Posted 5/15/2010 07:13:00 PM by Douglas

I don't make a habit out of agreeing with Roger Ebert, but when it comes to his loathing of 3-D movies, he's spot on.

Hollywood's current crazy stampede toward it is suicidal. It adds nothing essential to the moviegoing experience. For some, it is an annoying distraction. For others, it creates nausea and headaches. It is driven largely to sell expensive projection equipment and add a $5 to $7.50 surcharge on already expensive movie tickets. Its image is noticeably darker than standard 2-D. It is unsuitable for grown-up films of any seriousness. It limits the freedom of directors to make films as they choose. For moviegoers in the PG-13 and R ranges, it only rarely provides an experience worth paying a premium for.

It's been annoying people since the 50s, but other than being a cute little trick, it's not been taken seriously. I saw Jaws 3-D and I just remember it being a distraction. But I seriously doubt there will be a serious movie made with 3-D anytime soon. But not to be left behind jumping the 3-D shark,
Playboy.

Hefner explained it like this to the AP: "This particular picture is one example of how books and magazines are different (than computer images). You can hold [them] in your hands, save them, and as Dad used to, put them under the mattress."

3-D? More like 34-C.