#Bwana devil 3d movie movie#

Nor did we evolve to stand still and regard its advance. But it advances by growing larger against its background, not by detaching from it. 'But what about rapid movement toward the viewer? Yes, we see a car aiming for us. His explanations more than prove that it is not realistic human nature, nor the operation of the eye, to see objects 'pop out' or 'fly at us.' It's a misconception that 3D is mimicking how our eyes perceive reality, because our brain interprets dimensions much differently, as he explains.

#Bwana devil 3d movie movie#

Images leaping off the screen destroy that illusion.' That's not to say that 3D isn't an amusement park gimmick meant to entertain and, well, amuse the audience, but it should stay out of the movie theater.Įbert goes on to add about realism that 'in real life we perceive in three dimensions, yes, but we do not perceive parts of our vision dislodging themselves from the rest and leaping at us.' I think what Ebert has done is finally put some perspective on why I don't like 3D beyond my own belief that it's just a cheap trick to sell tickets. The idea of a movie, even an animated one, is to convince us, halfway at least, that that we're seeing on the screen is sort of really happening. Every time that happens, it creates a fatal break in the illusion of the film. 'There seems to be a belief that 3-D films are not getting their money's worth unless they hurtle objects or body parts at the audience. He starts off by shattering the beliefs of realism the most connect with the gimmick of 3D. His first 3D movie was Bwana Devil from 1952 and even 56 years later, he's still not impressed by it. There's really rational no way you can argue with Ebert's criticism of 3D. He finally puts some much-needed perspective on this entire 3D trend. I haven't felt this much gratification in a very long time after reading an article written by such a legendary journalist as Roger Ebert. He writes an article brilliantly titled D-minus for 3-D and briefly outlines how evolution shows that 3D is not what our eyes were meant to see and explains that it's a blatant mistake to believe that 3D is realistic. However, if there's one man who could potentially convince our readers that 3D is worthless, it would be Roger Ebert. For the longest time I've preached about my dislike of 3D and have constantly encountered resistance and seen Hollywood continue to make pointless 3D films like Journey to the Center of the Earth.

I woke up yesterday morning to discover an awe-inspiring blog from the one and only Roger Ebert.