-

Jump to content



Sign up for a free account!

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and you won't get the popup ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo

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

Warner

  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 of 10 Ronald Epstein

Ronald Epstein

    Studio Mogul

  • 39,344 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 1997

Posted March 27 2014 - 10:20 AM

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.
 

 


Ronald J Epstein
Home Theater Forum co-owner

 

gallery_269895_23_10043.jpg Click Here for the latest/hottest Blu-ray Preorders gallery_269895_23_1316.jpg Click Here for our complete Blu-ray review archive

gallery_269895_23_773.jpg Click Here for our complete 3D Blu-ray review archive gallery_269895_23_992.jpgClick Here for our complete DVD review archive

gallery_269895_23_7246.jpg Click Here for Blu-Ray Preorder Release Schedule gallery_269895_23_3120.jpg Click Here for forum posting rules and regulations


#2 of 10 Ronald Epstein

Ronald Epstein

    Studio Mogul

  • 39,344 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 1997

Posted March 27 2014 - 10:22 AM

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.


Ronald J Epstein
Home Theater Forum co-owner

 

gallery_269895_23_10043.jpg Click Here for the latest/hottest Blu-ray Preorders gallery_269895_23_1316.jpg Click Here for our complete Blu-ray review archive

gallery_269895_23_773.jpg Click Here for our complete 3D Blu-ray review archive gallery_269895_23_992.jpgClick Here for our complete DVD review archive

gallery_269895_23_7246.jpg Click Here for Blu-Ray Preorder Release Schedule gallery_269895_23_3120.jpg Click Here for forum posting rules and regulations


#3 of 10 Steve Tannehill

Steve Tannehill

    Producer

  • 5,466 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 06 1997
  • Real Name:Steve Tannehill
  • LocationDFW

Posted March 27 2014 - 10:50 AM

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 of 10 Steve Tannehill

Steve Tannehill

    Producer

  • 5,466 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 06 1997
  • Real Name:Steve Tannehill
  • LocationDFW

Posted March 27 2014 - 10:52 AM

By the way, some of the 3D is good, but that was probably mostly CGI.

#5 of 10 Ronald Epstein

Ronald Epstein

    Studio Mogul

  • 39,344 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 03 1997

Posted March 27 2014 - 10:52 AM

Thanks, Steve.

 

That's the story I must have read. 

 

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


Ronald J Epstein
Home Theater Forum co-owner

 

gallery_269895_23_10043.jpg Click Here for the latest/hottest Blu-ray Preorders gallery_269895_23_1316.jpg Click Here for our complete Blu-ray review archive

gallery_269895_23_773.jpg Click Here for our complete 3D Blu-ray review archive gallery_269895_23_992.jpgClick Here for our complete DVD review archive

gallery_269895_23_7246.jpg Click Here for Blu-Ray Preorder Release Schedule gallery_269895_23_3120.jpg Click Here for forum posting rules and regulations


#6 of 10 Josh Steinberg

Josh Steinberg

    Screenwriter

  • 2,415 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 10 2003
  • Real Name:Josh Steinberg

Posted March 27 2014 - 11:10 AM

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 of 10 FoxyMulder

FoxyMulder

    映画ファン

  • 4,579 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 14 2009
  • Real Name:Malcolm
  • LocationScotland

Posted March 27 2014 - 11:23 AM

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.


     :Fun Movie Quotes:

"A good body with a dull brain is as cheap as life itself"   

"Maybe it's a sheep dog... let's keep going" 

"Please doctor, I've got to ask this. It sounds like, well, just as though you're describing some form of super carrot"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 


#8 of 10 Matt Hough

Matt Hough

    Executive Producer

  • 10,897 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 24 2006
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted March 27 2014 - 12:33 PM

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 of 10 Josh Steinberg

Josh Steinberg

    Screenwriter

  • 2,415 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 10 2003
  • Real Name:Josh Steinberg

Posted March 27 2014 - 05:10 PM

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.

 

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 of 10 Chuck Anstey

Chuck Anstey

    Screenwriter

  • 1,550 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 10 1998
  • Real Name:Chuck Anstey

Posted March 28 2014 - 06:18 AM

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.







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Warner

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users