Feb 3 2009 11:38 AM ET

3-D 'Chuck': Twice is just as nice

I blame the defunct Captain Eo ride at Disneyland for my fascination with 3-D movies — something about Michael Jackson’s heavily reconstructed face infringing on my personal bubble terrified, and yet, compelled me to keep the glasses on. So, when I heard that last night’s episode of Chuck was going to be broadcast in 3-D, I dug out an old pair of the blue and red spectacles, plopped myself on the couch, uncorked a bottle of wine, and got ready for the adventure.

Sadly, even though I was initially compelled by the premise of an all 3-D episode, "Chuck Vs. The Third Dimension" was less than an out-of-this-world experience. Though it was in all aspects an excellent episode (featuring guest star Dominic Monaghan) that explored the rock-star lifestyle with the comedic twist the show knows how to deliver (see a clip below), I basically had to crawl to the television screen and spend the hour with my nose two inches away from the glass to get the 3-D effect. That kinda killed it for me. And even then there were only a couple of notable scenes that popped out, mainly during the flashback sequences and the credits. I spent more time wondering if being this close to the TV was going to give me one of those rare terminal diseases you only hear about on Grey’s Anatomy due to the microwave emissions I was probably receiving. 

I eventually found myself giving up and viewing the episode sans glasses, saving me from the mounting migraine that I felt coming, and there was little difference in the experience with or without the frames. So, PopWatch readers, what did you think of last night’s 3-D episode, which will air again Tuesday night? Should there be more 3-D episodes of our favorite television shows? Did I miss out on the full effect because it’s time for me to replace my 13-year-old television, or did anyone else have trouble making this work?

More ‘Chuck’:
‘Chuck’ exclusive: Scott Bakula spies pivotal role
‘Chuck’: Excited to see Chevy Chase’s guest turn?
‘Chuck’ Exclusive: Helfer in! Strahovski out?
TV Review: ‘Chuck’

Comments (1-15) of 49 Add your comment

Page: 1 2 3 4
  • M

    You needed the glasses they gave out for the Super Bowl in order to get the right effect. They were a little different that the old blue and red ones. These had blue and amber colored lenses. That is definitely why you couldn’t get the full effect.

  • mrgnexus

    The problem with 3D TV is the red/blue (or in Chuck’s case blue/amber) anaglyph lenses. Neither particularly works well with color TV shows or films. Polarized 3D glasses work great in modern movies like recent Disney CGI releases and the upcoming Coraline.
    It kinda irritates me that there is a new 3D movement rising and some studios still think that the multi-colored 3D lenses do anything other than give the viewer a headache.
    That said, last night’s Chuck worked better than most (especially the opening titles). However, too much camera motion rendered the effect stroke-inducing. The episode was all right, and the 3D was a nice experiment, but I think the home application of 3D isn’t ready for human consumption yet.
    The SOBE commercial during the Superbowl was more effective than Chuck due to it’s reduced color palette, which certainly helped the 3D work better.
    Wow — sorry for the drawn out reply.

  • pj

    I would rather have seen this in my usual sharp HD instead of this awful ghost image picture I had for the whole hour without the crappy glasses. It just looked like bad reception. Stupid gimmick.

  • Jason

    It wasn’t your tv – the glasses needed to be the specific kind used for the Superbowl commercials. Even with that, the effect wasn’t GREAT – some scenes had a little extra depth, but not much really came flying out of the screen. I know there’s this movement towards “depth” 3d but that’s more irritating than anything else. I’d rather just watch 2d than that. 3d is only worth it if things are flying out of the screen at you – otherwise, just don’t bother.

  • Mike B

    I had the glasses from the Super Bowl and the effect was not that good. If it wasn’t Chuck I would have turned after 2 minutes. I wanted more Sarah coming at me.

  • carol

    My glasses were the superbowl ones and we shut off all the lights and the effects were pretty good. The key was turning out the lights. I just didn’t realize it would be a bit racy, my kids were watching it.

  • Not Telling

    Worst. Gimmick. Ever.

  • Ryan

    I watched it on my friend’s giant HDTV, and it wasn’t that great. The knife throw and the Sarah dream were pretty much it. But I agree, it was otherwise another awesome episode of my favorite show.

  • Jen

    It’s not “chuck in the third dimension” it’s “Chuck VS the third dimension”. Do you ever watch this show? Every show title is Chuck vs…

  • Grace

    Didn’t care for the 3D. But I love Chuck and I’m stoked that its back!

  • Heather

    Ya you had to use the Superbowl glasses and turn off the lights to get the full effect. I loved it, giggling away at everything.

  • Vicky

    I didn’t watch it in 3D, but it was still entertaining. I think it’s about time they let Morgan or someone else in on Chuck’s secret life.

  • jen

    i had to use the crappy glasses I got in my journey to the center of the earth dvd, and they only gave me a headache, but I after reading the comments here it sounds like they would never work (they are green & red) where do i get the ones everyone is talking about? I loved the episode and would like to see if the 3-D works.
    PLEASE tell me where to get the glasses.

  • Catherine

    According to my DVR, which failed to record Chuck last night for some reason, it’s not on the schedule for tonight (Tuesday). What time will it be on?

  • Old Philosopher

    The first 3D movie I saw was Andy Warhol’s Frankenstein back in 1973. That used the polarized 3D technology currently used by Disney. I’ve always wondered why it didn’t become more popular. The technology has gone virtually nowhere since the initial craze in the ’50’s! Now I understand that polarization doesn’t lend itself to TV and DVD (digital) imaging, so we’re stuck with anaglyph 3D. Booo. Problem with that is the viewing glasses have to match the colors used in the production of the movie/show. That has two ramifications. One, you can’t break out those old red/blue glasses you used to read comic books when you were a kid, and two, the producers of the shows can control the market by forcing you to use “their” glasses. Too bad the whole issue isn’t about entertainment, but marketing.

Page: 1 2 3 4

Add your comment

The rules: Keep it clean, and stay on the subject - or we may delete your comment. If you see inappropriate language, e-mail us. An asterisk (*) indicates a required field.

When you click on the "Post Comment" button above to submit your comments, you are indicating your acceptance of and are agreeing to the Terms of Service. You can also read our Privacy Policy.
Advertisement
Powered by WordPress.com VIP