RealD Promises Designer 3D Glasses Will Be Ready by Avatar
While there are many complaints about 3D, one I hear often is about how uncomfortable the glasses are. If you see a 3D movie with RealD technology, they usually hand out disposable cheap plastic 3D glasses that are pretty ugly. For a long time, companies like RealD and 3D advocates like Jeffrey Katzenberg have been pushing for custom designer 3D glasses that you buy and keep on you and bring every time you go see a 3D movie would be coming soon. At the on-going 3D Entertainment Summit, RealD founder Michael Lewis finally said that designer glasses will be available "in certain outlets" before Avatar opens in December.
The statement was made at a presentation at the 3D Entertainment Summit because Fox Sports chairman David Hill explained that, "I have two teenaged girls, and they don't want to go on dates looking like they're going to do some spot welding." Um, okay, I guess? Either way, Lewis said that various designer glasses will be available in certain outlets as designed by Gucci and other manufacturers. Prescription glasses are on the way some time later as well as toddler-sized glasses. MarketSaw reported back in 2008 that other glasses might be coming from Ray Ban and Wayfarer as well, so you might have your pick, if you want a pair.
This is all good and dandy if you're still a fan of 3D. But unfortunately, as far as I know, these glasses will only work in RealD theaters. And right now if I'm going to see a movie in 3D, I'm going to see it in IMAX 3D. Will these designer 3D glasses work in IMAX? That's the next big question. And of course if they've got the RealD logo slapped on them somewhere, IMAX won't want to join in on all the fun. But that's one of the big industry problems with 3D. There are at least three competing brands (RealD, Dolby, IMAX) and until we have uniformity across the entire marketplace, consumers won't be quick to accept 3D as the new norm.
Of course there's still the problem that Katzenberg wants to continue charging more and more for 3D movies. So on top of spending some hard-earned cash on designer glasses, you may start paying double the ticket price to even just see the movie in 3D. I thought this was supposed to be the future? Not a way for Hollywood to just make more money. If it's really supposed to be like sound or color, then maybe the ticket price should stay the same until every movie is offered in 3D as well. Anyway, I'm curious to see how many of these glasses are sold. Will you be buying a pair? Would they make you go see 3D movies more often?
Reader Feedback - 33 Comments
why can't this gimmick just die already! And I really don't want to wear glasses that make images go "pop" and if "3-D" is the new way these "designer" glasses should be free of costs.
xerxex on Sep 18, 2009
After Avatar I think 3D will become more popular and will evolve into something more than a gimmick. If that's the case, then I might look into the prescription glasses. Wearing regular glasses behind the bulky plastic 3D glasses for 2-3 hours is pretty uncomfortable. If they're outrageously priced, then forget it. I won't pay $200 for glasses that I'll wear on occasion. I know the IMAX by my house charges you extra for their 3D glasses, so personal glasses may pay themselves off in the long run.
Rorschach90 on Sep 18, 2009
please keep u2 the fuck away from this site
Sumit on Sep 18, 2009
hahahaha #3 is hilarious!
ha1rball on Sep 18, 2009
Please keep Sumit the F*ck away from this sight as well.
Alex on Sep 18, 2009
I've seen one 3D movie so far... and I was not that impressed. Now I will go see Avatar in 3D just because James Cameron directing should not be missed And if I may point out... they may call it 3D but until its all around you, its not 3D... wake me when they make a projector like the holodeck
Janny on Sep 18, 2009
this guy the creator of designer 3D glasses is a greedy a-hole, I'm not paying anymore than I have to, to see a film on the silver screen, he can suck it, 3D should just up and die, granted I'll see Avatar in IMAX because that is really the only one I can trust. But as for all converting to 3-D count me way, way, way out.
xerxex on Sep 18, 2009
Great... just what we needed: for a gimmick to turn into a fashion statement. I'm already counting the days until I see videos on YouTube of kids doing that "jerk" dance while wearing 3D glasses. Ugh
Alfredo on Sep 19, 2009
Just fuck off with the glasses and 3D already. If I go to see a movie I dont want to wear anything and pay extra for some gimmick. There was a reason why 3D died in the 80s and no super new technology will help it.
Shige on Sep 19, 2009
Hell yeah #3!!! lol This is stupid and Alex, has common sense finally hit? "I thought this was supposed to be the future? Not a way for Hollywood to just make more money." You're so sickly naive man. This is the stupid thing. It's not like they charge you for the glasses and if they do, can I have a discount when I go see a movie 'cause I brought my own glasses? The glasses aren't uncomfortable, it's watching the movie that's uncomfortable after awhile.
Tra la la la la di da on Sep 19, 2009
untill all the 3D provider use a universal standard RealD,Dolby,IMAX, it will be like HD, or Blueray witch is the better. untill one pair of 3D glasses are avilable to be able to watch all 3D Brand's it's just another Rip off and Gimmick, the film industrie should get togeather and sort out a standard for the glasses so the Film fan's don't need wads of cash and all kind's of different pair's of glasse's.
Allen Reeve on Sep 19, 2009
I agree that it is often a gimmick. However I've seen some movies lately in 3D and those not in 3D that were also available in 3D. Some of it is gimmicky. Some of it is very much emersion. Overall, if it does in fact enhance the experience, I'm for movies made in 3D, as long as they stay available in 2D. maybe if the glasses were 30 or 40 bucks I might consider them with a decent stream of 3D. Though 3D glasses over normal ones are almost always annoying...
dave13 on Sep 19, 2009
fuck that. movies cost enough already. unless the glasses somehow make the writing and acting better in a movie, who gives?
mossy on Sep 19, 2009
What's the point of fucking buying a pair of designer 3d glasses when NOBODY is gonna see you wear them in a darkly lit theatre? Who's the idiot that comes up with this stuff?
teyhtr on Sep 19, 2009
I couldn't care less what the glasses I am wearing in a theater along with hundreds of others look like. Who gives a fuck!? It's pretty dark anyways, and people around me are proooobably more concerned with what is happening on the screen in front of them than with the glasses on my nose. I don't go to the movies to make a fucking fashion statement. This is just retarded. I pity everyone who feels the need to purchase a pair of these glasses. You got bigger problems than 3D movies, guys.
SuicidalOptimist on Sep 19, 2009
The only way I could possibly see this as being useful is for a person like me who wears Buddy Holly type glasses that make wearing the Real D glasses VERY uncomfortable. Prescription 3D glasses would be a god send, but I'd only pay for them if the 3D was GREAT and didn't give me a god dang headache.
Kail on Sep 19, 2009
No Alex, you silly goose. Do some research once in a while. IMAX is a projection technology while RealD, Dolby and X-pand are 3D technologies. All three 3D solutions are equally viable for IMAX theaters. So yes, if the film running in the IMAX theater is shown using RealD technology, those RealD designer glasses will work just fine.
Wottock Hunt on Sep 19, 2009
#14 is making the only point that needs to be made well 14 and #3... cause fuck U2
DoomCanoe on Sep 19, 2009
Amen to #14 and #15, this is some fucked up shit. All the materialistic fuckers that will buy this shit already and only live in Hollywood anyway, so let them only sell the shit there and cater to those assholes. Fuck 3D, and grats #3 for saying that early on in the post so we can all rip on how much U2 sucks balls. Thats prolly Hollywoods marketing tool to sell this crap, is to use U2 to sell their ideals about how great these glasses are so everyone needs to go out and buy a pair: because we all know how much U2 is capable of persuading people to see it their way....LOL....(there political ideals that is)....pfff losers
Fubar on Sep 20, 2009
I was just mentioning this to my friend that attended the Avatar preview with me. I can't wait until I can get my own pair of 3D glasses. The ones at the theater were spotty like they went through the dishwasher I had in my first apartment. Besides that they fit like crap. I am into home theater quite heavily as well, so investing in a nice comfortable pair of my OWN glasses I can actually take care of sounds fantastic to me. Count me in!
Andrew on Sep 20, 2009
I just saw Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs in 3D with my 7 year old Nephew. I know the extra price is a bit much when you don't even get to keep the 3D glasses, but during the movie, the 3D really did make it better. Honestly though, for those who are wanting designer 3D glasses, unless they're more comfortable over regular glasses, then what is the point? You are in a theater with the lights preferably completely off (If I can see light out of the corners of my eyes that is not coming from the movie itself, I get annoyed.) . You're not supposed to walk out the door in them anyway.
April on Oct 27, 2009
I don't really care if I look like a welder, I'm not vain enough to think that people will be looking at me when the movie is playing, and besides, it's going to be dark in there. What I'm concerned about is that my Rx glasses will fit under the 3D glasses and that wearing the two at the same time will not give me a headache while I'm trying to focus my eyes through them so I can see the movie in 3D! The last time I tried to see a movie in 3D (Rx glasses + 3D glasses) I had to walk out after 15 minutes because my eyes and my head was aching.
Bobagem Lixo on Dec 19, 2009
I'm not vain and don't care if the 3D glasses are the ugliest motherf--kers ever. What I care about is the QUALITY of the lens and that I am getting the best, possible 3D experience available. I went to see Avatar and it was beautiful and amazing...and a far cry from the gimmicks like Nightmare Before Xmas in 3D. For those who haven't seen Avatar, see it in 3D and you will understand the difference. Anyway...I knew I wasn't getting the experience as was meant to be seen by James Cameron. I knew it could be better. Why? Because my crappy theater glasses had scratches on them. At first, I thought they were just fogged up...the theater gave me recycled glasses that lessened the experience for me. Not cool. So not cool in fact, that I got my money back. So now I have to see it again, and will know this time to check my glasses before going in. It's going to cost me parking again and 2.5 hours of my life that I'm not happy about giving up again. But I want to experience the movie as was meant to be seen. If I didn't have to rely on the AMC giving out used glasses to hundreds of people a day, I wouldn't have had this problem. I don't ever want to deal with this kind of situation again. THAT is why I want my own 3D glasses. So that they are just as comfortable as my regular sunglasses. And I know I am the only one to blame if the lens are massively scratched up. The investment in the glasses is worth it to me even if I see one 3D a year because it's my time I'm giving up as well. I need to use my time wisely. It's akin to paying extra for better seats at a concert. What's the point in going if your just going to sit in the backrow? For me anyway, I'd rather not go. So yes, there is definitely good reasons to produce 'designer' 3D glasses...though I'd prefer to just call them 'personal'...because it's not about the look or brand. It's about a better experience.
Alex on Dec 25, 2009
I wear glasses and a while back I fund a sight that sold many different kinds of 3d glasses including some nice red/green click on and snap up and down for my glasses so I bought them since using the cardboard glasses sucks wit glasses. And I really liked them at the time they did not have polarized ones but I just checked today and now they do so going to buy some of those too. hey also have sun glass looking ones if you don't wear glasses already and other 3d products to use with your glasses. http://www.rainbowsymphonystore.com/
dustins111 on Dec 26, 2009
I agree U2 sucks so keep them away.
boner on Jan 1, 2010
I'm actually willing to pay up for two pairs of prescription 3D glasses, one red/cyan type for some of my PS3 games and one polarized type for movies. I'm willing to pay for them also because my prescription hasn't changed since I first discovered my eyesight went bad 20+ years ago. I'm not looking for hip, cool, wrapped around glasses, I'm actually looking for ways to get them custom fitted specifically in Oakley Frogskins as those fit me most comfortably, and the lenses are huge enough that I don't see its frame. I don't like current 3D glasses because: One, I need to layer them on top of my prescription glasses. Most frames are too small ( only some IMAX provide those gigantic dorky version which I prefer ), especially when it's placed further out because of my prescription lens, and I like to sit up close, so there are times when the movie starts, and I realize the film's corners aren't in my 3D frame, even though I can see them without even moving my eyeballs. And two, the lenses are are all thin and warped with finger oils from others. I take efforts to clean the lenses before viewing, but there's still weird reflection/distortion from those warped lenses. It's been so annoying that having planned the most recent two viewings, I wore disposable contacts for those two days. Some people like to spend thousands on audio, I can't tell the difference. But visually, I can notice every little detail, I can ignore the defects, but I'd rather spend a hundred buck once, to get the most out of my added visual layer/texture on every viewing.
liin on Mar 24, 2010
Why would you WANT to see the movie in IMAX 3D? It's the oldest of the top three and looks the worst. Awesome sound, but the visuals are not as good as RealD.
JEmlay on Jun 11, 2010
what is FPR? is this a technology/glasses. does FPR will provide painless entertainment? i get headache while watching 3d movies wearing sutter glasses.
Rambo_damn on May 23, 2011
yup FPR provide painless entertainment. the glasses are light in weight and without rechargeable batteries and that's the reason you will not suffer from headache while watching.
Rohittkhannaa on Jun 13, 2011
did you have any experience of FPR glass or you are saying just by reading.............. if it's true i w'll surely buy LG 3d tv glasses.
Ravinjain on Jun 13, 2011
Yes, i will undoubtedly agree that with FPR glasses watching experience is amazing, it gives a complete flicker free images, no cross talk ans perhaps the most comfortable glass as it do not create any headache and dizziness.
Sanjasnj on Jun 22, 2011
Yeah... exactly my friend who has Active shutter glasses 3D TV complain after wearing it for few hours, but for me the story is altogether different i can use my FPR glass for longer hour without having the slightest problem.
Pranap_muker on Jun 22, 2011
I appreciate the technology which LG is using but LG's products are rarely good. Most of the consumers complain about their product so being as a seller of electronic goods i don't prefer LG's product as it spoils my sales target.
gupta dipankar on Jun 23, 2011
Sorry, no commenting is allowed at this time.