Since my eyes do not focus properly 3-D means nothing to me. Wish it weren’t that way as everyone says Avatar was amazing.

It does not take a genius to realize the only reason Warner Brothers elected to distribute the film in 3D is that studios can justify demanding higher ticket prices for them and in this way can reap a greater profit. Please do not claim that you are doing it to enhance the film. You are doing it for money, the same reason that you decided to adapt the book into two films. There is nothing wrong with the pursuit of profit – just admit it for what it is and not try to conceal it under superficial reasons. That said, I do believe that they can succeed in transforming the film into the 3D medium, considering the success of Avatar and Alice in Wonderland. These films proved that 3D can work, so long as the makers of the film are willing to not let the 3D capacity dominate the movie and be the only memorable component of it.

Soo cool!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

They only camp for two chapters of the entire book. Get a grip.

I work at a place where it is said that the only thing constant there is change. I’ve learned to complain but be willing to give the change a chance. My hope is that they will make the movie bright enough to see the people and things in the scenes. It would also be more interesting to see less of the colors stormy blue, black and white in the films. If a scene is not in the book don’t put it in the film when you can essentially put in a scene that actually is in the film. I think 3d will be interesting and I think it’s also great that people will have a 2d choice as well.

I do not trust this man after the end of hbp.

Alice in 3D wasn’t good at all. It was just too distracting and took attention away from the story and the typical Burton’s ambiance. Good thing there’s file sharing as no way I’d pay to watch the film again.

Watching 3D films always makes me ill and the number of films being released in 3D is actually quite a concern to me. I’m a big film viewer and I hope that the 3D element does not overtake film making too much as it would limit the films I would be able to see, which in terms of money is a silly thing to do as it alienates part of the audience and results in lost profits. Which is bad.

Plus I never found 3D that impressive, even before I started vomitting.

avater was awesome with all the details and i think using it in harry potter will enhance it. ill probably watch both versions anyways :)

Even more epic huh, well I truly hope it is. As for me I’ll be seeing it in both, 2D first then 3D.

..I’m sure this will be fantastic in 3-D…but I would watch either way..

Can’t see 3D, so it’ll be a waste for me. Nevertheless, trying to copy the success of other 3D movies is lame and boring. Avatar (never saw it) was made to be 3D, so it’s highly doubtful that DH will succeed as well as Avatar.

I agree that Alice in 3D was terrible. It was very distracting at times and almost made the film seem blurry. I don’t know if those who have bad eyesight are used to seeing blurriness and didn’t notice, but i thought it was really bad.

If people want to see it in 3D that is fine. I will not.

I don’t like things in 3D either, but I’ve never seen a whole movie that way, just the short things at theme parks. It makes me a bit ill, to be honest. So if they ever get to a point of showing a film only in 3D, it’ll be one that I don’t go see.

I loved Avatar, but didn’t see it in 3D, though I heard that people liked it. Haven’t seen Alice yet, but I plan to see a regular version anyway.

Like anything else that is fairly new, they will experiment with it and finally arrive at a good and reasonable use of it. At least I hope so. Right now I think there are many who are enthralled with the technology of it and sometimes forget (like Lucas did with the later Star Wars movies) that it still is the story and the acting that count more than the special effects.

Get ready to empty your wallets folks:

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100326/0218498726.shtml