I stumbled across this article in the New York Times I thought you all might be interested in....

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/03/movies/03threed.html

Even though early critical reviews thought Clash looked awful, it seems regular movie goers think it looks fine (for the most part).

^^ well, that sounds much more hopeful! but Narnia is more than 3D.....

Due to previous experience I think I'm going to trust the "average" movie goers more than the critics, the critics often come across as biased in one way or another.
Long Live Narnia!!!

Pfft, the average movie goer thought Transformers 2 was a great movie. I'll stick with the critics.

I am going to just see in in 2D and forget the 3D part!
I don't really want anything to do with the 3D craziness that's been going on with the movies! too many 3D movies! ahhh!
it used to be that 3D movies were rare and therefore cool and special.....

Like i said, most people probably wouldn't even notice the difference, but if there is one thing i hate more than seeing 3D-gimmick shots in 3D, its having to watch 3D-gimmick shots in 2D. Irritates me no end. I can only hope the same doesn't happen with the choice of VFX shots on Voyage of the Dawn Treader.

Bravo! My thoughts exactly.

Fantasia_kitty, thanks for finding that article. It was incredibly informative. Now I don't have to research why 3D fizzled in the 50's. But I still would like to know how much it would cost a theater to make a screen 3D compatible... I suppose I could go research that...

OK .. all of this talk of Clash of the Titans undergoing the same 3D conversion that VDT is getting got me really curious considering that 'Titans' hasnt gotten the best of reviews. I just got back from seeing 'Titans' in 3D, and I personally liked it. Obviously it wasnt perfect but a lot of the effects were cool. I had a great time! Im sure that VDT will get a better treatment with months of post production still ahead of us. I am now more excited than I was before of seeing VDT coming out in 3D..and I will definitely go see it in both 2D and 3D.

^^ good point (about VotDT getting better treatment)! VotDT has had so much time that we might be surprised at how well it comes out! only time will tell!

I certainly hope the VDT 3D is better than the Clash 3D. They were talking about that movie on the LotRO forums and the consensus was that the 3D was horrible. I don't have any intention of spending extra money to see VDT in 3D, but any kind of negative publicity is not a good thing. If the movie fails, I'd rather it be because it's a crappy adaptation than the fanboys rose up against the 3D in it.

^^ I agree with you Bookey! I hope that VotDT being in 3D doesn't bring it down!

I certainly hope the VDT 3D is better than the Clash 3D. They were talking about that movie on the LotRO forums and the consensus was that the 3D was horrible. I don't have any intention of spending extra money to see VDT in 3D, but any kind of negative publicity is not a good thing. If the movie fails, I'd rather it be because it's a crappy adaptation than the fanboys rose up against the 3D in it.

I'm not altogether sure that it was just the 3D that made Clash of the Titans a crappy movie. Yes, it had marvellous Special Effects, which might have stood it in good stead even if the movie had stayed in 2D. But it was only an updated remake of something that had been done beforehand. I'm not even sure that the earlier movie wasn't better The trouble is with the Clash 3D is that the 3D effects, as sensational as the overall special effects might be, didn't make enough of a difference to what the 2D film would be. Nothing really flew out of the screen, and my companion and myself just watched the movie, not really noting any difference in effects.

Unlike the Alice in Wonderland film which I saw earlier this week. In that, I got a real sense of depth, of insects and other things really flying at me, even of being in a different world. At the end there was a butterfly which looked just as if it were flying at me. There were also things wrong with Alice as well, however. I didn't like the Jabberwocky, which looked too much like it had been recycled from the Hungarian Horntail in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. The Jabberwocky even walked on its wing joints. And did anyone notice the 'Um from Umbridge' reference?

Whereas in VDT, there is a real chance of making something that looks good in 3D, if the filmmakers treat it right. Remember Wizard of Oz, and the huge impact this 1939 movie made? Maybe most of you don't, despite this famous movie being released on VHS and DVD. Because this movie, filmed in black and white at the beginning and the end, switched to colour in the sequences filmed in Oz. One got a real sense of being in a different world whilst in the colour sequence.

Maybe 3D really ought to be handled the same way as the Wizard of Oz back in 1939. I, for one, would be hugely disappointed in VDT 3D effects if the picture at the beginning of the story doesn't get filmed as startlingly realistic as possible, so that the audience doesn't start worrying about getting wet. And I would be unhappy if Narnia, itself, looks as flat as the real world.

In any case, I intend to view VDT in both dimensions.

I voted "Can't decide". If the quality of the 3D effect is good and will benefit VDT artistically and it increases its commercial success, then I would be for it. Otherwise, they just jumped on board the latest 3D express train and it didn't go anywhere.

If enough NarniaWebbers approve of the 3D version, I will watch it in 3D at least once. But I do plan on seeing VDT in 2D first.

I'm happy it will be in 3D and will definitely see it in 3D on opening weekend.,

If they do a good job of it, it should be awsome.

here's my beef.
i have seen three movies in 3D, Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince, Avatar and Clash of the Titans.
Clash of the Titans killed 3D. it was awful, i felt like i was watching a completely cgi movie at times, they saw Avatar and jumped on the band wagon. Harry Potter was in between, it wasn't designed for 3D, but it was well done, granted only the first fifteen minutes were in 3D, but it was still quite good, it wasn't overly digital looking.
Avatar was amazing, no doubt about it, but i'm not expecting that from VDT, i'm expecting something on the lines of Harry Potter, it may (or may not) all be 3D, but all i care about is that it is done well. as long as it doesn't look too fake i'll be happy. i intend on seeing the movie in 3D, but i'm going to see it in 2D first so that i can get the idea of the movie first, i don't want any good bits wrecked by bad 3D.
but, i don't expect it'll turn out bad, the rumor was around for a while, they've been planning the 3D for a while, it's not like "bam!" two months before the release they decide, they've still got a good eight months.

Sorry, this is off topic, I've already ranted my feelings on the 3D conversion many times on here, but Tirian I love your sig