• Hi Guest: Welcome to TRIBE, the online home of TRIBE MAGAZINE. If you'd like to post here, or reply to existing posts on TRIBE, you first have to register. Join us!

Am I the only one who doesn't want to see movies in 3D, IMAX, Ultra AVX or D-Box?


TRIBE Member
It seems like GTA theatres only show all of the new releases in one of the above formats. It's a pretty obvious attempt to wring more money out of people, and it actually takes away from the experience for me. I feel like the typical modern cinema screen is plenty big, and the sound plenty loud.

Today was the first time that I ran into it for two films at once (Everest and The Martian). Not possible to see either one in normal format after about 7:00.
Alex D. from TRIBE on Utility Room


TRIBE Member
I like 3D but not as much in theatre as @ home.

In theatre typically resolution is halved and the artefacting is more pronounced for sure, especially if off-axis. Add in the washout from projection tech itself and its just a much crisper, engaging experience with more recent 3D home TVs

IMO - the tech would be more impressive had the theatres all been upgraded to dual projectors, one for each eye - this would have meant full res 3D in the theatre and likely made the experience a bit more impactful for the general audience.

Im not aware of dual projector 3D theatre in the GTA - but they exist in the states
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders


TRIBE Member
I don't care if other people want the option - go nuts! I just want to be able to see the normal format, which they typically start showing around week 2 or 3, but only until 6:00-7:00, forcing you into the special formats if you want to see a film during normal film-viewing hours for a working adult.

DJ Vuvu Zela

TRIBE Member
bigger & louder the better IMO.

3D, if done correctly, is also a bonus IMO.

you can always DL a screener in a few months and watch it on your smartphone if you don't care about the presentation.
(in which case you'd be a horrible person).


TRIBE Member
3D is great for animated films, but I do not like it for live action unless it's very specific, e.g. The Hobbit or Lord of the Rings. There's enough CGI there to make it enjoyable (plus with 48fps).
tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders


TRIBE Member
i loved mad max in 3D. i see where diablo is coming from though. sara is the same, not a huge fan of 3D. i think it works for some movies, i convinced her to see mad max in 3D and she enjoyed it. really does depend on the movie

cosmosuave..you're in luck if you like 70mm



TRIBE Member
I like all the nice screens, seats etc, just not 3D for the most part.

Unless its Avatar quality.

As far as quality goes, Hugo beat Avatar. The opening sequence below will give you an idea. And it just worked so well with shots involving layers of intricate French ironwork. It's the only time 3D really impressed me.

tribe cannabis accessories silver grinders


TRIBE Member
I ended up seeing The Martian in 3D, and actually thought the effect was mostly wasted! The initial few shots of the Martian landscape stand out, but once my eyes adjusted to that, I didn't really notice it for the rest of the film...and there are fairly lengthy sequences of Matt Damon farming potatoes and talking into the video monitors, as well as NASA "action" back on Earth.

However, my eyes felt more strained afterwards than they have after any 3D movie I've seen previously.

And yes, the effect in Mad Max was more enjoyable.


TRIBE Member
I don't like 3-D. I just want to see a movie on a large screen without having to wear stupid glasses for some gimmick-y effect that rarely adds to my enjoyment of the film.

I agree that the 3-D in The Martian didn't really add anything. I actually found it to be more distracting than anything. The edges of the screen seemed blurry and the images weren't crisp and sharp. I often found myself moving my head around to check if it was just the way I was looking at the screen, but no luck.

Down with 3-D!