The Next 3D Gascan Will Be...

[Deleted member 24]

I question if people actually read posts first...

....??

 

[EditReject]

3D is just a bust in general!!!

I do not think so being that 3D films (and major ones at that) keep being produced, plus they usually do well box office wise as well. I used to be "meh" about 3D but became a convert to the point that when I was in the market for a new tv I bought a 3D version and I love it. 3D when done well is not about objects flying at you or cheap gimmicks but rather creating an immersive environment with a depth of field to it. The Avengers in 3D was awesome and I am eagerly awaiting to see what Peter Jackson does with The Hobbit films in 3D.

 

[KG22]

If it was Judge Dredd, I would have flipped over a table to get one...

 

[Deleted member 24]

I also disagree, I don't think 3D has been a bust at all. Almost everyone at the box office performs very well.

 

[jk-27]

Tintin (the movie) was only a flop in America, but that was because Tintin is not a well known American character. The movie itself made $350 worldwide.

I think the Tron Gascans did well because it was the first, 3D was just starting off again, and Tron is a well known franchise. Since then people have realised that not every movie is going to be in 3D, in fact the vast majority still aren't, so buying 3D glasses just doesn't make monetary sense if they'll be used maybe 3-4 times a year at best. The 3D tv's I've seen require very specific 3D glasses for that TV alone, so the Gascan 3D glasses wouldn't work for that anyway.

If Oakley switched up the frame options for their next 3D glasses they may do better than the Transformers or Tintins but I honestly think the gimmick has worn off on these.

 

[Deleted member 24]

Tintin (the movie) was only a flop in America, but that was because Tintin is not a well known American character. The movie itself made $350 worldwide.

I think the Tron Gascans did well because it was the first, 3D was just starting off again, and Tron is a well known franchise. Since then people have realised that not every movie is going to be in 3D, in fact the vast majority still aren't, so buying 3D glasses just doesn't make monetary sense if they'll be used maybe 3-4 times a year at best. The 3D tv's I've seen require very specific 3D glasses for that TV alone, so the Gascan 3D glasses wouldn't work for that anyway.

If Oakley switched up the frame options for their next 3D glasses they may do better than the Transformers or Tintins but I honestly think the gimmick has worn off on these.

Oakleys work with any passive 3d setup. That is the sole reason i went with a passive 3d tv, so i could use my oaks lol.

I have 3 trons, a transformers and a tintin. Ill have to grab a hobbit 3d pair to keep the collection complete. Im sure theyll be sweet.

 

[Rustpot]

Maybe if they went with a Hijinx I'd be in, but the Gascan just doesn't do it for me.

 

[GRFMotorsports]

If it was Judge Dredd, I would have flipped over a table to get one...

Oh yeah..... Judge Dredd on one side.... Anthrax on the other!!!!!

 

[good2mod]

Maybe if they went with a Hijinx I'd be in, but the Gascan just doesn't do it for me.

+1 on this.

 

[Deleted member 24]

+1 on this.

I think they should use the fuel cell.