3D ? thanks but no thanks...

+1

I'm with you on that. Never mind the "NEXT BIG THING" will be along soon and the manufacturers will want us to empty our wallets all over again.

Agreed...3D is a gimmick.

But if the next big thing is Super HD (in 2D) I'd pay for that...trouble is, I'll probably have to wait another twenty years to get it, by which time my poor ol' eyes won't be able to appreciate it!¬(

 I guess the film was more of the same then?  I have got 1-3 on blu-ray and am thinking of buying this too, there is something i like about watching Pirates of the Caribbean on a home cinema system, i would never watch one on Sky, but with the sound on the home cinema system and blu-ray quality picture, i do like them.

Not watch one on Sky? Is the Sky broadcast less good than a DVD? Wrong topic? I wonder what Sky quality compares to?

I think (though it's sometimes hard to tell) that Herr Gel was drawing a comparison between the films on Blu-ray and Sky, not DVD and Sky...

Correct Andrew.  Thumbs up.  Sky is really good, and Sky HD even better, but going to blu-ray and 1080p for Pirates of the Caribbean - it does look fantastic.  Sky i suppose compares to dvd (or there abouts).

I'll give 3D another 12 months and then it will go the way of all its other past attemps at grabbing our attention--Down the tubes.

Pretty much. It suffers the same as 2 & 3 in that there's just no beginning, middle and end. It's just scene to scene to scene with no structure you can get hold of.

@roger06 we must have watched a different movie. 1)The film was shot in 3d and while it took a while to get going. First 10 mins or so i actually took my 3d glasses off then the 3d effect's was the best i've seen (Avatar apart) 2) I thought the storytelling was rather good. Sure it's OTT but hey, its meant to be. All-in-all a good 3d movie.

Pirates 4 is the begginning of teh end of this wave of 3D in teh cinema according to Mark Kermode. Its 2D showings have outsold its 3D showings, same as with that Parents in Mars Need Kids with Mums or whatever it was called.

Here's to teh end, though why that pleases me so I dunno.

Cheers Roger, i was hoping this one might be a bit different, i will probably stil end up buying it though, with owning the other three, probably might try a get one free disney deal, and hopefully land the new Narnia at the same time.

Cheers again.

Posted this before, but it is relevenat here. I took two 9 year olds to see Pirates 4 and they specifically requested to see it 2D as they do not like 3D. The cinema was almost full.

The next time I upgrade my TV will be when you can climb into the screen and join in with the film. But, I suspect the novelty of that would soon wear off as well.

But Kermode's unlikely to offer an objective appraisal. He's been one of the biggest naysayers (along with Roger Ebert) since 3D movies re-emerged. In other words, he'll grab any statistic that suggests 3D is on its last legs and broadcast it at volume with considerable glee. 

None of this means I'm an advocate of 3D films, or TV, or gaming for that matter. There's just been so much speculation about the success or failure of 3D in the last few years that I pay little heed to such proclamations.

LOL! Yeah well each to their own. I reckon Pirates one was excellent - a good mix of pace, structure, story, action etc all amounted to a great movie.

Two and three suffered what I see as the curse of the sequel - 'knock 'em out quick' as bums will be on seats regardless. If I was on a long flight I'd rather stair at the back of the seat in front than watch 2 or 3 again...

But you've convinced me never to try another 3D then! I was expecting people to write it was a poor example of 3D and that I should give it another go.

In terms of the film per se, then I may well have enjoyed it more in 2D! I'm actually taking my 3 year old to see Gnomio and Juliet tomorrow (2D) and can't wait!!