No end in sight to love affair with "3D"
12-29-09, 02:14 PM
#1
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
No end in sight to love affair with "3D"
Read this over on Aint It Cool. Sounds like soon all of your favorite movies will soon be turned into "3D"...or "dioramas with higher ticket prices."
ROBIN HOOD 3-D??
Merrick here...
TheWrap has a quick piece about Hollywood's new love affair with 3-D. The article reveals that Ridley Scott is looking to convert his new ROBIN HOOD into 3-D.
Director Ridley Scott is breathing down the neck of executives at Universal to get them to approve making a 3D version of his new $200 million epic, “Robin Hood,” according to one person close to the project.
...says TheWrap HERE.
Michael Bay was recently asked about whether any of his films would be presented in 3-D - a singularly unnerving prospect for moviegoers. His response (via Cinematical)?
"I prefer the flat screen. I'm not jumping to do 3-D at all-it's a pain in the neck to shoot it and I actually like the flat image. I've heard that some people can't even see 3-D and, moreover, that a major side effect of watching it is feeling exhausted. Can you imagine how you'd feel watching one of my movies in 3-D?"
During Fantastic Fest, producer Jon Landau said that James Cameron is planning on re-issuing TITANIC in 3-D & may be looking to convert TERMINATOR 2 as well. A few weeks ago we learned that Louis Leterrie's forthcoming CLASH OF THE TITANS would be 3-Dimensionalized, and before that we heard that the ZOMBIELAND sequel would utilize the process as well. Like it or not, looks like this trend won't pass anytime soon...if ever. Can IRON MAN or TREK be far behind? There have been murmurs.
Stay tuned...
Merrick here...
TheWrap has a quick piece about Hollywood's new love affair with 3-D. The article reveals that Ridley Scott is looking to convert his new ROBIN HOOD into 3-D.
Director Ridley Scott is breathing down the neck of executives at Universal to get them to approve making a 3D version of his new $200 million epic, “Robin Hood,” according to one person close to the project.
...says TheWrap HERE.
Michael Bay was recently asked about whether any of his films would be presented in 3-D - a singularly unnerving prospect for moviegoers. His response (via Cinematical)?
"I prefer the flat screen. I'm not jumping to do 3-D at all-it's a pain in the neck to shoot it and I actually like the flat image. I've heard that some people can't even see 3-D and, moreover, that a major side effect of watching it is feeling exhausted. Can you imagine how you'd feel watching one of my movies in 3-D?"
During Fantastic Fest, producer Jon Landau said that James Cameron is planning on re-issuing TITANIC in 3-D & may be looking to convert TERMINATOR 2 as well. A few weeks ago we learned that Louis Leterrie's forthcoming CLASH OF THE TITANS would be 3-Dimensionalized, and before that we heard that the ZOMBIELAND sequel would utilize the process as well. Like it or not, looks like this trend won't pass anytime soon...if ever. Can IRON MAN or TREK be far behind? There have been murmurs.
Stay tuned...
12-29-09, 02:17 PM
#3
DVD Talk Legend
"a major side effect of watching it is feeling exhausted. Can you imagine how you'd feel watching one of my movies in 3-D"
12-29-09, 02:20 PM
#4
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: No end in sight to love affair with "3D"
I honestly don't see why some people are so up in arms with this. With the advancements in home theaters for the past decade this appears to be a way to get people to go out to the theaters as opposed to waiting for a home release. If it's done effectively, like with Avatar, than I have no problem with it.
12-29-09, 02:23 PM
#5
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
12-29-09, 02:23 PM
#6
DVD Talk Legend
Re: No end in sight to love affair with "3D"
THEY ALWAYS HAVE 2D PRINTS AVAILABLE FOR EVERY 3D FILM. Nobody is "forcing" you to watch a 3D movie. Where exactly is the problem?
12-29-09, 02:31 PM
#7
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
Re: No end in sight to love affair with "3D"
It's just not an enjoyable way to watch a movie to me, it's unnecessary to the quality of the film, and it reeks of desperation from the studios, instead of pushing for better scripts and better movies. And it makes movies more expensive to make and market, and that just hurts the entire business model. This might be a quick fix but I think people will soon tire of "3D" and too many eggs might already be in that basket.
12-29-09, 02:36 PM
#8
DVD Talk Legend
Re: No end in sight to love affair with "3D"
I guarantee you, there will always be 2D alternatives. 3D screens are expensive upgrades -- they'll be cheaper in the longterm, and besides someone will inevitably sue theaters claiming ONLY 3D screenings are a violation of the ADA on behalf of the vision-impaired, the elderly, the oversensitive, or some combination thereof. Relax dude!
12-29-09, 02:37 PM
#10
DVD Talk Hero
Re: No end in sight to love affair with "3D"
Michael Bay commenting on exhaustings his viewers? Hehe, that's funny. Armageddon is one of the most exhausting [good, enjoyable] movies I've ever seen (along with Return of the King). And is he maybe a little jelous? Both Bay and Cameron are in the business of making gigantic, pleasing movies. Yet Bay is put down by all of us online film geeks, while Cameron gets all kinds of massive praise, and may be up for a few Oscars. But, hey, one makes the other stronger. Now that Cameron did what he did with Avatar, maybe we'll get another movie from Bay that measures up (imo, Bad Boys, The Rock, Armageddon and Tranformers all measure up to Cameron's movies).
Ya' can't really complain. Nobody forces you to the 3D show. All of these 3D movies have 2D showings also. It's still the movie that mostly matters. Transformers in 3D is still far more enjoyable than Transformers 2 in 3D. Would the both have been slightly better in 3D? Probably. Get it?
There will also just be certain movies that demand the 3D. For instance, I saw Inglorious Basterds this year. I doubt it would have benefited from the 3D experience. Transformers 2, on the other hand, may have been a little more enjoyable. A 3D Bourne movie? No. A 3D Pirates of the Caribbean? Yea.
Putting it in 3D would probably would guarantee that I go see it in theaters, instead of waiting for DVD.
And bring on 3D porn. I'd never go to one of those sticky cinemas. But it'll be well worth the television upgrade.
Ya' can't really complain. Nobody forces you to the 3D show. All of these 3D movies have 2D showings also. It's still the movie that mostly matters. Transformers in 3D is still far more enjoyable than Transformers 2 in 3D. Would the both have been slightly better in 3D? Probably. Get it?
There will also just be certain movies that demand the 3D. For instance, I saw Inglorious Basterds this year. I doubt it would have benefited from the 3D experience. Transformers 2, on the other hand, may have been a little more enjoyable. A 3D Bourne movie? No. A 3D Pirates of the Caribbean? Yea.
Putting it in 3D would probably would guarantee that I go see it in theaters, instead of waiting for DVD.
And bring on 3D porn. I'd never go to one of those sticky cinemas. But it'll be well worth the television upgrade.
12-29-09, 02:38 PM
#11
Banned by request
Re: No end in sight to love affair with "3D"
OH NOES! Whatever will we do?! We already have to put up with movies that are ONLY IN COLOR and now we have this travesty? Someone should be shot!
12-29-09, 02:42 PM
#12
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Behind the Orange Curtain
Posts: 20,085
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes
on
7 Posts
Re: No end in sight to love affair with "3D"
Almost all of the 3D films being made or developed right now don't need to be. Robin Hood? Really? Does anyone but Ridley Scott want to see that in 3D? And I remember hearing that there's no way Clash of the Titans would make its release date if they converted it to 3D. Unless it some Avatar-level shit, I'm perfectly happy with 2D films.
12-29-09, 02:56 PM
#15
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: No end in sight to love affair with "3D"
I honestly don't see why some people are so up in arms with this. With the advancements in home theaters for the past decade this appears to be a way to get people to go out to the theaters as opposed to waiting for a home release. If it's done effectively, like with Avatar, than I have no problem with it.
If this trend continues, how long do you honestly think that will last? Because I think it means that very soon, someone is going to put out a major release ONLY IN 3D!
It's just not an enjoyable way to watch a movie to me, it's unnecessary to the quality of the film, and it reeks of desperation from the studios, instead of pushing for better scripts and better movies. And it makes movies more expensive to make and market, and that just hurts the entire business model. This might be a quick fix but I think people will soon tire of "3D" and too many eggs might already be in that basket.
It's just not an enjoyable way to watch a movie to me, it's unnecessary to the quality of the film, and it reeks of desperation from the studios, instead of pushing for better scripts and better movies. And it makes movies more expensive to make and market, and that just hurts the entire business model. This might be a quick fix but I think people will soon tire of "3D" and too many eggs might already be in that basket.
Ha, ha. I was just saying something about that to one of my friends. Once 3D Blu-ray really starts up, I'm sure some porn company will give it a try.
12-29-09, 02:57 PM
#17
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
12-29-09, 03:10 PM
#19
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Re: No end in sight to love affair with "3D"
Avatar was the first movie I've ever seen in 3D. I figured if Cameron developed a whole new camera system for the movie, Avatar would be the movie to see in 3D. It was cool but not cool enough that I intend to see more movies in 3D. I'll just hit the 2D showings for future movies.
BTW, the cartoon thing they had in front of the movie (talking about the Real 3D system) had better 3D effects than the live action movie did. While Avatar had items in 3D, nothing looked like it was coming out of the screen. The cartoon thing did have a few things that looked to me as if they were out of the screen.
BTW, the cartoon thing they had in front of the movie (talking about the Real 3D system) had better 3D effects than the live action movie did. While Avatar had items in 3D, nothing looked like it was coming out of the screen. The cartoon thing did have a few things that looked to me as if they were out of the screen.
12-29-09, 03:13 PM
#20
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
Re: No end in sight to love affair with "3D"
I've never said we should shoot anyone over this. But I will continue to call a gimmick a gimmick. And that's all this pseudo-"3D" is...a gimmick.
12-29-09, 03:22 PM
#21
Banned by request
Re: No end in sight to love affair with "3D"
Color in film isn't how we see the world, though. A few cameras have been developed that see color the way the human eye does, but they're currently far too unwieldy to use for feature films. They're mostly used for medical imaging.
12-29-09, 03:26 PM
#22
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Re: No end in sight to love affair with "3D"
Avatar was the first movie I've ever seen in 3D. I figured if Cameron developed a whole new camera system for the movie, Avatar would be the movie to see in 3D. It was cool but not cool enough that I intend to see more movies in 3D. I'll just hit the 2D showings for future movies.
BTW, the cartoon thing they had in front of the movie (talking about the Real 3D system) had better 3D effects than the live action movie did. While Avatar had items in 3D, nothing looked like it was coming out of the screen. The cartoon thing did have a few things that looked to me as if they were out of the screen.
BTW, the cartoon thing they had in front of the movie (talking about the Real 3D system) had better 3D effects than the live action movie did. While Avatar had items in 3D, nothing looked like it was coming out of the screen. The cartoon thing did have a few things that looked to me as if they were out of the screen.
I don't see where that really makes a difference. I disagree about the whole how we see the world thing. We see things with depth; 3D is trying to recreate that. And color isn't always a true representation of how we see the world. There are many films that use colors to create something different from how we see the world. Does that make the use of color in films nothing more than a gimmick? Or just when the color isn't used to present a true representation of how we see the world? And for that matter, why should the sole determining factor for technology in film be the truest representation of reality? Many movies are supposed to be about escape, about something other than a just a true representation of our lives.
12-29-09, 03:31 PM
#23
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Ottawa...not the one in Illinois
Posts: 1,111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: No end in sight to love affair with "3D"
I wouldn't be so worried about a guy's wang waggling in my face but I would be terrified if they filmed a 3D money shot aimed directly at the camera. That would definitely be a DO NOT WANT!!
12-29-09, 03:33 PM
#24
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: No end in sight to love affair with "3D"
Whoever is worried that they might go exclusively to 3D might have cause for concern. AMC Hoffman is only showing Avatar in 3D and IMAX (lite) 3D...