3D Harry Potter & The Deathly Hallows Parts 1&2 (3D Blu-ray) Available for Preorder

Discussion in 'Blu-ray and UHD' started by Ronald Epstein, Mar 27, 2014.

Tags:
  1. Ronald Epstein

    Ronald Epstein Administrator
    Owner

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 1997
    Messages:
    46,180
    Likes Received:
    4,245
    Real Name:
    Ronald Epstein
    XenForo Template

    51BwaDYBWhL._SL500_AA300_.jpg

     

    Thank you for supporting HTF when you preorder using the link below.  If you are using an adblocker you will not see link.
     

     

     
  2. Ronald Epstein

    Ronald Epstein Administrator
    Owner

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 1997
    Messages:
    46,180
    Likes Received:
    4,245
    Real Name:
    Ronald Epstein
    First, nice to see Warner trying to keep the 3D home format thriving.

    I'm a sucker for anything 3D.

    That being said, not a huge Harry Potter fan. However, this does look
    like an interesting purchase -- especially since you are getting both films
    for a pretty damn good price.

    I am just trying to figure out how good the 3D is going to be on this.

    Am I right that they started filming Deathly Hallows in 3D but abandoned
    the project? Am I to presume all of this is upconverted instead of being
    natively shot in the format?Just would like a little more background and to hopefully get the facts set
    straight on anything I may be wrong about.
     
  3. Steve Tannehill

    Steve Tannehill Ambassador

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 1997
    Messages:
    5,550
    Likes Received:
    214
    Location:
    DFW
    Real Name:
    Steve Tannehill
    They started the conversion of part 1 and abandoned it when they discovered they did not have time to finish it and meet their release date. Part 2 was a conversion, and it was released in 3D theatrically. Then around the time of the home video release, Warner finished the 3D conversion of part 1 and released it as a Best Buy exclusive. The 3D is not spectacular, but I glad to have it in my collection.
     
  4. Steve Tannehill

    Steve Tannehill Ambassador

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 1997
    Messages:
    5,550
    Likes Received:
    214
    Location:
    DFW
    Real Name:
    Steve Tannehill
    By the way, some of the 3D is good, but that was probably mostly CGI.
     
  5. Ronald Epstein

    Ronald Epstein Administrator
    Owner

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 1997
    Messages:
    46,180
    Likes Received:
    4,245
    Real Name:
    Ronald Epstein
    Thanks, Steve.

    That's the story I must have read.

    I might pick this up just to expand my 3D collection.
     
  6. Josh Steinberg

    Josh Steinberg Producer
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Messages:
    5,565
    Likes Received:
    3,196
    Real Name:
    Josh Steinberg
    As Steve pointed out, both were post-conversions. The movies were shot back-to-back, with part one coming out in November 2010, and July 2011. As I recall, both parts were scheduled to be released theatrically in 3D, but Warner dropped the 3D released of Part 1 when it wasn't up to snuff. I remember reading that the lack of 3D was because Warner knew the quality was nowhere near good enough (they had been beaten up over their rushed conversion of "Clash Of The Titans" earlier that year). Part 2 was released theatrically in 3D.

    The difference in quality between the two is night and day. While neither is a top-of-the-line conversion, Part 1 has very, very minimal depth in most scenes, and no pop-out that I can recall. Part 2 has much better depth by comparison (though still not as good as a conversion you'd see today), and at least one minor pop-out that I can recall.

    Last time I rewatched all the Harry Potters, I watched both of these in 3D and came away thinking that while I'd definitely do Part 2 in 3D again and again, that the 3D version of Part 1 was probably not worth revisiting. If I was watching with someone who wasn't that into 3D, that wouldn't be the title I'd try to use to change their mind with.
     
  7. FoxyMulder

    FoxyMulder 映画ファン

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2009
    Messages:
    5,236
    Likes Received:
    1,613
    Location:
    Scotland
    Real Name:
    Malcolm
    I have read that Part 1 isn't that good in 3D save for a few scenes but Part 2 is quite good, let us all know when you view them.
     
  8. Matt Hough

    Matt Hough Executive Producer
    Reviewer

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2006
    Messages:
    14,412
    Likes Received:
    2,840
    Location:
    Charlotte, NC
    Real Name:
    Matt Hough
    I'm one of those oddfellows who likes Part 1 better than Part 2, but I've never seen Part 1 in 3D, so I'm tempted to get this even though I already have Part 2 in 3D. I think this price is cheaper than Part 1 by itself with the other discs.
     
    Josh Steinberg likes this.
  9. Josh Steinberg

    Josh Steinberg Producer
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Messages:
    5,565
    Likes Received:
    3,196
    Real Name:
    Josh Steinberg
    Part 1 is a really solid movie - I've got nothing bad to say about it. Even though I wouldn't rate the 3D in Part 1 as being anything great, I totally get the desire to see it in 3D and it's not the worst purchases you'll ever make. (I need to pop in my versions of the 3D sets to make sure they don't have any special features not on the mega Wizards box set - if not, then I've got extra copies of the BD3D/BD/DVD set potentially in need of good homes.)
     
  10. Chuck Anstey

    Chuck Anstey Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 1998
    Messages:
    1,624
    Likes Received:
    102
    Real Name:
    Chuck Anstey
    Well as another opinion, my son, who was almost 11 at the time saw Part 2 3D in the theater and said the 3D was pretty bad. People's heads being elongated in 3D is one specific thing he mentioned as being distracting.
     

Share This Page