Comment Re:To be honest, the 3D sucks (Score 4, Insightful) 139
To be very honest, the 3D sucks. Why you ask?
Because the director / animator constantly pulling focus make my brain go bzzzzzrk!
In the real world we move our gaze around, adjusting focus as we look at the foreground or background. Since Avatar did this for us it felt very exhausting to watch.
Actually, Avatar was the ONE 3D movie that got this right. They almost constantly had a very large depth of field, allowing the viewers to choose what to look at since everything was crisp. This made the 3D experience great. The only thing I ever saw in 3D that was as good was a U2 concert compilation from a bunch of shows in South America in 3D. That was in iMax, and the sound quality was amazing too.
I later watched Avatar at home in good resolution, but 2D, and it was really bad. Pulling focus to direct the viewer’s attention is so important in 2D film making to create a great sense of depth, and without it, everything just looked flat. And all the computer animated stuff just looked fake because of it.
With The Force Awakens, the situation was reversed. The narrow depth of field really bothered me for exactly the reasons you described. It’s hard for the brain to accept when something you look at and try to focus on remains out of focus.
But watching The Force Awakens at home on my 4K TV without 3D was awesome. JJ Abrams is really great at using depth of field to make a great 2D experience with depth, and he's also a master of using it to direct the user's attention.
To truly make a film work in both formats, everything would have to be recorded twice, with different focus settings, or with light field cameras so that focus can be decided in post. Not sure light field video cameras exist though...