When they criticized the 3D, they meant adding it as an afterthought as opposed to shooting it in 3D. Naturally the effect isn't as good when you do it this way, and the film will also lack elements worth making 3D in the first place.
However, I still don't know what people mean when they say the 3D didn't "add" anything. Do you mean you expected there to be parts of the movie where something comes out at you? I honestly find that completely novelty and cheesy, and it looks weird as fuck when you watch it in 2D. A fine example would be the infamous Beowulf spear.
I don't think making a movie 3D is entirely a gimmick anymore. It's simply adding more visual plains to the image so you feel more engaged with the film. The 3D for Alice in Wonderland, based on what I saw, was fine. Nikki said the 3D sucked when she went to see it, so perhaps you guys overseas just got a crappy deal.
|