DVD Talk Forum

DVD Talk Forum (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/)
-   Movie Talk (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/movie-talk-17/)
-   -   Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D? (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/movie-talk/568989-do-you-think-directors-getting-nervous-about-getting-pressured-film-3d.html)

toddly6666 02-03-10 09:51 AM

Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D?
 
Do you think that some directors can't even handle 3D? It seems that Michael Bay is getting pressured to do Transformers 3 in 3D. He said that he doesn't want to film it in 3D. Do you think directors are now intimidated to film in 3D? James Cameron spent a lot of time mastering the 3D medium. Now it seems like directors will have a shorter time span to make a 3D movie since most big action movies are rush jobs. Is it possible that 3D directing is a whole different medium from 2D directing, meaning some directors just won't be able to do it well, not because they don't get it or if they don't have enough practice using it, but because it's a whole different art form?

Ash Ketchum 02-03-10 10:02 AM

Re: Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D?
 
I don't think any director's ever really mastered 3-D. In the old days, Jack Arnold came the closest, having shot three of his best films in the process (CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON, IT CAME FROM OUTER SPACE, REVENGE OF THE CREATURE). I've seen all three in 3-D and I thought the last one (REVENGE, 1955) did the best job with the process. Too bad he couldn't have developed it more, but by then the 1950s 3-D craze had passed. Even so, the one 3-D film from the old days that I thought did the best job with the process was George Sidney's MGM musical, KISS ME KATE (1953).

And on the basis of AVATAR, I would argue that no, James Cameron has not even come close to mastering 3-D. I saw very few compositions in the film that used the process well. Most of the frames were unbelievably cluttered and way too busy, all of which detracted from the 3-D experience in my eyes. He needs a designer, an artist, to show him how to compose shots. Less is more.

PopcornTreeCt 02-03-10 06:24 PM

Re: Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D?
 
I don't think directors will be intimidated by 3D movies... and if they are, it will only be directors like Michael Bay. I don't think we have to worry about the Coens, PT Anderson or Tarantino being pressured to put out 3D movies.

devilshalo 02-03-10 06:31 PM

Re: Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D?
 
Director's won't be intimidated, studios will force 3D if they want to regardless of a film being shot for 3D or not... just look at this...


Originally Posted by Variety
'Titans,' next 'Potter' to get 3D treatment
Warner pushes back release date of 'Clash'
By DAVID S. COHEN

Prime Focus will convert Warner Bros. adventure epic 'Clash of the Titans' to 3D in just 10 weeks, ahead of its bow on April 2.

Warner Bros. announced Tuesday that it will convert "Clash of the Titans" and the first part of "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows" to stereoscopic 3D (S3D), kicking off a flurry of release-date shifts and solving a puzzle that had stumped Hollywood's tech community.

Reports that Warners was ready to announce the conversion first surfaced more than a week ago in the Marketsaw Blog, which follows S3D. The studio is also converting "Cats and Dogs 2" and will release the animated "Guardians of Ga'hoole" in S3D as well.

Buried in Warner's announcement, however, was the answer to a question that's left the tech community baffled: Who could get the conversion of "Titans" done in the scant weeks left before the pic's release date, which was moved back only one week to April 2?

The answer: Prime Focus Group, the Indian-owned visual effects and post-production company with offices in Hollywood and around the globe.

Prime Focus announced its View-D conversion process in September and promised it would be "exponentially faster" than anything else in the marketplace. Those claims will now be put to the test.

Chris Bond, who heads Prime Focus' View-D team, told Daily Variety, "We view this as a 10-week project." Work is already under way. Bond flew to London to meet with the producers and directors of "Clash."

"We started fully a week ago in full swing," he says, though the decision to go ahead wasn't finalized until after a Monday screening of the film.

Even with the shifted date and a head start, however, Prime Focus will be doing a conversion faster than most in the field would be comfortable with.

"Ten weeks is really tight," said Tim Sassoon of Santa Monica-based Sassoon Film Design, an established S3D conversion shop. "You're not really going to be producing final shots right away. So in your last five weeks you have 40 shots a day to be finalled (assuming 1,500 shots for the whole movie). That's a tall order for anyone, especially for a company that's never done this before."

Prime Focus unveiled its View-D conversion process in December and has never done an end-to-end conversion of any feature. That's true of most companies, though, in this nascent field.

One experienced S3D filmmaker called Prime Focus' first public showing of View-D "so-so" but added, "I'm sure if Warner Bros. is going with them it will be excellent quality."

Bond credits the deal to the studio's comfort level with Prime Focus leaders Mike Fink and Terry Clotiaux, both vfx vets.

Warners execs confirmed that Prime Focus was more or less hand-picked for the job. "In-Three was very busy with 'Alice in Wonderland' and all the other things they're doing, so we went with a vendor we knew had an open availability in their schedule," one of the execs said, adding that Prime Focus was set up to work fast and would be able to handle all of the work from its Hollywood facility.

Warner and partner Legendary Pictures did not disclose how much they're spending to get the pic into S3D. Sassoon said converting a feature costs about $5 million, but that figure varies according to the length of the title, the complexity of the images and whether the title is to go to homevideo or theaters.

"The bigger the screen, the tighter the work has to be," he said.

There's also talk of converting library titles, especially with 3D TV on the horizon and the real possibility of selling S3D Blu-ray disks.

However, Sassoon warned that with homevideo-quality conversions at $2.5 million, there may not be a rush to convert library titles beyond such high-value pics as the "Star Wars" trilogies and James Cameron's "Terminator 2."

Announcement of the one-week delay for the "Titans" prompted several other date shifts Tuesday. MGM opted to move "Hot Tub Time Machine" into the March 26 slot from March 19; Fox shifted "Diary of a Wimpy Kid" two weeks forward to March 19; and CBS Films decided to shift Jennifer Lopez romantic comedy "The Back Up Place" back a week to April 23.

Besides "Hot Tub Time Machine," the other wide-release pics in the March 26 slot are DreamWorks and Paramount's "How to Train Your Dragon" and Consolidated Picture Group's comedy-drama "I Love You, Phillip Morris."

On April 2, "Clash of the Titans" will face a pair of wide releases: Lionsgate's launch of "Tyler Perry's Why Did I Get Married Too?" and Universal's sci-fier "Repo Men."


RocShemp 02-03-10 06:42 PM

Re: Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D?
 
And Michael Bay isn't intimidated by 3D. He just thinks of it as a cheap gimmick. He prefers IMAX. Too bad he barely used IMAX in TF2.

DeanoBKN 02-03-10 06:44 PM

Re: Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D?
 
Ugh. Leave it to Hollywood to take an idea and run it into the ground.

I seriously hope a ton of these 3D movies bomb so this fad can die yet again.

RocShemp 02-03-10 06:49 PM

Re: Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D?
 
I love the use of the redundant term "stereoscopic 3D". I know they use it to refer to the polarized method specifically but both polarized and anaglyph are stereoscopic, which means 3D.

Solid Snake 02-03-10 07:42 PM

Re: Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D?
 

Originally Posted by Dean Kousoulas (Post 9980027)
Ugh. Leave it to Hollywood to take an idea and run it into the ground.

I seriously hope a ton of these 3D movies bomb so this fad can die yet again.

As do I actually. As much as I enjoyed Avatar, I can't see most directors using it well. Has Letterier said anything about the 3D and how it's being used for Clash?

pinata242 02-03-10 08:05 PM

Re: Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D?
 
Harry Potter 7.1 is also going to be in 3D. I will not be watching any movie in its 3D form. I absolutely abhor it.

RocShemp 02-03-10 08:45 PM

Re: Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D?
 
I think 3D movies should stay niche. Less chance of people rushing it and screwing it up if they're allowed the time and care such an endeavor requires.

This post 3D nonesense is a bad idea. It's like the spiritual successor of colorizing B&W movies. If you want your feature in 3D, shoot it in 3D.

The Antipodean 02-03-10 09:08 PM

Re: Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D?
 
I totally see the studios running this into the ground. I liked the novelty of Avatar but frankly I can't handle wearing those glasses more than an hour or two without it bothering me, and I think they're all overestimating how much audience there is for 3D movies -- Avatar succeeded for a lot of reasons but I think they think 3D is the only one.

Artman 02-03-10 09:16 PM

Re: Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D?
 
Yeah, I don't want the majority of films to be 3D. If nothing else, the extra $3 charge will make it an easier decision to stay home. I don't mind a handful of films truly designed for it, and having a future option for home viewing.

GenPion 02-03-10 09:17 PM

Re: Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D?
 

Originally Posted by PopcornTreeCt (Post 9979980)
I don't think directors will be intimidated by 3D movies... and if they are, it will only be directors like Michael Bay. I don't think we have to worry about the Coens, PT Anderson or Tarantino being pressured to put out 3D movies.

Agreed. So I'm less concerned. However, if there ever comes a day that studios will only release movies in 3D I just don't know how I'll react. If that will mean the end of going to the movies for me. I'd like to think the 3D aspect, which is such a theme park type thrill ride, will only be done for certain event movies and will not even be the only available option. It's just not necessary.

Draven 02-03-10 09:34 PM

Re: Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D?
 
I think this is a terrible idea, and I wouldn't see Clash of the Titans in 3D if you paid me. That would ruin the movie for me.

However, many people in this thread think this is a grand idea.

DarthMarino 02-04-10 07:05 AM

Re: Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D?
 
There's already part of me who just wants to give up going to the theater altogether. New Blu Ray's are getting close to $15 with standard theatrical ticket prices over $10 now in my area. Forcing gimmicky 3D crap will just help me take that plunge.

matome 02-04-10 08:07 AM

Re: Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D?
 

Originally Posted by Dean Kousoulas (Post 9980027)
Ugh. Leave it to Hollywood to take an idea and run it into the ground.

I seriously hope a ton of these 3D movies bomb so this fad can die yet again.

:up:

Travis McClain 02-04-10 03:37 PM

Re: Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D?
 
My wife gets headaches watching movies in 3D, so we don't go see those versions. I myself am indifferent; I find it distracting because every time I watch one of those movies I have to deal with the 3D glasses (do they go behind, or in front of, my regular ones?) and the entire time I'm watching I'm only half paying attention to the actual movie because I'm looking for anything that justifies the entire ordeal.

As for the original discussion about directors and their views on 3D, I think it will largely depend on the director and the film. Studios are pushing it on tentpole releases (Harry Potter, Transformers; I read recently they're wanting to shoot the next Bond movie in 3D, etc.) because those releases are already attracting an audience that's there to be wowed. Most movies really aren't crying out for the 3D treatment, and I think most of your auteurs will deride it as a studio gimmick that muddles their storytelling, but then, they're not making the kinds of movies that studios are going to feel worth the cost of producing in 3D.

UAIOE 02-05-10 03:42 AM

Re: Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D?
 
It could be worse, it could be "Smell-o-vision".

Draven 02-05-10 09:29 AM

Re: Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D?
 

Originally Posted by UAIOE (Post 9982455)
It could be worse, it could be "Smell-o-vision".

I'm sure that's coming once 3D goes away again.

islandclaws 02-05-10 09:51 AM

Re: Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D?
 
After reading the article that devilshalo posted, I'm not even convinced that Clash will look any good in 3-D. I'm getting sick of the gimmick, too. It's one thing if you conceptualized and shot your entire film in 3-D (like Avatar), but converting a film shot 2-D in post sounds, to me, ridiculous. It won't be adding anything to my experience except a few extra dollars out of my pocket. So, unless a film is specifically shot in 3-D, I'll stick with standard viewing for now.

Supermallet 02-05-10 10:43 AM

Re: Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D?
 
I love 3D and will take as much of it as I can, thanks!

Edit: Oh, and screw Michael Bay. He may think 3D is a gimmick, but as Transformers 2 taught us, he clearly also thinks story and character are gimmicks, too.

DonnachaOne 02-05-10 10:55 AM

Re: Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D?
 
Filming in 3D? Fine.

Conversion to 3D? Looks cheap and tacky. I can see them re-rendering the CG monsters and sets, but 2D-shot organic objects, from actors to props, don't magically have another angle shot to ensure a 3-D composition. They'll look flat and weird. The 3D Dave Matthews concert used this all the time to frankly insulting effect. While it was obvious that several angles were shot in 3D, frontal shots were obviously converted, looking like something from a tuppenny theatre.

UAIOE 02-05-10 01:56 PM

Re: Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D?
 

Originally Posted by KillerCannibal (Post 9982780)
It's one thing if you conceptualized and shot your entire film in 3-D (like Avatar), but converting a film shot 2-D in post sounds, to me, ridiculous. It won't be adding anything to my experience except a few extra dollars out of my pocket. So, unless a film is specifically shot in 3-D, I'll stick with standard viewing for now.

Don't let George Lucas hear this!

RocShemp 02-05-10 03:10 PM

Re: Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D?
 
I love 3D and would like to see more movies in the format, provided they're done well and not a rushed hack job or an afterthought. 3D conversions of movies shot flat fall into the latter and may be the end of 3D. Why bother carefully composing your shots with 3D in mind when you can just slap on some 3D effects in post? You'll get a few butts in the seats at first but eventually people will notice it doesn't look that hot and mistakenly assume all 3D looks that cheap.

GoldenJCJ 02-05-10 05:36 PM

Re: Do you think directors are getting nervous about getting pressured to film in 3D?
 

Originally Posted by Suprmallet (Post 9982851)
Edit: Oh, and screw Michael Bay. He may think 3D is a gimmick, but as Transformers 2 taught us, he clearly also thinks story and character are gimmicks, too.

:lol: I enjoy most of Michael Bay's films and I consider myself a fan of his but I have to admit this made me laugh. I certainly can't argue with you.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:25 PM.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.