3D box office revenues have taken a steep dive, with box office sales at their lowest level in eight years. It may finally be time to say sayonara to those bulky tinted glasses.
I would be overjoyed on the day that 3D finally bites the dust. The tinted glasses overly darken the screen, and the rare effects that cater to the technology often only serve to make me woozy.
The reporter writes about films but when it comes to 3D, is a dufus – movie theater 3D glasses are light weight, clear, polarizing filters, not “bulky tinted glasses”. The reporter believes she is wearing tinted glasses when she is not – apparently does not understand the concept of polarized lenses. Since she does not like 3D (sample size n = 1), then no one should enjoy 3D. Wow. If she doesn’t like 3D, then she does not have to watch it, but alas, she wants 3D to be gone because no one should enjoy 3D 🙂
The reporter, like many who mislabel 3D glasses as “goggles”, is a fan of virtual reality helmets. Yes, VR helmets.
For some reason, reporters who think 3D glasses are “bulky” goggles that consumers do not like, simultaneously think consumers prefer actual VR helmets…. that makes sense. Not.
It is possible to write accurate stories about 3D, including benefits and drawbacks, market and content issues. But the above is just awful reporting.
Prior posts on dufus reporters referring to “3D Goggles”.
- Reading never caught on because you have to wear silly, uncomfortable reading glasses
- Reporters still refer to “3D Goggles” with a new twist: “Goggle-free 3D”
- Reporters go gaga over virtual reality helmets
- Media declares war against 3D