Originally Posted by WynsWrld98
Is it me or do some people express negativity about popouts by calling it gimmicky? To me there is a place and a market for popout effects, most people will reference a short segment or two in a movie and that's all there is, just not enough. I haven't seen Hugo so can't comment if popouts would be appropriate but I'm tired of snobs referring to it in a negative fashion as gimmicks, to me I would use the term cool and impressive just like the 3D presentations you see at amusement parks that have a lot of popouts.
I don't necessarily considering pop-outs to be a bad or negative thing... it totally depends on context.
IMO, if it contributes to the story, it's not a gimmick. If it's being done just for the sake of doing it because it's cool, that doesn't make it NOT cool, however, it does make it a gimmick. Gimmicks can be cool. That doesn't mean they're not gimmicks... stunts done just because they can, and not because they actually contribute in any way to the story.
The infamous potato cod scene is definitely a gimmick. It's cool, though... and doesn't interfere with the story. (not much story there, of course, more of a general narrative that's not quite the same thing as a genuine story.)
If you're watching a desk specifically designed to show off 3D for it's own sake, it's not a gimmick, it's a feature. If a movie does some random 3D pop out thing in the middle of just because they can, and it doesn't help tell the story in any way, it's just a gimmick. In that instance, if my "ooh, a pop out" moment takes me out of the story, it was a negative thing, and I will consider it as such.