QOTW: How do you prefer to watch movies: 2D or 3D?

[jnutt]

2D always

[directhex]

3D TV is dead. Again. Can't buy 'em.

[adidan]

2D. My head doesn't play well with 3D movies.

[3dcandy]

3D in the cinemas (as we can't afford it that often so it's a treat) and then 2d though as I've just setup our home cinema kit I'll be the first to answer that as my better half is disabled we personally find it better to watch the movies at home. Projector DOES have a 3D option but we've not invested in the extra bits required

[Boon72]

Never been to a 3D showing of a film.

[GrahamC]

Isn't 3D dead yet, sigh!!

[HollyDOL]

Depends how the 3D is done, there are cases where it is a disruption, cases where it nicely adds to overall immersion and also cases where you couldn't care less since there is nothing lost or gained.

[Zak33]

2d.

I cant balance the 3d glasses onto of my normal glasses for long before my nose snaps off... and there's only so much duct tape I can use on my face.

[anselhelm]

2D. 3D is a dying fad, which pops up every 30 years or so then gradually fades.

Cinemas are good for big action films, but mostly I'll watch at home.

[Salazaar]

2D. I've seen a couple of 3D movies that were done quite nicely but I've never felt it's been worth the extra money or fuss wearing the glasses either in the cinema or at home.

[cheesemp]

I've only ever watched Avatar in 3d so it has to be 2d by default I guess. Only just replaced an 8 year old TV with a cheap 4k unit. Didn't even see a 3d model for sale so I guess I never will get into 3d now...

[siu99spj]

2D. 3D gives the better half an instant headache and I can spend half the movie with the 3D effect looking inverted (My brain maps it all wonky I guess, or something. Forcing myself cross-eyed helps, but gives me a headache).

I did see Monster vs Aliens in 3D IMAX a long time ago. That worked OK (Guess the massive screen helps) but I'm not paying that much for my movie fix.

At home I can't see 3D ever being popular, so just slowly saving up for super massive 2D OLED 4K-jobby, if I can convince the wife we *need' it (So that's unlikely then...)

[Smudger]

2D by preference at the cinema, but if it's a specially-for-3d film, 3d. Still haven't seen Avatar in 3d though...

Home: 2d as I don't have a 3d telly, but 4k HDR is enough to make me not miss it.

[CHiLL]

For normal films - 2D.
For animated films, such as Pixar films - either 2D or 3D.
My local cinema has 4DX and I have seen some films in it. I'd not recommend big action films with lots of gun fire, etc. There are blowers in the back of the chair that puff air around your ears to simulate the experience, but it can be too much. I remember seeing Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them - and it was great in 4DX. I then went to see Rogue One and 4DX ruined it. Every blaster shot, there was a puff of air in the ears. And there were a lot of blaster shots!

[ByteMyAscii]

2D.
As someone who has to wear spectacles constantly it simply isn't a good experience for me. And in my attempt to watch one 3d movie I found the effect to be very hit or miss.

3D just seems like an excuse to charge more.
If they don't offer the 2D version, then that makes it clear what the motivation is.
And it isn't about offering the customer a better experience.

[securitywyrm]

I have a big TV with passive 3d (polarized instead of powered 3d glasses) and I do like the upscaled 3d effect for live-action movies. Just a little depth does a lot for immersion. However I don't like to play video games using the 3d effect, as while it's 'neat' it does make it harder to pay just about anything.