New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

HTF TOP 16 MUST OWN 3D TITLES - Page 16

post #451 of 484
1/14/12 at 10:48am
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmiller68 View Post

 

Well I watch Megamind yesterday in 3D. It is really good but I thought Despicable Me was better done. 



I viewed Megamind in 3-D and it was great.  Over the next couple of days, I'll try to watch Despicable Me in 3-D to compare the two.  By the way, The Beauty and the Beast 3-D BRD was awesome.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Crawdaddy

 

Reply
post #452 of 484
1/14/12 at 10:56am
Thread Starter 

 

 

 

Quote:
By the way, The Beauty and the Beast 3-D BRD was awesome.

 

 
I knew you would love it.  I think it trumps LION KING for the 
fact that there are a lot more objects to enhance.  Perfect example
is the films' opening town square scene featuring the song Bonjour!
 
I can't see how anybody can say anything negative about the 
upconversion.
 

 

Quote:
Over the next couple of days, I'll try to watch Despicable Me in 3-D to compare the two

 

 
They are on par with each other.  My preference is Megamind, but
the closing credits of Despicable Me is perhaps one of the most fun
moments you'll have with your 3D display.
Reply
post #453 of 484
1/14/12 at 11:05am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald Epstein View Post

Thomas,

 

My first question to you would be (and I probably asked

this question before), have you actually watched these 

films on the home screen that you are so blatantly panning?

 

I have made it very obvious over the past year that I have

a preference towards 3D films that exploit their capabilities.

In other words, I do love things that get projected towards

the audience.

 

I have also been very vocal on this forum over the fact

that most of the films shot in native 3D don't exploit the

format whatsoever.  This has been a major complaint of

mine.  If you are going to shoot a film in 3D, and charge

a premium for it, then at least give the audience its money's

worth.

 

So, I agree with you up to a point.

 

Where I disagree is your complaints over the specific

Disney titles you mentioned above.  Have you actually

watched them in 3D?   I ask this, because I think they 

look absolutely tremendous.

 

Post conversion has come a long way since Warner's

attempt at Clash of the Titans.  While it is true that post

conversion will not provide the audience with projectile

3D, I am very impressed over how a company like DIsney

has made their classic animated features seem like new

again.  Really, I was far more immersed in the Toy Story

films, Lion King and Beauty and The Beast like never before.

 

You may have a point that the general public has no idea

that they are paying for 3D that has been unconverted, but

I generally think that they will be most satisfied with what 

they see on screen.  After all, when Lion King was released

in 3D last fall, it was the #1 film for at least 2 weeks in a row.

What does that tell you about the success of 3D and a film

that is 17 years old and which most people have in their film

collection?

 

I am very disappointed that Hollywood isn't making enough

3D fare that really packs the WOW factor.  However, that 

being said, I really can't slam the efforts of some of the recent

Disney upconversions when they look pretty dam good.

 

Quite frankly, I would love to see Warner upconvert 

The Wizard of Oz.  Could you imagine how unbelievable that

film would look in 3D?   Now, If there was only a way to make the

bubble that becomes Glenda The Good Witch project itself

outwards towards the audience....


Ron,

 

you have in fact already asked me if I have watched the Disney movies which I am condemning & I have already answered this question.  I see no need in answering it again; that would be a total waste of time.  As for The Lion King being # 1 again, that's because its a good movie, period.  Do you think if the direct-to-video version of Lilo & Stitch 2 were re-released to the theater in 3-D, it would make a killing at the box office?  Most likely not.  Why? Because its nowhere near as good as the Disney/Pixar hits.  The 3-D makes no difference; in this case, its the movie which drove people to the theaters.  Notice how another hit, Finding Nemo, is being re-released....coincidence?  You want to see The Wizard of Oz in fake 3-D? Fine; enjoy. Now, can you please give a review for the last 2 Final Destination blu ray discs already??  You say you respect both modes of the 3-D format, but it appears the fake post-converted stuff is being given greater consideration here.  This is a 3-D forum & these discs have been in circulation for a while now; where are the reviews?  If you are not the one in charge of the reviews for this forum, then can you forward this request to the persons

 who are?  I just want people to have the chance to see a positive opinion for the hard work of acutally taking the time to shoot a film in real 3-D instead of the the 1-sided bias of post-conversion which has been occuring as of late.  Thanks. 

 

 


Edited by tbaio - 1/14/12 at 11:20am
Reply
post #454 of 484
1/14/12 at 11:15am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Crawford View Post

Such actions just ticks me off as nobody has to right to tell another individual how to spend their monies on legal products.

 

Crawdaddy


Oh, boy.  I gave an opinion of what I feel & an example as theoretical proof of my point; not a direction on how to spend your cash.  Its no different than how any other person conducts their point of view during a debate.  Please read the post more carefully & you will see that I did not give such instruction on how to spend your money. 
 

 

Reply
post #455 of 484
1/14/12 at 11:20am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Crawford View Post

I'm a firm believer that the market of supply and demand will dictate the 3-D market including these 2-D conversions to 3-D.  I have no problem with the companies supplying 3-D product, but it is up to the consumers to determine how much of it they are willing to buy of it.

Not that I have anything to base this on but I wonder if the studios are 'wasting' money on 3-D conversions. Tremondously popular movies like Toy Story, The Lion King, The Phantom Menace, Titanic, Beauty And The Beast, etc. would probably make about as much money in 2-D without spending a few million on a conversion. I'm not saying that it isn't a boost at the box office to some degree but I wonder if it's worth the $10 million cost (I believe that's the quote for the average 2 hour movie) when a popular movie is going to sell tickets no matter what.
Reply
post #456 of 484
1/14/12 at 11:23am
Thread Starter 

 

 

Quote:

Tremondously popular movies like Toy Story, The Lion King, The Phantom Menace, Titanic, Beauty And The Beast, etc. would probably make as much money in 2-D without spending a few million on a conversion.

 

 

Would they?  I would argue they wouldn't.

 

Much cheaper to just rent or put the DVD you own

into the player and watch it at home than go to the

theater.

 

I would think many parents would argue that point

with their kids and win.

 

However, where the argument is lost is that these

films are now in 3D, and many parents still don't have

that technology in their homes.

 

Heck, just look at Crawdaddy and myself.  We could

have been well-suited with our 2D copies of Lion King

and Beauty and The Beast.  But we went for the 3D

releases and we couldn't be happier.  I have no desire

to see these films in 2D again now that I own the 3D

version.

 

I know many parents at my workplace and they all

tell me their kids love 3D.  They aren't as particular

about upconversions vs. native as we are.  

 

 

Reply
post #457 of 484
1/14/12 at 11:29am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald Epstein View Post

 

 

 

Would they?  I would argue they wouldn't.

 

Much cheaper to just rent or put the DVD you own

into the player and watch it at home than go to the

theater.

 

I would think many parents would argue that point

with their kids and win.

 

However, where the argument is lost is that these

films are now in 3D, and many parents still don't have

that technology in their homes.

 

I know many parents at my workplace and they all

tell me their kids love 3D.  They aren't as particular

about upconversions vs. native as we are.  


I'll ask again:  is it a coincidence that only the blockbuster hits are the ones being re-released??

 

Reply
post #458 of 484
1/14/12 at 11:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald Epstein View Post




Would they?  I would argue they wouldn't.

Much cheaper to just rent or put the DVD you own
into the player and watch it at home than go to the
theater.

I would think many parents would argue that point
with their kids and win.

However, where the argument is lost is that these
films are now in 3D, and many parents still don't have
that technology in their homes.

I can't say that I'm definitely right (I can't even say that I'm probably right) but, to me, it seems like if the studios put the same amount of money into an ad campaign for a 2-D re-release as they do for the release of a 3-D conversion, they're going to get the same basic results and they'll also have not spent millions on the conversion.

For what it's worth, I don't have any big problem with conversions as long as the movie lends itself to 3-D. I think everyone here has seen movies that don't convert very well so it's not like every movie translates to 3-D.
Reply
post #459 of 484
1/14/12 at 11:37am

I think this is a key point my kids don't care if it is post or pre processed 3D. They like 3D movies! 
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald Epstein View Post

I know many parents at my workplace and they all

tell me their kids love 3D.  They aren't as particular

about upconversions vs. native as we are.  

 

 



 

Reply
post #460 of 484
1/14/12 at 3:09pm
David it's the same with my kid. She loves the 3D experience. When The Lion King was re-released in theaters, we saw it in 2D because I wasn't a big fan of 3D or the converting of movies to 3D, but we went to Beauty and the Beast today because we love the movie AND it was in 3D on the big screen. My kid had a great time. I wasn't blown away by it and I do not know if I'll get it on Blu-ray since I already have the 2D version on Blu, but there is no denying she loved the experience.

I still will not support crappy post-conversions to 3D, but it's silly to lump what Disney has done with the some of the other conversions out there. After seeing the trailer for Finding Nemo in 3D, I can't wait to see it on the big screen. It was impressive.
Reply
post #461 of 484
1/14/12 at 3:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbaio View Post


Oh, boy.  I gave an opinion of what I feel & an example as theoretical proof of my point; not a direction on how to spend your cash.  Its no different than how any other person conducts their point of view during a debate.  Please read the post more carefully & you will see that I did not give such instruction on how to spend your money. 
 

 


I read your post very carefully and your meaning was quite clear to me.  With the following bold and condescending comments from you, it certainly seem like you were giving directions to others how not to spend their cash.  By the way, I will keep up the good work whether you like it or not.
 

 

Quote:

To all the people who have bought into this regurgitation of good movies converted to 3-D, let me ask you a question: if I traced a portrait from either Rembrandt or Da Vinci using the best paints & oils, framed it & put it in a gallery, would you pay the ticket price to see it? Would you buy it for a greater price than the original work? If this sounds outrageous, don't condemn the idea, because this is exactly what you are doing when you spend your money to see all these post converted 3-D movies. The tickets to see them are more expensive than what they were when originally released (other than inflation) & their blu rays which you purchase are also more expensive. You're buying counterfeit 3-D product. As a result of your purchases, more of these 1/2 ass hack products are on the way to theaters in due time. Keep up the good work.

 

 

Reply
post #462 of 484
1/14/12 at 3:44pm

Ok, so kids don't care about 3-D on the same plain we do.  What else is new? Why do you think 4 Superman movies (Christopher Reeve) were made? Because as long as a man with a red cape was flying around, kids wanted to see it.  The point being.....kids are easy; so of course they loved the new Disney films. Especially the chance to see them again with "the cool glasses," & in the theater; that's kid heaven.  If you leave it up to kids to decide if they had a good time at the theater after seeing the updated version of their favorite cartoons, its a win-win situation guaranteed. However, this is an adult forum.  Adults who can see the differences in the quality of 3-D & hopefully give an insightful opinion on they are watching.  Not to be cold here, but can we please continue to discuss 3-D from our points of view here?  After all, its the adults whose opinions are being discussed & physically written here, not the kids'. 

Reply
post #463 of 484
1/14/12 at 3:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Crawford View Post


I read your post very carefully and your meaning was quite clear to me.  With the following bold and condescending comments from you, it certainly seem like you were giving directions to others how not to spend their cash.  By the way, I will keep up the good work whether you like it or not.
 

 

 

 


At no instance did I instruct you or anyone on how to spend your cash.  You interpreted my post incorrectly.  Period. Over. Let's move on. 
 

 

Reply
post #464 of 484
1/14/12 at 4:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbaio View Post

Not to be cold here, but can we please continue to discuss 3-D from our points of view here?  After all, its the adults whose opinions are being discussed & physically written here, not the kids'. 

Do you even have kids? I have kids, and they definitely have an impact on what gets screened in our home theater. More to the point, having kids plays into my decision-making process about what we see in the theater and at home. Even more to the point, being a parent invariably colors my perspective. I'm not going to filter my comments because you prefer a child-free "adults only" perspective.

Here's an idea ---- stop trying to direct the conversation. And maybe show a bit of respect to the admins while you're at it.
Reply
post #465 of 484
1/14/12 at 4:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Beam View Post


Do you even have kids? I have kids, and they definitely have an impact on what gets screened in our home theater. More to the point, having kids plays into my decision-making process about what we see in the theater and at home. Even more to the point, being a parent invariably colors my perspective. I'm not going to filter my comments because you prefer a child-free "adults only" perspective.
Here's an idea ---- stop trying to direct the conversation. And maybe show a bit of respect to the admins while you're at it.



LOL!!!  Oh my God!  Talk about turning a fire cracker into an atom bomb.  Dude, my point was leaving things up to kids is an easy thing to predict.  Its a safe bet that kids love wearing the 3-D glasses.  As far as discussion about 3-D, getting the opinions from adults is not so predictable & they can offer something of more value than a kid can.  I hope you can understand that.  I'm not directing the conversation, however, I clearly have given it a jump start.  I hope we can discuss/debate here without people getting bent out of shape or misinterpreting each other's opinions.....you know, like responsible adults. 

 

Reply
post #466 of 484
1/15/12 at 4:53am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Crawford View Post



Watch yourself and consider that a warning.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Crawdaddy

 



LOL.  I like how, at 3:00 am, you yanked my reply to your "warning," so that no one here could see it.  Slick.  Keep up the good work. 

 

Reply
post #467 of 484
1/15/12 at 5:56am
^ The funniest and, at the same time, saddest part is that if you get banned, you're going to tell yourself that everyone was against you and that you did nothing wrong. The people here are generally cool and are at least willing to listen to opinions that they don't agree with but when you act rude, people are going to respond in kind.
Reply
post #468 of 484
1/15/12 at 6:15am

While admittedly he has livened up this thread this young guy, I'm guessing early to mid teens? has been asking for it. He was taunting Robert in the removed post.

 

For myself of the few films I saw in 3-D I couldn't tell the difference between converted and real 3-D. Was the Immortals converted? It wasn't great 3-D and when I removed the glasses during the film it was like the sun came out. I was wearing sunglasses in the cinema, thats how it felt. :)

Reply
post #469 of 484
1/15/12 at 6:21am

Hey guys, Hugo filmed in 3-D is one of the best films of 2011 and my choice for Best Picture is up for preorder at Amazon for 27.99 which is the 3-Disc set.  The 2-Disc set is 21.99, but I'm not sure it's in 3-D.

 

A great film shot in 3-D by Scorsese and is his usage of 3-D scenes was impeccable in my opinion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Crawdaddy

Reply
post #470 of 484
1/15/12 at 6:25am

The Golden Globes tonight it'll be interesting to see how well Hugo does, could it be the first 3-D movie to win big at the Oscars or will a "silent movie" be the big winner?

Reply
post #471 of 484
1/15/12 at 7:22am
I think Moneyball will win the Golden Globe (with its mega famous star and feel good sports story- plus, it's a very good movie) but Hugo is really good as well. Anyone who hasn't seen Hugo yet should go check it out in 3-D if it's still playing near them.
Reply
post #472 of 484
1/15/12 at 8:40am
With respect to the new Disney 3D releases (Lion King and Beauty and the Beast) vs the Pixar ones (Toy Story, Finding Nemo, etc). I thought that I'd read somewhere that for the Pixar ones, they were going back to the original files and "reshooting" the movie as 3D. If that's the case, shouldn't these be categorized as "real" 3D as opposed to "upconverted" 3D?
Reply
post #473 of 484
1/15/12 at 8:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Angell View Post

With all the conversation regarding post and native 3D movies, I'm wondering if the question isn't moot when it comes to the Toy Story movies. When TS1 was produced, Pixar had in their computers 3D models of each character and probably of much of the backgrounds. Wouldn't the process of converting TS1 to 3D consist of rendering 2 different angles for each frame of film? Something Pixar could "natively" do using their original 3D models.
It would appear that there would be only two things lacking: 1) the film wouldn't have originally be designed for 3D; and 2) Perhaps there would be objects, particularly backgrounds, for which they wouldn't have 3D models.
In any case, I would expect the TS movies to quite good in home 3D.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexF View Post

With respect to the new Disney 3D releases (Lion King and Beauty and the Beast) vs the Pixar ones (Toy Story, Finding Nemo, etc). I thought that I'd read somewhere that for the Pixar ones, they were going back to the original files and "reshooting" the movie as 3D. If that's the case, shouldn't these be categorized as "real" 3D as opposed to "upconverted" 3D?

This is an idea I mentioned earlier in the thread.
Reply
post #474 of 484
1/18/12 at 7:17pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Angell View Post

This is an idea I mentioned earlier in the thread.
I'm relatively certain that I say a similar comment elsewhere though. Might be wrong though.
Reply
post #475 of 484
2/9/12 at 12:49pm
No biggee.
Reply
post #476 of 484
3/5/12 at 2:26pm
Thread Starter 

Updated to add HUGO

Reply
post #477 of 484
3/6/12 at 9:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald Epstein View Post

Updated to add HUGO

Worthy addition. While I haven't seen anywhere near the number of 3D films that you have and haven't been able to few Avatar anywhere other than on a store display, Hugo is the best use of 3D that I have seen.
Reply
post #478 of 484
4/23/12 at 5:07pm
Thread Starter 

Updated the list.  Expanded to top 16 as I did not want to remove anything that was already listed.

 

All worthy 3D purchases, for certain.

Reply
post #479 of 484
5/14/12 at 2:05am
Ron, I just obtained the R2 3D Blu Ray of "A Turtles Tale". My neice and nephew watched it with me on Mothers Day. The oohs and aahs never stopped throughout the movie! Great "in your face" moments and amazing depth. Hardly any ghosting worth mentioning on my Panny 3000 and 120" screen. This is a film that both kids and adults would enjoy. It's my new 3D demo disc. I wonder why it hasn't been released yet in R1?

600
Reply
post #480 of 484
5/14/12 at 5:25am
Thread Starter 

Reed,

 

I have to get this.  I have heard nothing but incredible things

about this 3D Blu-ray release.  Let me look over on Amazon UK

to see how much it costs.


Thanks for reminding me about this Blu-ray.

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: 3D Blu-ray