3D Top 30 Must Own 3D Blu-Ray Releases (3 Viewers)

[TravisR]

^ Yeah, laserdiscs started in the late 70's and only really died because all the people who bought LDs pretty quickly transitioned to DVDs in the late 90's. While they never caught on with a mainstream audience, you can't really knock something that lasted 2 decades.

And not to nitpick but CLV laserdiscs held 60 minutes and CAV laserdiscs held 30 minutes.

 

[Professor Echo]

At a cinematographer symposium I attended at the Los Angeles County Museum Of Art in the early 90's, every single DP on the panel, all famous and well regarded within the industry, said that if it weren't for laserdiscs widescreen movies would have faded away. They all agreed that with the advent of letterboxed films on laserdisc, directors, led by Scorsese with CAPE FEAR, once more felt comfortable shooting in widescreen. Prior to that they did not want their legacy to be that a constant stream of half movies, i.e. pan and scan versions.

So while laserdiscs may have been a small niche with the general public, they played a significant part in the history of movie making.

 

[Scott Calvert]

What "hasty push to convert older movies older movies to 3D" are you talking about? The only non-current movies that I'm aware of that are actually being converted are Star Wars & Titanic and they've been talking about those for years and George Lucas & James Cameron are involved with the conversions.

Here's an article I found after a 5 second google search.
http://www.hdtvreview.com/news/2010/02/05/sony-looks-to-convert-old-movies-to-3d/

 

[Phoebus]

And don't forget JVC's short-lived VHD laserdisc players of the early 1980s, many built to display 3d discs, and viewable with lcd glasses.

Both House of Wax and Dial M for Murder were commercially available in this format. [field sequential fans tend to be weirdly knowledgeable about such matters.. ]

I think VHD found its niche in the karaoke market eventually.

 

[TravisR]

Originally Posted by Scott Calvert
Here's an article I found after a 5 second google search.
http://www.hdtvreview.com/news/2010/02/05/sony-looks-to-convert-old-movies-to-3d/

So nealy a year ago, Sony talked about converting some of their movies and only mentioned 2 titles specifically? Considering that 3-D adoption isn't anywhere near where studios had hoped and that 2012 and a Michael Jackson concert movie probably aren't going to drive many sales, I'd imagine that those plans have changed or at least are going to wait until when or if things pick up for 3-D. And in the end, all 3-D releases have to have a 2-D version included so that might be why there's no outcry (and not because people today aren't as good movie fans as they used to be).

 

[Charles Smith]

Originally Posted by Robert Harris
I don't see those in the second group settling for Lawrence of Arabia on an iphone. They're still going to try for 70mm first, and then the experience at home on Blu-ray, and for those who "long for the vanished gardens of Cordoba" in the highest possible quality, your wishes will be met at the highest possible level in due course.

Say no more.

 

[Scott Calvert]

about converting some of their movies and only mentioned 2 titles specifically? Considering that 3-D adoption isn't anywhere near where studios had hoped and that 2012 and a Michael Jackson concert movie probably aren't going to drive many sales, I'd imagine that those plans have changed or at least are going to wait until when or if things pick up for 3-D. And in the end, all 3-D releases have to have a 2-D version included so that might be why there's no outcry (and not because people today aren't as good movie fans as they used to be).

I should have known someone was going to hone in on a specific comment and ignore the gist of my overall point. My opinion is that, in the macro, that technology has advanced so that it seems there are more people today who are more interested in the gee-whiz factor of the technology itself than in the content, and that the instant gratification the technology provides has devalued the content. That is not necessarily 3-d related but more a comment on the state of entertainment media delivery in general. I admit that's drifting off topic. I guess my tangents were inspired by Robert Harris' satiric post earlier.

 

[tbaio]

I'm learning alot more about Laser discs now than when they were at the "height" of their time. However, 3-D even now at its slow start, is bigger than what Laser discs accomplished throughout their entire run. It sounds like laser disc was only for a small audience base such as film-makers; like someone else mentioned earlier. 3-D on the other hand is, as mentioned already, for a wide wide consumer base/distribution; not just film-makers. Also, if anyone purchased a laser disc (I'm guessing not many people), they're stuck with something now taking up closet space. This will not be the case with 3-D devices. They're compatibility with all formats & WiFi features make them worth the buy. Thanks for the info on the LD's, guys.

 

[Walter Kittel]

[COLOR= rgb(24, 24, 24)]3-D on the other hand is, as mentioned already, for a wide wide consumer base/distribution; not just film-makers. Also, if anyone purchased a laser disc (I'm guessing not many people), they're stuck with something now taking up closet space. This will not be the case with 3-D devices. They're compatibility with all formats & WiFi features make them worth the buy. Thanks for the info on the LD's, guys. [/COLOR]

Laserdisc was an enthusiast's format that paved the way for a LOT of things that were taken for granted on DVD including:

a) Preservation of Original Aspect Ratio formatting.
b) Multi-channel sound formats.
c) The concept of a Special Edition release of a film with features such as:
- Supplementary content that augmented the film experience.
- Audio Commentary tracks (a supplement to be sure, but such an important feature that I listed it separately.)

3D will likely achieve a wider install base but its contributions to the appreciation of film in the Home Theater environment will never approach that of Laser Disc (IMHO.)

- Walter.

 

[Scott Calvert]

Originally Posted by Walter Kittel
3D will likely achieve a wider install base but its contributions to the appreciation of film in the Home Theater environment will never approach that of Laser Disc (IMHO.)

- Walter.

Well said and I completely agree. Laserdisc had their drawbacks but they were for serious people. Distribution lables knew this and catered to that audience. Some of those sets were absolutely reverential. Look at the difference between the way Disney treated their animated classics on laserdisc compared to bluray. They've turned those films into kitsh for bluray which is rapidly becoming a lowest common denominator format, and much faster than DVD enentually did as well.

 

[tbaio]

All this information about laser discs & all this nostalgia is beautiful, folks! Thanks again for the information.

Now, back to 3-D: it seems the latest (& perhaps greatest?) 3-D release is Resident Evil Afterlife. Here's an early review:

http://hcc.techradar.com/playback/blu-ray/blu-ray-review-resident-evil-afterlife-3d-22-12-10

Looks pretty good by this opinion. If anyone else has seen it, can you share your thoughts as well? Thanks in advance.

 

[Douglas Monce]

Originally Posted by tbaio
Wow, laser discs were around for 20 years? I learned something new. I agree it must have been a small "niche" as you put it, but as for being successful, I have my doubts. I remember that hardly anyone owned such a device. Also, the discs were only available for sale, not rental (except for a few small exceptions). The format was supposed to overtake VHS tapes but never did. In fact, I think they died out before VHS tapes did. Despite their improved quality, they were cumbersome because only 45 minutes were able to be played per side; which meant the disc had to be flipped over. I think they were successful in that they paved the way for DVDs, but that's about all.

Laserdisc was NOT intended to over take VHS, because at the time of Laserdiscs introduction, prerecorded movies had not yet appeared on VHS. The first 3 films would appear on VHS about 6 months later from Magnetic Video. Jaws was the first film to be released on Laserdisc in 1978, and would not appear on VHS until about 5 years later. This was the case with many films on laserdisc, some of which NEVER ended up on tape, thought that was rare.

Laserdiscs WERE available for rent, normally in mom and pop video stores, but even some Blockbuster locations had a selection of laserdiscs for rent. I was a frequent renter of Laserdiscs.

Another laserdisc innovation was the use of anamorphic wide screen video on a release of Terminator 2 in 1996, a full year before the release of DVD. You could also say that home theater started with laserdisc. People surely weren't building home theaters systems based on the picture quality of VHS or Beta!

By the way the first 3 films to show up on VHS were The Sound of Music, Patton, and MASH.

Doug

 

[Douglas Monce]

Originally Posted by tbaio
All this information about laser discs & all this nostalgia is beautiful, folks! Thanks again for the information.

Now, back to 3-D: it seems the latest (& perhaps greatest?) 3-D release is Resident Evil Afterlife. Here's an early review:

http://hcc.techradar.com/playback/blu-ray/blu-ray-review-resident-evil-afterlife-3d-22-12-10

Looks pretty good by this opinion. If anyone else has seen it, can you share your thoughts as well? Thanks in advance.

Seriously? It looks like the WORST of the 1950's 3D films with everything AND the kitchen sink being thrown at the camera! Talk about a gimmick! If this is the best 3D has to offer it will die a 3rd death!

Doug

 

[tbaio]

Originally Posted by Douglas Monce
Seriously? It looks like the WORST of the 1950's 3D films with everything AND the kitchen sink being thrown at the camera! Talk about a gimmick! If this is the best 3D has to offer it will die a 3rd death!

Doug

When you were a kid, what did you remember most about 3-D? Was it the technical aspects of depth, separation, etc or was it objects coming at you? I remember the latter. As a kid, after viewing the House of Wax, I didn't say, "Wow, the depth ratio of the paddle ball scene was outstanding!" No, I remember being amazed at those things flying out of the screen right at me. Why else did 3-D become so popular? I'm sure people remember the objects coming at them. Yeah, its gimmicky. But that's what gets the audience's attention.

 

[tbaio]

Originally Posted by Douglas Monce

Laserdisc was NOT intended to over take VHS, because at the time of Laserdiscs introduction, prerecorded movies had not yet appeared on VHS. The first 3 films would appear on VHS about 6 months later from Magnetic Video. Jaws was the first film to be released on Laserdisc in 1978, and would not appear on VHS until about 5 years later. This was the case with many films on laserdisc, some of which NEVER ended up on tape, thought that was rare.

Laserdiscs WERE available for rent, normally in mom and pop video stores, but even some Blockbuster locations had a selection of laserdiscs for rent. I was a frequent renter of Laserdiscs.

Another laserdisc innovation was the use of anamorphic wide screen video on a release of Terminator 2 in 1996, a full year before the release of DVD. You could also say that home theater started with laserdisc. People surely weren't building home theaters systems based on the picture quality of VHS or Beta!

By the way the first 3 films to show up on VHS were The Sound of Music, Patton, and MASH.

Doug

Another great effort of research. You are indeed the first that I encountered to have seen laser discs for rent. I only remember hearing of 1 place which did so & it was very much out of the way for me. Consider yourself lucky to have had a place to rent them. I now have a new respect for the late great laser disc. Whereas laser disc did not see the audience it deserved, I hope 3-D will not suffer the same fate.

 

[Douglas Monce]

, I didn't say, "Wow, the depth ratio of the paddle ball scene was outstanding!" No, I remember being amazed at those things flying out of the screen right at me. Why else did 3-D become so popular? I'm sure people remember the objects coming at them. Yeah, its gimmicky. But that's what gets the audience's attention.

Honestly I remember the depth of the layers of smoke after the space ship crashed in It Came From Outer Space. I remember the stuff floating near the camera in the under water shots of Creature from the Black Lagoon.

For the most part films where they were constantly poking my in the eye gave me a headache.

And 3D DIDN'T become popular! Thats the whole point. 3D was dead with in 3 years of its introduction in the 1950s, I think it lasted an even shorter time in the 80s. With films like Treasure of the Four Clowns (sorry Crowns) and Coming At Ya!, its not surprising. For the most part I'm not finding anything released today much more interesting.


Doug

 

[Adam Gregorich]

Originally Posted by tbaio
Guys,

I agree that the push for 3-D is happening at not the best time due to the economy; granted. However, as for the cost of the machinery, that's typical of every new device/technology. I personally lucked out by buying at the right time (Independence Day sale). A 40-inch LED Samsung TV, the 3-D disc player, & 4 glasses cost me just over $1,500.00. I've seen televisions alone that cost hell of a lot more. Just like everything else, the price of the devices are sure to drop over time (if the format is successful).

Going back to the push for 3-D, I think its bigger than its ever been. More and more televisions are being made that are 3-D enabled. More 3-D films are being produced now that at any point in the existence of 3-D. And its not just films involved here. I'm seeing camcorders being made to record 3-D motion, still cameras that produce 3-D shots & computer programs that enable 3-D; and video games are sure to join. I hope the push for format is successful (I'm not part of the studio or gadget business, folks; I just like 3-D that much). On the flip side though, this is probably unrealistic thinking on my part, I hope the format remains a choice for the consumer. I would not like to see standard definition or regular blu ray players disappear in favor of 3-D players (even if the 3-D players are made compatible for the other discs). I personally hate to change/throw away a device that works perfectly all because of a new format. I guess we'll just have to wait & see how it turns out.

Over the next year or two 3D will work its way further down the line-up into more TVs. I would expect the CEA to announce a standard for glasses at this years CES, so glasses will get much cheaper. More and more BD players will have 3D capabilities included, and more titles will become available. I think the economy combined with a real lack of software is the reason its not a huge success at the moment, but it will slowly catch on. It was a huge hit at my home over the holidays with relatives who either didn't even know it was available in the marketplace, or who hadn't scene it. 3D will never replace 2D, but its not intended to, but it will catch on.

 

[tbaio]

For the most part films where they were constantly poking my in the eye gave me a headache.

And 3D DIDN'T become popular! Thats the whole point. 3D was dead with in 3 years of its introduction in the 1950s, I think it lasted an even shorter time in the 80s. With films like Treasure of the Four Clowns (sorry Crowns) and Coming At Ya!, its not surprising. For the most part I'm not finding anything released today much more interesting.


Doug

Wow, again you are a first: I never as a kid noticed the "depth." I remember things coming up to the screen & wanted to see more. So, 3-D didn't become popular? Well, its been around since the 1920's (maybe even earlier) and it has resurfaced again and again. That's something laserdisc is not likely to do. As for the headache reaction, yeah I can see that happening. Be honest here, did you actually see Resident Evil Afterlife in the theaters? My point is that if you didn't, please wait to see it before bashing it.

 

[Douglas Monce]

3D will never replace 2D, but its not intended to, but it will catch on.

Its track record doesn't suggest this will be the case.

Doug

 

[Douglas Monce]

in the theaters? My point is that if you didn't, please wait to see it before bashing it.

No I didn't. The Resident Evil films aren't the sort of films that I would pay to see in the theater much less buy on blu-ray. I did however see the trailers, and it looked exactly like those bad films from the 50s. You can always tell when they turn up on TV that they were shot for 3D, because they are constantly shoving things at the camera, saying "hey look! We're in 3D!!!" It was stupid then and its stupid now.

There are some films where the 3D was handled brilliantly. The aforementioned Creature from the Black Lagoon and It Came From Outer Space, both directed by Jack Arnold, are two examples. They save the off the screen effects for very specific moments in the film. Arnold uses 3D to help tell his story rather than just goosing the audience every 5 min. I've never seen it in 3D but my understanding is that the only off the screen effect in Dial M for Murder is when she reaches back to grab the scissors. In effect reaching out to the audience for help. At another point an object important to the plot becomes obvious because of its placement in the frame and its depth.

Only when filmmakers stop treating 3D as a gimmick and start using it as a story telling tool, will it actually stop BEING a gimmick and be taken seriously.

Doug