MovieChat Forums > Love (2015) Discussion > 3D my ass!!

3D my ass!!

posted 9 years ago by sonic_bang
8 replies | jump to latest

I don't know, maybe, the screen I watched (TIFF Bell Lightbox Theater 1) was a bit too small for 3D to really work. I don't think the 3D worked at all.
Noe should have used the technology more cleverly. The only time I felt I was indeed watching a 3D movie was when Murphy was jerking off his juice toward the viewers. That was funny and scary at the same time.
3D movies should make you feel as though you can feel and touch if you reach your arm toward the screen. Other than the scene I have just described above, it totally failed.
If you watch it on your regular 2D tv, you won't miss anything.

[–] mrpinbert 9 years ago

Although I agree with you to some extent. I do think the 3D was effective in making both the action on screen and what was going on in Murphy's head more immersive.

[–] sonic_bang 9 years ago

In some degree, yeah. I guess I expected a bit more from the movie being real 3D than you did.

[–] manolo21123 9 years ago

theres a cumshot right to the camera?, wtf

[–] mrpinbert 9 years ago

yup 

If you save the world, We can do it in the *beep*
My top 100 http://www.imdb.com/li

[–] CelluloidAdmirer 9 years ago

That's nothing.
Over here, we have midnight movies and one time they ran a 3D adult flick called Lollipop Girls and that had a shot like that in the movie.

[–] ganubis 9 years ago

Most of the screen time is dedicated to the 3-D image of the back of his head while he is on his cell phone to Electra's mother. Honesty, Enter the Void was more immersing than Love was with the advantage of 3D.

I thought that the 3D was most striking wheen Gaspar lying in bed blew smoke towards the camera.

"the roman empire never died, it just turned into the catholic church"

[–] Benedict_Cumberbatch 9 years ago

I agree with you that "Enter the Void" was a (much) more immersing experience than "Love," without the 'advantage' of 3-D. It was also, overall, a much better film.

(very minor spoilers):

I did like, however, the 3-D effect in the gallery sequence where his girlfriend walks into the background with the ex-boyfriend. And the sequence near the end where we see how Murphy and Elektra met.

But I believe the sheer existence of this film was that somebody had to film a 3-D cumshot, and who better than Noe to give us that? The audience was literally applauding at that moment (this was at the Aero in Santa Monica). Noe cancelled the after screening Q&A he was supposed to do tonight, which was a bummer. "Love" had its moments, and it's a curious slice of provocation from an interesting filmmaker... but it's far from a great film, and the acting was absolutely atrocious.

Without you, today's emotions would be the scurf of yesterday's.

[–] IndyCelt 9 years ago

Saw the thread title, thought you'd posted a nice JPG. What a let-down!