Brian Lowry of Variety reviewed this Monday night's episode of Chuck and the review was good news/bad news.
First the good news:
Revisiting the show, there is a lot to like here, particularly the interplay among the three leads: Chuck (Zachary Levi), the reluctant secret agent with all kinds of top-security info downloaded into his head; Sarah (Yvonne Strahovski), the butt-kicking girl of his dreams; and John (Adam Baldwin), the steely operative who would just as soon wring Chuck's pencil-neck to be rid of babysitting him
The bad news was pretty much everything else, from
The gimmick gets points for the old college try, but the ship for this second-year series appears to have sailed.
to:
As for the 3-D, the results prove somewhat disappointing, as it often is when trying to appreciate the effect in a home-theater setting. Or maybe it's just that those cheap cardboard glasses never fit particularly well over the prescription kind.
I'd already told Bill that every other experience I've had with in-the-home 3D (say as opposed to 3D at EPCOT or The IMAX theater at Smithsonian's Air and Space Museum) was a disappointment, so I won't be surprised if he's right. BUT, I don't wear glasses so I will have to see for myself rather than trust someone who wore the cheap cardboard glasses over a pair of prescription glasses.
The rest won't cheer you up any either, but, if you must, you must.
Robert,
I also did the 3D at Epcot thing. It was truly amazing (and this was back in the early 80s). I’ve never tried 3D anywhere else, so I can’t really compare.
I’ve never been impressed by 3D (at least not after the age of 10 or so) even in Epcot, so this never seemed like a good idea to me. The article does not mention whether the episode is watchable without the glasses which is the real question. If not, I don’t see this being a good thing for Chuck’s ratings at all.
Julia you will definitely be able to watch the show without the glasses, you just won’t get any of the 3D effects (which may not be much different than the people who have the glasses!).
I’m going to use the Super Bowl commercials to determine if the technology for in-home is any good. I think it’s reasonable to expect that it won’t be as good as it is in a big theater with more expensive glasses.
I’m not down on 3-D, just never had a good experience in the home so hopefully this is better. I talked to a few people who watched the NFL network game in 3D in the theater and they said it was actually very cool (even though that particular game sucked).
Yeah 3D is kinda cool. I wouldn’t think that they’d not allow you to see without the glasses, cos wouldn’t it just be a pretty much waste of a good idea to bring in new veiwers.
I am not to optimistic about the 3D episode since I think they were reaching for it a little. I would not say that the 2nd part season of CHUCK has sailed on one episode, I think they have enough good episodes and enough good ideas left to have CHUCK maintain its ratings that it had when NBC was stupid enough to put it on hiatus for 7 weeks. I will never understand how some people who run NBC still have their jobs, compared to other networks they have the worst scheduling on where to put shows on that I have seen. If the same people also were involved in picking the new shows that CHUCK will have to compete with I feel good about CHUCK getting another season.
Chuck doesn’t strike me as a show that should have a 3D episode. A 3D episode of Heroes might have made more sense to me.
NBC *really* should have put this episode on after the Super Bowl.
The series needs the boost more than The Office does, and it would’ve made more sense to have a 3-D episode of Chuck air the same day that they’re doing 3-D commercials in the Super Bowl. Oh well. I’ll be watching either way.
The only TV 3D I have ever seen was Elvira Mistress of the dark in the 80′s Her chest looked pretty awesome to a teenage boy
Movie 3D is great. My bloody valentine was actually better than I thought it would be.
I do not watch “Chuck” but the 3D idea caught my attention & picked up the glasses.
Who knows, they may have found a new fan in me….for what may be left of this season.
I don’t get how the show could be in 3D needing special glasses, but is watchable without them. I’ve taken a peek at a 3D movie in a cinema without glasses and it’s very unwatchable.
That’s what I was thinking, Ben, but I have not seen this new 3D that they’ve been using more recently. Maybe it really is watchable and 3D?
“there is a lot to like,” and then the rest of the review don’t make sense. There is either a lot to like or the ship has sailed.
I’m guessing THE OFFICE could break records for least watched Super Bowl followup show ever. CHUCK would have been the perfect choice, but NBC isn’t smart.
There is a website printed on the Superbowl glasses: http://www.colorcode3d.com/gallery/index.htm. You should check it out. The demos are pretty cool (to me, at least), and it does seem like you don’t really need to glasses to watch.
Grace, thanks for the link. While that’s certainly much better than what I was picturing, I’m not sure just how watchable it will be. Some of the demos looked okay, but then others ( http://gallery.me.com/csvendb#100290/Medicine_AppleTV_2&bgcolor=black ) look like I’m going blind and I wouldn’t want to sit through an hour of that if I weren’t a real fan, and I assume most of those will have found glasses.
Great catch Grace. those demos are pretty cool, and much better with the glasses than the clips I’d seen via YouTube
Julia, I don’t know if the full 3D effect can be gotten via the YouTube clip from Chuck, captured from Leno — even if you watch it in HD. That seems easier to watch without the glasses and I didn’t really get much in the way of 3D effect with them on. I think the demos at the ColorCode site (and I’m guessing the Sobe commercial and Monsters vs. Aliens trailer) are highly optimized for 3D, Chuck, perhaps not so much. Or something is lost in translation with the YouTube uploading.
i thought this was the best one of the demo effect-wise. Just a still, but the plane definitely jumps way out of the screen.
http://gallery.me.com/csvendb#100424/07&bgcolor=black
Robert, I applaud you for not linking to the breasts in the bikini.
haha Nick, I just was writing a post about it. I thought the 3D effect with the fighter jets was much more pronounced, otherwise I might have been torn.
Thanks, Robert. The Youtube isn’t too horrible to watch without glasses, though it does still look a bit fuzzy around the edges. But if it really is no worse than that then it may be that they won’t lose viewers due to this stunt. Though I’m still doubtful they’ll gain very many.