The Hobbit

Started by Geekyfanboy, December 18, 2007, 08:54:38 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

KingIsaacLinksr

I think so Bryan, I could be wrong but I think Avatar was unique while everyone just converted to get on the bandwagon of 3D.

King
A Paladin Without A Crusade Blog... www.kingisaaclinksr.wordpress.com
My Review of Treks In Sci-Fi Podcast: http://wp.me/pQq2J-zs
Let's Play: Videogames YouTube channel: www.youtube.com/kingisaaclinksr

Feathers

Quote from: HawkeyeMeds on October 22, 2010, 01:51:33 PM
Mike you know how they kill off the characters all teh time in spooks, i think we know whats happeneing at the end of those series

Well, we were right. Without any spoilers, let's just say that it looks like Richard Armitage will now be available to persue his career elsewhere for a while.

I know it's unnusual here but I don't have a podcast of my own.

QuadShot

Quote from: Bryancd on December 01, 2010, 05:04:56 AM
Quote from: Kingisaaclinksr on November 30, 2010, 07:54:40 PM
Personally, while I am sick of 3D, ranting about it is a lost cause, I hope they wake up to the fact that 3D is not selling.  It hasn't sold since Avatar came out and its already what I consider a dead tech.  My next monitor/graphics card will not be based around the intent of getting 3D.  Hollywood is grasping to 3D so badly so it can get ppl back into the theaters again.  In the long run, its a wasted effort.

King

I think the jury is still out on that. It doesn't take a lot of predictive skill to realize that TRON is going to likely do big 3D business and besides "Despicable Me" there hasn't been a true 3D film in thetaters since "Avatar", all the rest have been up-conversions of dubious quality. Done right, 3D provides a different experience which I and many people I know really like and will pay more for.
Bryan, Alice In Wonderland was 3D, true 3D and it was pretty cool. Just sayin' :)

QuadShot

And for the record...I don't understand why everyone is so up in arms about the 3D debate! I mean, really? 3D??? Anything more that a good Double D is just a waste! :)  :roflmao :shocked

Bryancd

Quote from: QuadShot on December 02, 2010, 07:37:19 AM
Quote from: Bryancd on December 01, 2010, 05:04:56 AM
Quote from: Kingisaaclinksr on November 30, 2010, 07:54:40 PM
Personally, while I am sick of 3D, ranting about it is a lost cause, I hope they wake up to the fact that 3D is not selling.  It hasn't sold since Avatar came out and its already what I consider a dead tech.  My next monitor/graphics card will not be based around the intent of getting 3D.  Hollywood is grasping to 3D so badly so it can get ppl back into the theaters again.  In the long run, its a wasted effort.

King

I think the jury is still out on that. It doesn't take a lot of predictive skill to realize that TRON is going to likely do big 3D business and besides "Despicable Me" there hasn't been a true 3D film in thetaters since "Avatar", all the rest have been up-conversions of dubious quality. Done right, 3D provides a different experience which I and many people I know really like and will pay more for.
Bryan, Alice In Wonderland was 3D, true 3D and it was pretty cool. Just sayin' :)

I didn't see it Al and wasn't sure if it was shot in 3D or not. Good to hear you liked it. My contention is that all the native 3D films have delivered on the experience whereas the up-conversions have not. So when discussing the merits of 3D, it's important to separate the wheat from the chaff so to speak.

Rico

The fairly recent "Alice in Wonderland" was upcoverted for the most part.  Only full CGI scenes (with no actors) were in native 3D.  Posting a link below with some info for you all to ponder.  There are actually very few native 3D films that are not animated features that have been or will be shot in native 3D.  "Drive Angry" with Nic Cage is one native 3D movie coming that was shot with 3D equipment.  The recent "Step Up 3D" was also native 3D.  Anyone run out to see that one?  Anyway, here you go...

http://www.3dmovielist.com/list.html

Bryancd

Which I think gets back to your previous position, Rico, that a movie is good or bad regardless of the format. With 3D, I would suggest you get what you pay for when it comes to live action. "Avavtar" spent the money and it's all on screen. I bet we will say the same about "TRON" and the final Harry Potter movie and the "The Hobbit" if they do it in 3D. Also the Star Wars movies. It's all about how much money they are willing to spend to make the 3D experience effective and those titles will spend BIG. You have to acknowledge those other films were likely cheaply and quickly done.

Rico

My ONLY point all along has been a good movie is a good movie - regardless of it being in 3D or not.  I see movies that interest and appeal to me, not based on if they are in 3D.  And I really think the movie going public does the same, on average.

Bryancd

I agree the film comes first, format a distant second. BUT, I also think that done right, it can enhance the experience and is worthwile.

Jobydrone

I took my daughter and son too see Chrismas Carol in 3D last year and it was a nightmare.  The glasses kept falling off their faces and I had to sit there holding them on their heads for them because of course the picture was blurry and unwatchable without them.  The whole thing was ridiculous, there was maybe one part, when it was snowing and it actually seemed like the snowflakes were falling all around me, that I thought it was a cool effect, but overall the whole experience would have been much more enjoyable in a regular showing.  The 3D added nothing but hassle.  I'll never make that mistake again.
"I'm not crazy about reality, but it's still the only place to get a decent meal."  -Groucho Marx

QuadShot

Quote from: Jobydrone4of20 on December 02, 2010, 10:25:00 AM
I took my daughter and son too see Chrismas Carol in 3D last year and it was a nightmare.  The glasses kept falling off their faces and I had to sit there holding them on their heads for them because of course the picture was blurry and unwatchable without them.  The whole thing was ridiculous, there was maybe one part, when it was snowing and it actually seemed like the snowflakes were falling all around me, that I thought it was a cool effect, but overall the whole experience would have been much more enjoyable in a regular showing.  The 3D added nothing but hassle.  I'll never make that mistake again.
Duct Tape Joby...gotta use the Duct Tape! :)

Meds

3D 'convertion' makes me want to vomit over my film collection. Serioulsy belt up and just make the film if youcant afford to film it with 3D equiptment which so far has only been Avatar and i found that boring because it was all gimick and no story. And if i hear another film 'producer' (rarely a director) say oh yeah we are going to convert this section in 3D i'll hand in my geek card. DO NOT CONVERT A FILM it looks like those cheap theatre toys you used to buy, just layers of flat screen over each other, here's a hint "Just make the damn film and make it good."

Rant over now to make a cup of tea.

QuadShot

Now WAIT just a moment Meds...you have a geek card???? :)

Meds

Yeah Its all shiny and glossy and signed by Rico. ;)

Rico

Quote from: HawkeyeMeds on December 02, 2010, 01:27:27 PM
Yeah Its all shiny and glossy and signed by Rico. ;)

Thanks, my brother in arms against the evil that is 3D!  ;)