WB, all 3D all the time

[ScottotD]

http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/03/18/all-warner-bros-tentpole-movies-will-be-released-in-3d/


and 3... 2... 1... freakout!

[Relaxing Dragon]

I'm very excited for this, very excited indeed.

...means more open seats in the 2D shows

[mrbasehart]

That's not really surprising, considering the way things have been going.  I don't care either way on 3d, but I am a little worried that movies are going to have to accommodate a feature that they really don't need, to the detriment to the overall product.

[ScottotD]

That's not really surprising, considering the way things have been going.  I don't care either way on 3d, but I am a little worried that movies are going to have to accommodate a feature that they really don't need, to the detriment to the overall product.

How so? most reports are studios are finding it cheaper and easier to convert movies to 3D in post.

[gbeenie]

That's not really surprising, considering the way things have been going.  I don't care either way on 3d, but I am a little worried that movies are going to have to accommodate a feature that they really don't need, to the detriment to the overall product.

How so? most reports are studios are finding it cheaper and easier to convert movies to 3D in post.

That's why they're doing it, but how can it not be to the detriment of the quality of the 3D?

[TTYT]

Yeah, but does it add anything? It's like colorization (no offense to Mike and Legend Films...) I'd rather go see 3D movies that were actually filmed with two cameras, like Avatar was. Roger Ebert linked to a great article on this on Twitter: http://gizmodo.com/5493832/the-movie-studios-big-3d-scam

In other news, I wonder how Christopher Nolan feels about this.

[Scribblesense]

I sure hope so!

That means I won't waste money going to the theater to see that crap and can rent them instead because I despise 3D.

It's nothing more than a parlor trick. Give me a good, entertaining movie free of gimmicky nonsense that I don't have to wear an uncomfortable piece of plastic on my face in order to watch without getting a headache.

They could at least make the damn glasses more comfortable. If you let me buy a permanent, thirty dollar pair that doesn't feel like a freaking head clamp out of A Clockwork Orange, and then I don't have to pay inflated ticket prices for the cheap pair, I might be a little less irate.

Thankfully, no one is forcing me to see these in theaters! Hooray!

[TTYT]

I don't mind the glasses - but then again, I'm wearing regular glasses right now, so make of that what you will.

[MrTorso]

I won't bother with any that weren't originally shot in 3D.  Here is an article from that same site:

http://bit.ly/9cX5WC

At Warner Bros presentation at ShoWest, we were shown 7-10 minutes of Clash of the Titans clips, which were upconverted and presented in 3D. I will be completely honest — it did not look great. It looked passable. General audiences might not notice the difference, but they will feel it.

To me, the live-action post-converted 3D footage looked very unnatural. At times the characters appeared to stand out like cardboard cutouts, while other times they appeared to be graphed to a computer generated 3D model, and it just looked odd. The computer animated elements look a bit better, but as a whole it was a subpar experience.

Read more: Peter's Thoughts on the Post Converted Clash of the Titans 3D Footage | /Film http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/03/18/peters-thoughts-on-the-post-converted-clash-of-the-titans-3d-footage/#ixzz0iaW3APsB

[ScottotD]

Peter's usually pretty whiney

[Sharktopus]

I'm not going to see any that was post-converted to 3D. (Or threedeeified, as I'm campaigning for the world to call it.) I get enough headaches from 2D movies. It's a fad.

[bratpop]

It would be... FUCKING... AWESOME... if Nolan threatened to drop the Superman franchise because of this. James Cameron is the Devil. Why not demand that all movies now feature stupid blue CG characters? I could deal with that. But if movies start having terrible cinematography from now on? I will be super pissed.

The post-produced 3-D sounds terrible. Hopefully that will keep them from rereleasing Star Wars. Presumably they already found out it looks terrible and have kept it quiet.

If this is how movies are "meant to be seen" in the future, it's a big fuck you to everyone's home theater setup. Oh well, you'll just have to settle for the awful red-blue technology from the 50s, which is ALMOST the same... if you have one eye and are colorblind.

[Rattrap007]

"Tentpole movies"... is that a nicer way of saying porn?

[warofthebees]

It's a fad.

Agreed.  Until 3-D technology is affordable and looks decent on home video, it will remain a fad, as well.  I think 3-d works pretty well as "event" movies, such as Avatar.  I'll probably never see Avatar again, because it was not a good movie, but seeing it in Imax and in 3D is an event, sort of like seeing a concert.  You probably won't sit at home and watch three hours of concert footage from the nosebleed section of a Rolling Stones concert, but you'll go to see them perform just for the experience.

[TTYT]

Michael Bay: Unlikely voice of reason!

http://www.deadline.com/2010/03/michael-bay-james-cameron-skeptical-of-3d-conversions-the-jury-is-out/