CE-Oh no he didn't!: Katzenberg says 'beautifully styled' 3D glasses won't make you look like a dweeb
By Vlad Savov 
posted March 10th 2010 7:32AM
posted March 10th 2010 7:32AM
posted March 10th 2010 7:32AM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
3D TV wow .... so what are we going to do to see 3D? Oh, a 3D glasses, right? We're going to use a 3D glasses. No. Who wants a 3D glasses. You have to get em and put em away, and you lose em. Yuck. Nobody wants a 3D glasses. So let's not use a 3D glasses.
@Ahmed Alzayani
If they said "Ray Ban" on them I doubt I'd have a complaint.
That comment reminded me of Vince from the ShamWow ads...
@iKurtz It probably WAS Vince, perhaps using some off-the-wall username to throw everyone off ;-)
Until they are able to provide 3D WITHOUT glasses, this will never catch on. Let me reiterate the formula for those CEO's out there...
3D + Glasses = Major Fail
3D + No Glasses = Win
No one wants to come home from a hard day of work, plop on the couch, and put on some glasses to watch TV. I hate sunglasses because I hate things resting on my face. It's annoying, stick to researching 3D HDTV Monitors instead. THAT is something the public would buy into.
@GadgetGeeks
If 3D box-office numbers are any indication of how willing people are to use 3D glasses at home, then you're wrong.
And producers aren't really talking much about 3D TV show-type content at home anyway - it's all about movies. Other content types will be experimental for a while. I agree that there's not much upshot to watching the Office in 3D.
@GadgetGeeks
Really? What about the people who come home and have to put on glasses to watch TV?
@Ahmed Alzayani
With these 3D glasses, the rate of falls-on-your-face will skyrocket!
@shadowj0 Making out while watching movies will get a little more awkward, banging your frames together and such. None of the 3D glasses I've seen sit as far back on the face as regular ones.
he can't see his own stupidity
@Jacob Apple Geek
actually he can see it in full 3D 1080P
@abedinthehouse I think he's at 4K atm.
@Jacob Apple Geek
Stupidity must run in 2D and he's seeing right past it with those glasses.
Especially since he's wearing anaglyph (crappy red/blue) glasses, which were never the dominant system. Old 3-D systems used polarized lenses and glasses, essentially the same as many of today's.
What beautiful styling these 3d glasses have. Styled after the original iPod I imagine.
My glasses come with a switch to go into 3D mode. I bet YOURS can't do that!
Engadget, "CE-Oh no he didn't!" is funny, but don't overuse it.
@LeJay They've stopped numbering the articles, I see.
Nicely written!
I got a chuckle out of it ;)
To his credit, so far Dreamworks has produced the best quality 3D experience yet: Monsters vs. Aliens. But I'm not sure which it was -- a Monster or an Alien -- that actually sucked his brains out.
-Pie
@EatingPie
3d sucks. Whether in cinema or on the PC with the nvidia glasses, the experience doesn't feel true 3D.
The objects on the foreground are the only ones that stand out as 3D. Everything in the background stays the same 2D.
@EatingPie maybe he's like B.O.B. from Monsters vs. Aliens?
Dr. Cockroach Ph.D.: [about B.O.B] You must forgive my friend, but as you can see, he has no brain.
B.O.B.: Turns out, you don't need one. Totally overrated! I don't even have to...
[Starts gasping for air]
B.O.B.: I forgot how to breathe! Help me, Doctor Cockroach!
Dr. Cockroach Ph.D.: Suck in, B.O.B.
B.O.B.: [breathes normally] Thanks, Doc. You're a life saver.
@EatingPie
To his credit what? What does his films have to do with pushing overpriced, niche tech on people? That's like saying if Bungie sold their own Xbox controller, it MUST be great because they make Halo.
'To his credit'... whatever.
Oh i forgot, it's the Internet... where only 1 out of 3 people have a sense of humor! Sorry you are in the latter Dood and HateEverything(!!).
@dode: The new 3D is great, and your description of is 100% inaccurate. Inside the Alien ship in Monsters vs. Aliens had a sense of depth from the close foreground all the way to the deepest background. With close-ups showing a sense of depth across the whole object (be it a face or a blob).
@HateEverything: I get it, you hate everything! Try to get out some time and actually *see* a 3D movie before you judge though. Might even make your life a bit more enjoyable! Oh wait, you hate everything (I get it!) nevermind.
-Pie
Well, I suppose he has to stick to the party line. In this respect I feel kinda sorry for him since he's having to stand there and recite nonsense that is clearly nonsense in public. Following my experiences with 3D movies (Beowulf and Avatar) I can safely say that 3D adds nothing to the movie experience, gets annoying, and I will never pay to view a 3D movie again. Just concentrate on telling interesting stories.
@Kelmon IMAX 3D is much better than the typical "Real D" you see at the "regular" theaters.
@bstump
True. I saw Beowulf at an IMAX and the experience was much better but I feel that a 2D IMAX movie would have delivered the same sense of immersion simply because the screen completely fills your field of view. Basically, I don't think the benefits of 3D outweighs the costs, financial or otherwise.
@Kelmon *shrug* he's the CEO. If even he won't stand behind his product, who would?
IMHO, someone who'sjumping up and down the couch in an XL size NFL shirt over his XXL belly, has a greasy remote in one hand an a bag of Cheetos in another, already looks like an idiot enough. Adding 3D glasses to the mix won't alter the balance too dramatically.
No, sorry, 3D glasses don't work for me. Why? Because I already wear glasses.
"After all, "many many many people" wear glasses"
Exactly why 3D will never work. Ever tried wearing glasses on top of another pair? Not exactly easy. Buying 3D capable prescription glasses would be ludicrously expensive, seeing as you have to pay that special premium for being "3D."
@Gandalf20000
Very true... Now XRay glasses on the other hand I would pay a premium for...
@Gandalf20000
I managed to wear my glasses and 3D glasses just fine the other week...
@Gandalf20000
The whole 3D glasses thing is just a big plot from contact lens makers.
I don't really care much about looking dweeby when watching TV/movies in my home.
What I DO care about, though, is the discomfort of wearing 3D glasses over-top of my regular glasses and having to find the 3D glasses when I want to watch 3D TV.
Here's a question I'm not sure people have asked. What about people that already wear prescription glasses and no contacts? Kindof a bummer as you'll have to get contacts instead to wear daily if you have to wear shutter glasses while watching your tv. I don't know many kids under 12 that wear contacts opposed to prescription glasses. How does the 3d affect people blind in one eye? Dies the affect still work? I know with the blue/red glasses you need two good eyes to experience the 3d, what about shutter glasses? Do they work with just one eye?
@pingu324
Pretty sure that life is in 2D for people blind in one eye.
@pingu324
I have a bad eye not blind but it does not line up with my other eye (double vision, lazy eye) . Typically when I have tried 3d glasses in the past it has not worked for me and has added quite an annoyance to me making the movie appear to be one color. I think this new 3d method is polarized instead of the color separation technique, however my guess is that it would be annoying and possibly headache inducing for me.
@pingu324
doesnt work with partial sight. i have a dettached retina (well reattached now but with scar tissue) in one eye and 3d films are flat lol.
@bwl
well for people like me who recieved the injury at some point in their lives the brain in essence remembers what 3d is and compensates.
people born with a defiency in one eye will see in 2d.
Commandant Lassard: "After all, many many many people wear glasses"
"HEY!" Harry Caray!
He's a CEO with a vested interest in the success of 3D movies. He's downplaying the annoyance of 3D glasses, or maybe he really believes they're no big deal. "More lip gloss than brain matter?" That's a little harsh.
Engadget, don't start writing in that annoying, pessimistic teen voice that the internet's comment sections seem to be coalescing into. You know what? He's a multimillionaire CEO of a giant company and promoting their products. "He's so FAIL" eh guys?
@MisterK I agree. In public, you stand by your products. It's part of your responsibility to your shareholders and employees. Sounding over the top is no big deal compared to being downbeat or ambivalent. That goes double because investors assume you have insider information they don't have. Any negativity or nonchalance a CEO have towards her own products will be swiftly punished in the equity markets.
Within the company, you can voice whatever concerns you want. Some companies have the option to come out and be frank with failures, but that's really a luxury and is usually done after the fact, after they took the financial loss. Of course, the best way to avoid this situation is to take good projects and perform well, which is obviously easier said than done otherwise we'd just have tons of profitable companies.
Engadget is the one with more lip gloss than brain matter, here.
This wasn't at all over the top. If 3D glasses had the appearance of Oakely's wire frames or other stylish glasses, most people wouldn't really care.
These glasses don't exist now, but you'd be a fool to think they weren't in the pipeline.
@Smurf
First off, you missed how Katzenberg is trying to appeal to your pop sensibilities by saying, "Hey bro, 3D glasses are COOL. Everybody wear's 3D glasses... so you should spend $2,000... oh and the extra $200 for the... and then $150 per glasses... well, you should spend whatever that adds up to, but you'll look cool doing it"... its the equivalent of the 'everybody pisses their pants' scene from Billy Madison. What you're really missing is that engadget is saying he's full of it for saying its about style; what engadget is saying (and I agree with) is that its insulting to believe that 'style' is the reason 3D won't take off. Oh, so shit, make some Gucci 3D goggles and suddenly 3D is great? Fuck no... 3D sucks. It's layered images, not true three dimensions; unwatchable without glasses; and costs an arm and a leg and for what? Avatar and Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs? Oh shit son, you're WoW character is slightly popping off the screen... that suddenly makes the game better, right? that suddenly justifies the cost? But you know, nevermind that... like Katzenberg says, as long as you look cool, that must be what you're REALLY paying for.
2nd. I'm tired of 3D nerds trying to proclaim that 3D glasses are no different than prescription glasses and contacts. You know what the difference is between my prescription glasses and 3D glasses? When I look away from the screen, I can STILL SEE CLEARLY. You know what the difference is between contacts and glasses? you forget the contacts are there... I don't mean aesthetically, I mean physically, contacts are 'invisible' and 'unnoticeable' by the user. Someone in another blog once tried to say that 3D glasses couldn't be any more uncomfortable than wearing contacts... ridiculous and obvious as hell that person never wore a contact in their life.
These jerks trying to compare prescription glasses to 3D glasses are so talking out their asses, their breath smells like shit.
I'm too old for 3D.
I'll stick to my monochromatic television set, thank you.
Nobody is going to buy $75 3d glasses. This is going to be a major flop.
You're really giving this a "CE-Oh no he didn't" . . . really?
You guys are stretching big time. Especially because what he said MAKES SENSE. If the technology catches on, some people will buy stylish 3D glasses that look good, and I being an eyeglasses wearer will probably go to the optometrist to see if they have any good 3D options in a few years.
Can we just skip ahead to holograms? I'm willing to live without this cheesy, nauseating, 3-D-at-home technology for a couple years, and I suspect a lot of other people are too.
3-D tv's, worst idea since invading Russia...with winter approaching
@SeveringGecko
heheh... nice reference....