# Up-Should I do 3D?



## dpeters11

Want to see up, but debating whether I should do the 3D version or go standard. I hate traditional red/blue glasses, but it sounds like they are using different technology. Is it worth seeing in 3D? Both of us wear glasses, so it will need to be comfortable over normal glasses. My favorite theater is showing it both ways, so have an opportunity to choose the version. I would be paying an extra $8 for two tickets for the 3D version (if they don't accept my Bugs Life ticket, as we technically don't qualify for it, being adults.)


----------



## Stuart Sweet

I personally plan on avoiding 3D unless someone tells me for darn sure that the glasses fit over my regular glasses. I find that 3D movies almost always lack saturation and smooth motion compared to the 2D version.


----------



## James Long

We saw Monsters and Aliens at an Imax in 3D (double bonus on the charge for the 3D and the large screen). 3D has come a long way. I'm not sure it is worth the money.

We also saw The Polar Express 3D at an Imax ... I got more out of the movie watching the DVD later. Hopefully UP is a better 3D film.


----------



## Drew2k

Roger Ebert, a film critic I respect, speaks disparagingly of the need to view "Up" in 3-D in his Cannes journal (link) and even in his official movie review (link) says to skip the 3-D version ...

This is definitely a movie I'm looking forward to seeing, but I think I would like to see it both ways, 3-D for the novelty, and then on BD on my couch!


----------



## dogs31

The glasses are like sunglasses with polarized lens. Yes they will fit over your glasses and they are comfortable. The 3D used is called RealD and it is digital 3D.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

I am reminded of the deluge of "computer animated" movies that started after Pixar first made it big... forget that many were crap movies, they were CGI so they must be cool!

I have a feeling 3D is on the verge of becoming the new fad... it's happened before with 3D, where movies had 3D just to have 3D and the stories suffered.


----------



## elaclair

We've got tickets for the 1:40 show tomorrow afternoon in a digital 3D theatre. I've seen a demo of the technology and it was very impressive....but it WAS a demo. After I see it tomorrow I'll post what I thought about both the movie and the 3D.


----------



## Fab55

We too saw Monsters vs. Aliens in 3D Imax, and thought it was pretty cool. The glasses are plenty big enough to go over prescription glasses, I'm assuming they designed them as such. I plan on seeing Up in 3D, but again, only in Imax 3D. I can't speak to the 3D viewing experience in a standard theater.


----------



## cmtar

I would go 3D, the place I work out is renting out 2 of the theaters in my town so everyone in the company can go see it. They also have a new commercial with UP...dont know if you saw it but.....it has a duck in it


----------



## elaclair

Okay, so the short and sweet of it....GO SEE IT!

The use of 3D is very subtle, not in your face at all, so it does what 3D really should...it adds depth to the picture without being a distraction. Since it was a digital theatre, there was no image ghosting like you would see in a film version (two projector vs single projector image). Looking at the film without the glasses only shows a slight color-shift and slightly too bright an image...in other words the projection is completely tuned to the use of the glasses. The glasses themselves are, as has been mentioned before, of ample size to cover most prescription glasses (count me as one of those) without any significant vignetting or blocking of the image.

Now, as to the movie itself, I don't want to give anything away, but in typical Pixar fashion, there is something for everyone..the subtle adult humor, the splashy images and colors for the kids, and a story that tells well for both young and old. Edward Asner is the perfect curmudgeon, and Christopher Plummer makes the perfect antagonist. Can't say too much about his part without giving a bit of the plot away, so I'll leave it at that. And for those in the know about Pixar history, A-113 is in there....


----------



## Drew2k

Pixar is such an amazing studio, maybe I'll have to try to see this on the big screen.

(I still have a program I recorded last year on my DVR from Starz! If you can find "The Pixar Story" either On Demand or on Starz! again, I definitely recommend it. It's a very good behind the scene look at the history of the company and their trials and tribulations.)


----------



## Stewart Vernon

"The Pixar Story" was a good watch. I enjoyed it. I had it recorded until I bought Wall-E, and it was included as one of the extras there... so I watched it again when I got that.

I got the feeling they could have done a documentary twice that long and still not told all the interesting behind-the-scenes stuff.


----------



## fluffybear

Saw the movie yesterday in both 2-D and 3-D (saw the 3-D first) an can honestly say PASS on the 3-D


----------



## Chris Blount

I saw this movie yesterday in digital 3D. 

First, the movie is good. Lots for kids and adults. Heck, the first 10 minutes could be a movie just in itself. Great stuff and lots of fun.....squirrel!

As far as 3D, I was pleasantly surprised. Not a lot of in-your-face stuff. They just told the story without making a big deal about 3D. With that said though, the visuals are stunning with lots of great 3D effects especially in the scenery shots. 

My advice is to NOT pass on 3D. The image quality on 3D digital projectors are fantastic and IMHO, look better than their film couterparts. Remeber, when viewing a movie like this in a 3D digital theater, you are seeing the movie in its original form. When stuff like this is transferred to film, image quality is lost. Dirt specs and scratches are also introduced.


----------



## fluffybear

Chris Blount said:


> Remeber, when viewing a movie like this in a 3D digital theater, you are seeing the movie in its original form. When stuff like this is transferred to film, image quality is lost. Dirt specs and scratches are also introduced.


Many theaters are going ALL-Digital and thus there is no advantage to going 3-D except for the effects.

I know at least here, we pay a surcharge of $3.00 for the ability to watch the movie in 3-D plus another $3.00 to rent the glasses. I just don't see 'UP' in 3-D being worth the extra $6.00


----------



## Nick

Dpeters, "What's Up"?

My gf read your OP and thought is was a "wussy" question (her words).


----------



## cmtar

I saw t he movie Saturday and well....it wasnt all that great to me.


----------



## johnck78

cmtar said:


> I saw t he movie Saturday and well....it wasnt all that great to me.


I agree! Skip the 3D, skip the whole thing! IMHO, the worst Pixar movie yet!


----------



## fluffybear

cmtar said:


> I saw t he movie Saturday and well....it wasnt all that great to me.





johnck78 said:


> I agree! Skip the 3D, skip the whole thing! IMHO, the worst Pixar movie yet!


I'll agree that the movie was not what I was expecting nor do I think it was as funny as the previews and critics led me to believe. However, the kids loved it and that speaks volumes around this house.

IMHO, this may not have been Disney-Pixar's best but it is far from their worst as well.


----------



## brant

The movie is great . . . . .but I would pass on 3D. 


They did a good job w/ the 3D, but the glasses were uncomfortable to me. It also made the image very dark. About 3/4 of the way through my eyes were really bothering me from the strain of the dark picture. And my 4yr old son finally just put his to the side and watched it without them. 


And for me, wife, and son, it was almost $40 to watch (add popcorn, drinks, etc. . ., makes it a $65 movie night). I made it two trips in one . . . the first and the last. 



We normally wait for movies to get passed over to the dollar theater; If it weren't for wanting to see the 3D version it would've cost me less than $5 for all of us to watch.


----------



## elaclair

brant said:


> The movie is great . . . . .but I would pass on 3D.
> 
> They did a good job w/ the 3D, but the glasses were uncomfortable to me. It also made the image very dark. About 3/4 of the way through my eyes were really bothering me from the strain of the dark picture. And my 4yr old son finally just put his to the side and watched it without them.


You can probably blame that on the theatre rather than the movie itself. As I had mentioned in my earlier post, the projector was obviously optimized for the 3D since when you took the glasses off the image was overly bright.

As for the glasses being uncomfortable, guess I'm just used to having glasses on all the time 

Oh, and the AMC where I saw it did not charge extra for the glasses....and we got to keep them.


----------



## brant

elaclair said:


> As for the glasses being uncomfortable, guess I'm just used to having glasses on all the time


I haven't worn glasses in years. Lasik. 



elaclair said:


> Oh, and the AMC where I saw it did not charge extra for the glasses....and we got to keep them.


Lucky you. We paid $6 more to see the 3D; had to show ticket stubs at the door to be loaned a pair of glasses, and they were watching everyone like hawks coming out the door to make sure they got them back. I wonder if they had anyone stationed at the emergency exits?


----------



## elaclair

brant said:


> Lucky you. We paid $6 more to see the 3D; had to show ticket stubs at the door to be loaned a pair of glasses, and they were watching everyone like hawks coming out the door to make sure they got them back. I wonder if they had anyone stationed at the emergency exits?


Out of curiousity, what did your glasses look like? Ours were in a sealed pack with the RealD logo. The glasses themselves were pretty substantial, seemed to be made for multiple use (ie real hinges, nose pads, and reasonably adjustable earpieces.) and also had the RealD logo on the earpieces.....


----------



## ShawnL25

Saw it in 3d and really enjoyed it. Charged us $3 extra for the glasses they came in a sealed pack with the RealD logo and you could keep them if you wanted. Not gimmicky at all just very cleaver use of 3D.


----------



## RasputinAXP

elaclair said:


> Out of curiousity, what did your glasses look like? Ours were in a sealed pack with the RealD logo. The glasses themselves were pretty substantial, seemed to be made for multiple use (ie real hinges, nose pads, and reasonably adjustable earpieces.) and also had the RealD logo on the earpieces.....


Ours were the same; we tossed them in the handy recycling bin at the exit.


----------



## redfiver

fluffybear said:


> I'll agree that the movie was not what I was expecting nor do I think it was as funny as the previews and critics led me to believe. However, the kids loved it and that speaks volumes around this house.
> 
> IMHO, this may not have been Disney-Pixar's best but it is far from their worst as well.


I thought this was one of Pixar's best. An excellent story with many layers.

Out of curiosity, which of Pixar's films was your favorite, and which one was your least favorite? My favorite is Finding Nemo, with UP coming a close second. We'll see how it plays after 800 viewings when out on DVD. I have Finding Nemo near memorized as my daughter loves that one as well.

My least favorite is either the incredibles or Bug's life. I enjoyed both of those, but they are are the lower end of the list. I used to thing Cars was the worst one, but the more I've seen it, the more I've enjoyed it. Pixar movies seem to play well over and over.


----------



## fluffybear

redfiver said:


> I thought this was one of Pixar's best. An excellent story with many layers.
> 
> Out of curiosity, which of Pixar's films was your favorite, and which one was your least favorite? My favorite is Finding Nemo, with UP coming a close second. We'll see how it plays after 800 viewings when out on DVD. I have Finding Nemo near memorized as my daughter loves that one as well.
> 
> My least favorite is either the incredibles or Bug's life. I enjoyed both of those, but they are are the lower end of the list. I used to thing Cars was the worst one, but the more I've seen it, the more I've enjoyed it. Pixar movies seem to play well over and over.


Bugs Life, Monsters, Inc., & Toy Story are my top 3 (in no particular order)

Incredibles, Ratatoule, Wall-E would be the bottom 3 (again, no particular order)


----------



## clueless

It will be interesting to see what James Cameron does with Avatar in 3-D when it is released this winter.


----------



## redsoxfan26

Went to see the 3-D version last night. I found myself taking the glasses off halfway through the movie. Good movie, 3-D not worth it.


----------



## chris vesuvio

*Loved the movie...*
3D was not worth the xtra bucks!! Nothing floated or jumped out at you like other 3D films I have seen. 
Wife, Me and 2 kids = $50+ for a 1:30 showing.
Glasses were in sealed bag w/recycle box at the door.


----------



## Matman

Saw it last weekend, our theater here isn't charging extra for the 3d... the glasses came in a clear bag marked "real 3d", left them in the recycling bin after. 

Being a balloon pilot, I was impressed with the magic they captured of flying in a balloon. Being a Pixar fan, I was again pleased with the story. Pixar is one of the few companies that have you wanting to cry and laugh at the same time. (Being newly married, the story of the couple kida hit home on how quick life can pass you by). 

Overall, not my fav Pixar flick, but I would't tag it as their worst either. Regardless, I say its a LOT better then 99% of the crap that is hitting the theaters these days.


----------



## hdtvfan0001

Cute movie, and 3D is a must to enjoy it to its potential.

Both my 11 year old grandson and I enjoyed it.


----------



## nickfrye

I missed it in the cinema.. I was extremely busy when it came out. :nono: any thoughts about the film? the reviews were great and I kinda feel Pixar has done nothing wrong so far.


----------

