- You have to wear ridiculous glasses
- If you have a friend, they too have to wear ridiculous glasses
- In most cases it adds nothing to the experience
- It gives me a headache like DLP
Criticisms from Francis Ford Coppola and Roger Ebert have already condemned the technology in more mainstream forms as nothing more than a distraction and a way to get more money from consumers.
So I have to ask, why do we need 3D porn??
Isn't masturbation humiliating enough??
When the whole ordeal is over and your sat there frantically searching for a tissue, a sweating panting mess staring at the graphic scenes on your television that merely moments ago had seemed extremely erotic, but now seem vaguely like a murder scene in a horror film. Thoughts flashing across your mind.
Where is the remote?
Was the volume always that loud?
Is this really what I wanted from life?
Isn't that all bad enough without introducing the added humiliation of sitting there semi naked with ridiculous glasses and a headache??
And really, HD was already starting to burst the bubble of fantasy, making porn seem too real. Do we now need to appreciate this vulgarity in three dimensions and live in genuine fear for a mischievous directors idea of comedy with a well placed camera for the 'money-shot'
You know what I think, what about you??
Đ
[Gizmodo]
There is a really amazing graph charting critical reception of media vs. technical hoo-har.
ReplyDeleteBasically, all the best films were made before audio, technicolor, dolby, HD and I imagine 3D.
Is the web cam on? Is an additional concern for PC wankers.
Do you have the link? It would be interesting to see if they are saying the technology is at the expense of the film or just there was more focus on story without tech as a distraction. I do believe HD is awesome (sometimes even in some porn) and 5.1 just makes sense (not in porn), these all add to the experience, but 3D i'm not convinced.Would a remade classic with HD and 5.1 make the experience worse? I doubt it
ReplyDelete