure, they’re free to use it, and I have no grudge against people who do, but quite honestly, I don’t give a damn to a film that uses it to little effect. Its like… this
5 seconds later
That’s what my general reaction is to films like that. Fortunately, there are some films that have used it exceptionally (Beowulf and Avatar… to an extent), but for the most part, its generally not exciting, nor boosting in any way. This leads me onto
THIRD FREAKING REASON
It ruins films
I mean this in the sense that, if not worn with 3d glasses, it can make the film look smudgy and mis-coloured. This is obvious, but many times I’ve found myself watching a 3d film, only to take my 3d glasses off because they don’t seem to do anything, and then seeing the film for what it is… putrid, non cinematic s***.
I mean… this is 2010. They’ve improved 3d glasses, adapted cinemas for the sole purpose of 3d, EVEN MADE 3D TVS… and yet they all seem to be missing the initial point, that 3d screens just look like multi-coloured vomit… what masochist decided to tell everyone that
‘We need to develop 3d to the best of our ability… but that effect you get without glasses… nah, lets just skip that till later’
Whoever did must be laughing pretty hard right now… and yet I’ve been struck down by God… I think the concept of logic has been destroyed 0.0
But let me get to my final point, because I haven’t done angry yet. This is it
FOURTH FREAKING REASON
What is with the popularity of 3d itself
You probably don’t understand, so let me ease you into it. Think of how big 3d is today, and then think when it was last popular… lets say for a brief period (lol… I should be above laughing at that) in 2005. Before that… 2000 or so, and it keeps going on
Just like how 3d happens in the cinema, this extends to its popularity. One minute, its really ‘new’ and amazing, the next… no one cares in the least.
WTH
Whats with this consistency. It shouldn’t be popular on and off, that doesn’t make sense. Well at least not at this rate, because it is just stupid. SERIOUSLY… this shouldn’t happen
Arrgh… dammit… that’s it, RANDOM ANGER SPAZ OUT ATTACK
Ndjkbsisd,n.famssznvrbzjkhf leiebniuthncxlgnrejui; tvb,xd.fgnreolkbkni;r,dsnb,.trkhinbrtn,njbrj.tkkhf/.dnrtk/dln/dtr/k/lknk rctnlfb.tt,fjbtrcx,gbrmjgbelrd,gbrvtdmgbvd,rbgvjt,rxubjcgerxgbvidt,rgvxd,gbcj5rtb.tr,gbd,vrmbd xm
(5 hours later… and 3 people dead)
Okay… *breathes*… okay, Im calm, Im cool. I won’t do that again… phew… alright then
So those are my major reasons for my dislike, and feel free to prove me wrong on some of them (its not like people haven’t tried in the past), but I guess I do have to mention the good points about 3.5d… or else this would just be another biased anger topic for me
For starters, I have a great fondness for those classic, blue and red lensed cardboard glasses (like my logo suggests… that will actually become a big plot point in the not far off future)
They just look… awesome. Screw these new versions, when I go watching a 3d film… I take the old versions. Any day…
And like I mentioned before, there are films that use 3d extraordinarily. Usually, they’re made for 3.5d, which helps I suppose, but certain scenes can stand out as just perfect when combined with 3.5d (like that scene with that deformed monster fighting guys in the dark in Beowulf… I mean, the film was s***, but that was a pretty cool scene)
And to be fair, it does make the whole experience of watching a film completely change, which I think can go either way, but it does have a chance of making a bad film have at least one merit.
And that’s… all I can think of to say about now. Like always, please leave comments for everybody’s viewing pleasure (okay mine… it lets me know you all haven’t died from one of my attacks), and if you have a Facebook profile, join my official fanpage for updates and more in the future
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Official-From-The-View-Of-The-Onlooker-Fan-Page/104440739594430?ref=mf&v=wall
I’ll probably make a part 2 in the future, but lets leave that till’ later. Anyway… only one more entry till a super, ultra awesome surprise. Some of you already know it, but others don’t, so… lets keep it mellow, shall we
And if you don’t… then you are NO FANMINION OF MINE
No comments:
Post a Comment