Losing One's Virginity in the Third Dimension

So today I went to see The Hobbit, but this is not a movie review as such, the film was good - that is all.

I had long avoided 3D movies thinking they were nothing more than a fad that would pass off. That is a more cynical attitude than a skeptical one, a skeptic would give 3D a chance while a cynic would just dismiss it out of hand. Well I meet my friend at the agreed time and go to the movie, but the showing at this time was 3D, but not being one to flake out, I'll give 3D a go and wear the ridiculous glasses over my already ridiculous spectacles. What struck me first was how impressed I was by the title sequence, the Warner Brother's and New Line Cinema never looked so good, and for once; the Metro Goldwynn Mayer lion didn't make me think of Tom & Jerry, I was dumbstruck by how the lion just pops out.

People had complaints about motion sickness while watching 3D, I can sympathise with that, in the early scenes between dialogue between characters and camera panning was unnecessary, a vestigial technique from the old fashioned second dimension of cinema. However I acclimatised after about 20 minutes and the rest of the movie was plain sailing.

Overall the experience was quite immersive, flinching whilst flaming acorns flew towards my head, and moving to the side as boulders came at me. The New Zealand/Middle Earth scenery is amazing and it really brings you there, and intensifies regret on not having visited that amazing country yet.

I don't think I'll make it my business to see every movie in 3D, however not being a big Sci-Fi/Fantasy fan, it may make me enjoy the movies more by dragging me kicking and screaming into their world and screaming the ongoing drama in my face which is what I look for in a movie. Comedies, not much point, Blockbusters, especially ones with an unrealistic world, sure.

If I was to see another movie in 3D, I'd choose Star Trek; as I've said, I'm not a Sci-Fi fan, but it looks good and would make me enjoy the movie more.
I've always loved Superman, and with the Christopher Nolan involved, The Man of Steel looks like something I would like, and perhaps in 3D, we put this motion sickness theory to the test.

Overall I enjoyed my experience in the third dimension, so I may as well comment on some aspects of the movie. A couple criticisms I disagree with:

The Shire looks like Tellytubby Land
Everyone said that about the original trilogy, that's how Peter Jackson decided the look for his movies, lets move on.....

The 48 Frames per Second makes it look like an 80's Soap Opera
I didn't get that but maybe it's my eyesight. [Incidentally, there was a delay in the screening as projectors had to be changed...]

The Dwarfs singing goes on too long, and so does that movie
I thought this a perfect opportunity to take an emergency comfort break should I need it, although there are two songs, the first is entertaining and the second is quite moving, they were not as long as I was lead to believe.  As Hitchcock said, the length of a movie should relate to the endurance of the human bladder, mine survived, thanks for asking.

I do think, and would have no problem with, Peter Jackson doing a re-release of the original DVD trilogy cutting old Bilbo (Ian Holm) finding the ring, and replacing it with Martin Freeman for the sake of consistency  It would make Jackson comparable to George Lucas but what film director doesn't want to be regarded in that company, even if it does make you look like a revisionist.

And of course, Andy Serkis as Gollum stole the show! The man deserves credit for turning motion capture CGI into an artform.

One thing though...  the dwarfs look grotesque with their large bulbous noses, William Arimatage (Thorin) didn't get as much time in make-up as the other dwarfs, and looks uncomfortably human, not belonging to the dwarf gene-pool, considering he's their king and greatest hero. Since there is no Viggo Mortensen to be Aragorn this time around, did the makers think the ladies need eye-candy?