Are 3-D Movies Worth It to See in the Theaters?

My answer is a resounding NO! I have yet to see a 3-D movie that was actually improved by the movie "coming at you." I saw Transformers 3 last week and watched most of the movie over the rim of my 3-D glasses. We also saw Cars 2 in 2-D and I didn't see anything in that movie that would've been improved by 3-D.

I think it's a fad and I hope it dies out soon!

for me, it's paying for a headache. We saw Toy Story 3 in regular and 3D and I didnt see that the 3 D was better. We only saw it that way b/c it was the only way that theatre offered it.

Totally not worth the extra money. Actually I believe the 3D effects from oh so long ago where you wore the red and blue lensed glasses were so much better than what they are calling 3D. It just puts this to shame. Also It just isn't worth the expense to me. I saw Avatar in 3D and in 2D. I actually preferred the 2D version.

If you really must have a wonderful 3D experience go to Disney, at least there you have a short 3D experience and can find and smooch that famous mouse.

It's fun once in awhile, but it depends on the movie. Most of the time I'll opt for 2D just because it's cheaper, but it's fun to splurge once in a while and it is a bit of a novelty.

I only saw Avatar in 3D. It's silly how many movies are 3D. When they announce 3D all ecstatic it's like *shrug* omg 3D, shocker (sarcasm of course).
I would experience it at least once, it is cool to feel like your kinda in it. It's a different experience for sure. Something to do at least once in your life :)

If you can take off your glasses and watch the movie, it's not quality 3D. With Avatar, if I took my glasses off it was a swirl of colors. I just saw it in a normal theater.

I don't like 3D movies at all. It's a distraction for me. Also, half the time the kids end up taking them off because the glasses are bothering them and actually, I do too! :)

So far the ONLY movie that I thought was better in 3D was Avatar, but I also saw that in IMAX. I won't waste my money anymore. But that's just me.

It depends on the movie.
Some are better than others.
I believe a good story can be enhanced with special effects.
But if the story is no good, no amount of special effects can help it.
Some 3D movies spend/waste a lot of time playing around for the sake of the 3D - it's just pointless filler.

I get headaches from watching movies in 3D. I have only done it twice and I will never do it again. I took off my 3d glases after the first hour of Toy Story 3 and didn't notice much of a difference in the experience, other than my headache started to go away after I took off the glasses.

I love 3D and so don't mind paying the extra the dollars - we go to matinees only and, um, usually bring our own snacks so the extra cost doesn't feel that big.

My son and I just saw Transformers in 3D today - it was awesome.
I love 3D in the theater - I love the feeling of having to duck when things seemingly fly off the screen - of being in the crowd scene - it was like being in the middle of it all.

With that being said - some 3D movies are better done than others. And some genres lend themselves to 3D better than others. Big, action filled movies are really very fun when viewed 3D.

IMO, not it is not worth it.

Not really. I don't love 3D movies or wearing the glasses. It might be cool if it was something like Avatar but I typically avoid 3D and the extra cost.

I don't care for 3-D & will not go. If my son really wants to see 3-D, just my husband takes him. Oh, & it makes me ill.

My family (including my son) doesn't think so. The glasses don't fit well and are annoying, and I personally think the "effects" are distracting. If you take the glasses off b/c they are so annoying, you can't watch the flick w/o getting a headache. And you get to pay extra for all that! :)

By and large I'd agree with most that it's not worth it. When I saw Polar Express in 3D it was terrific. I saw a short film about the sea (20-40 mins long) and it was wonderful. But beware. I think if the film is not designed specifically for 3D it's going to be bad. I saw Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince in 3D and it was atrocious. The actors looked like cardboard cutouts. And no one mentioned that only 20 minutes of the film were in 3D! Then in tiny type at the bottom it said to remove your glasses. I didn't see it and when the effect was turned off I could no longer see out of my left eye (till I took off the glasses) and it scared me to death. My friend too. And so expensive! And it can trigger migraines; it did with me.
S.

I saw Clash of the Titans in 3D, and it was SO NOT worth it!! However, I heard that Avatar in 3D was absolutely amazing. I opted not to take my 4.5yo son to see Cars 2 in 3D, and it turned out to be the right decision for us :)

HAHA
OK I Just have to answer, I can't even see them in 3D because I am blind in one eye and have no lense in the other. I have terrible depth perception. So for me, I can't even go to the movies any more at all.

We saw Cars 2 in 3D just the other day only because that is all the theater offered. I didn't think it was worth it at all. It didn't really add to the experience or the movie at all.

A lot of people seem to love them, but I've paid the extra money twice & both times gave me a raging headache for the rest of the day. I tried it the 2nd time thinking the first must have been a fluke, but no, same results. It does give the movie that 'extra something', but for me, if a movie needs to rely on the 3-D aspect to be good, then it's probably not a great movie in the first place.

It really depends on the movie. A movie like Avatar took 4 years to create a complete virtual 3D world that makes you feel like you are there. This is totally worth the 3D experience. Many other 3D movies are done more as "special effects 3D", where they aim random objects at the screen for a "3D feel", not really to immerse you into the movie.
I just took my girls to see Cars2, & just saw the 2D version. The movie was great just by itself, without any 3D effects.
Also, many people tend to have headaches after a 2hr 3D movie, & have other vision re-adjustment issues.
In most cases, the extra cost for the 3D experience is just not worth it.

I also don't care for the 3D movies. I can't see them well and really don't see the big deal of them personally. My husband has seen some home TV's that are 3D capable (as well as 2D) and says they are better than the theater ones but I personally don't care for wearing glasses the whole time for watching a movie. That's why I chose contacts over glasses! LOL.

Good Luck.

I guess I don't "get" 3-D. I just don't really see what everybody else sees, and the glasses give me a headache. My daughter knows if she wants to see something in 3-D, she goes with her cousins or grandpa. To me it's not worth it, because I hate paying extra for a headache.

For me? Absolutely!!!

Read3D (as opposed to imax 3d on a flatscreen) is mindbendingly amazing. Like being able to see 'forever'. Unlike the old Captain Eo at Disneyland where things actually DO come out of the screen at you (lazers in mist), or red/blue glasses (which just put a blurry line around things)... the new 3D (when done well) adds incredible depth and richness. As if you're looking at an open window into a whole other world, instead of it being on a screen. Like the difference of looking at a fishtank and looking at a screen with a fishtank. A real fishtank the perspective changes between yourself and the tank and within it. A screen with a fish tank you only get the change in perspective of the fish, because the camera is a constant placement.

You can tell how "well" the 3D is done by taking off your glasses. If the screen is a blurry mess of color and you can't see anything (worse than looking at something underwater with your eyes open) there is a LOT of 3D, and it's really well done. If you can take your glasses off and still see everything, they've just added touches to it. AVATAR, for example, was just a mess of colors all swirling around... and to date is the best 3d I've seen. (I'd still go pay to see it in the theatre, if it were still out). A lot of Disney and "teen" movies, it's almost identical to non3d, because they just use it to add shading and an occasional "splash" of 3D. Disney "cheats" very well. They get a lot of 3d effect without a lot of effort, but it's not STUNNING effect (like AVATAR). In really well done 3D you can look and look and look, and the details just *keep coming*. You can look past the central action and count leaves on trees, and see birds behind those trees, and see veins on leaves behind the birds, and the mountains behind the birds, and then the streams and clouds... it. just. keeps. going. Like actually being there, with better eyesight than any human has. "Cheat" 3D is like the difference between computer animation and shaded cartoons. There's a difference, but it's not a huge one.

NOTE: IMAX 3D is designed for ROUND screens. Golfball shaped screens. IMAX3D on a round screen is amazing, but IMAX on a flat screen gives many/most people headaches. Some people get headaches as well from Real3D (they're 2 different types of 3d)

I am sure there is someone out there who enjoys it, but that person is not me! The 3-D glasses gave me a major headache. You know, they are cheaply made and not the most comfortable, and were pressing really hard against my temples (and I have a small head!). I took them off for most of the movie, but then it is really hard to tell what is going on (It didn't just look regular 2-D without the glasses, it was blurry.) We saw Tangled 3-D and I enjoyed it much more when we watched it in DVD, in 2D.