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

[Tino]

I think Passengers got a 3D release mainly because it's a sci fi film starring two of Hollywoods biggest stars.

Making $300 million worldwide I'm sure helped.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I think Passengers got a 3D release mainly because it's a sci fi film starring two of Hollywoods biggest stars.

Making $300 million worldwide I'm sure helped.

Could be. Or it simply could have been the at the end of a pipeline which is now coming to a close. I don't want it to be that, but when two major studios end up repeating the same pattern at the same time, it's worrisome. It's hard not to see it as a bad omen.

You know I love 3D and want it to stick around. And as a strong believer in watching movies as the filmmakers intended, I genuinely don't know what I'm going to do if/when 3D isn't available at home. I know that when I watched the 2D version of The Force Awakens, the movie just didn't work for me on any level - I had seen it theatrically in 3D many times, and watching it at 2D at home, I could never shake the feeling that something was missing. It didn't look right, it didn't feel right. It was like watching a pan and scan version of a movie that you know so well you can just see what's been chopped off. I don't want to have that experience again. So my choices may be between seeing movies in 2D only in the first place, so I don't experience that feeling of something missing when watching the 2D disc, or I might just see 3D movies in theaters in 3D, and resign myself to never seeing them again.

 

[Paul Hillenbrand]

It probably didn't help that any Sony executive browsing a forum like this would see countless posts with comments about how readers were opting to watch the UHD disc in the set over the 3D disc, even if they were 3D capable and had previously been big 3D fans.

My recent experiences have been the reading of more people opting for the 3D disc version than the UHD disc, but I tend to mostly read forums related to 3D capability.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

My recent experiences have been the reading of more people opting for the 3D disc version than the UHD disc, but I tend to mostly read forums related to 3D capability.

I'd hope that was true overall, but anecdotally from people at this forum, I'm not sure if it's true. Without wanting to single anyone out, I was surprised to see several longtime members of this forum who in the past had been strict OAR proponents talking about how the 4K disc looked better to them than the 3D one, and though they didn't expect to feel that way beforehand, that was their reaction to seeing both versions.

There is no version of any technology that would make me more interested in watching a 2D version of a 3D movie. I don't care if there's extra resolution or if the color reproduction is slightly more expansive. To me, that's like playing a movie in surround sound through a single mono speaker. You could buy the biggest and best mono speaker in the world, that could technically be of a higher quality than each individual speaker in a 5.1 setup, but you're still missing some of the audio. And at least with surround sound, if you play back a surround track in mono, all of the audio gets collapsed into that one speaker. If you watch a 3D movie in 2D, 50% of the picture information is just thrown away. It's not present on the screen and there's no way to get it back.

Without wanting to criticize anyone who's enjoying the UHD format, it does seem that many of the reviews and comments I'm reading boil down to people enjoying that UHD discs show off what their new UHD TV can do - rather than it being about reproducing the filmmaker intentions accurately. And if that's what the mass audience wants, "nevermind what the movie was supposed to look like, just make my TV look cool!", then we're going to have much larger problems in the years ahead.

 

[Paul Hillenbrand]

Just finished reading about the Sony 4K RGB Laser Projector at CinemaCon.
4K 3D has to start somewhere, which is at the professional/commercial cinema end of the industry.

Quoting the article:
"According to Mark Clowes, Sony’s Product Manager for Professional Digital Cinema in Europe, “There are multiple advantages of this next-generation evolutionary step forward with respect to projector technology. Firstly, it means that the projector will offer the benefits of a single assembly, but with all the benefits and more compared with 6P. Additionally, the projector outputs two native 4K HDR images simultaneously through the same lens. This produces a more natural and realistic-looking image in 2D and 3D. But with 3D, the benefits are even greater. Because it’s not triple-flash-type 3D, we have eliminated the undesirable artifacts that occur with that technology.”

 

[Colin Jacobson]

I would say Turtles underperformed, not bombed.

Total Lifetime Grosses
Domestic: $82,051,601 33.4%
+ Foreign: $163,572,247 66.6%
= Worldwide: $245,623,848

On a $115 million budget.

"XXX" 2017:

Domestic: $44,898,413 13.0%
+ Foreign: $301,404,091 87.0%
= Worldwide: $346,302,504

On an $85 million budget.

 

[Panman40]

Just finished reading about the Sony 4K RGB Laser Projector at CinemaCon.
4K 3D has to start somewhere, which is at the professional/commercial cinema end of the industry.

Quoting the article:
"According to Mark Clowes, Sony’s Product Manager for Professional Digital Cinema in Europe, “There are multiple advantages of this next-generation evolutionary step forward with respect to projector technology. Firstly, it means that the projector will offer the benefits of a single assembly, but with all the benefits and more compared with 6P. Additionally, the projector outputs two native 4K HDR images simultaneously through the same lens. This produces a more natural and realistic-looking image in 2D and 3D. But with 3D, the benefits are even greater. Because it’s not triple-flash-type 3D, we have eliminated the undesirable artifacts that occur with that technology.”

I read that myself earlier on, I have just enough room on my dining table to accommodate that beast, I'm not sure on the throw factor for my 106" screen though..

 

[John Sparks]

Just ordered my KONG: SKULL ISLAND from Best Buy for $43.50. A lot of money, yes, to get it in 3D...NO!.

There goes my budget for the Universal Monsters BDs.

 

[Bob Cashill]

That'll drop down in price. It always does.

 

[Paul Hillenbrand]

Just ordered my KONG: SKULL ISLAND from Best Buy for $43.50. A lot of money, yes, to get it in 3D...NO!..

Kong: Skull Island 3D $23.72 to the U.S. from the United Kingdom.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

In my opinion, it doesn't make sense to preorder from Best Buy or Target since neither orders a pre-order price guarantee. They also don't guarantee release date delivery. Given those factors, if you're going to order from them, I think it makes more sense to wait until the release week to take advantage of the inevitable sale pricing.

 

[Panman40]

Kong: Skull Island 3D $23.72 to the U.S. from the United Kingdom.

View attachment 37328

That's cheaper than I can buy it from Amazon in the UK

 

[Bob Cashill]

Amazon UK is a good friend of ours here across the pond.

 

[3D Projectionist]

Seen many video formats come and go from Sony's open reel low density video in the 60's, LD, Beta, Super VHS but 3D is still around thankfully. We project 3D onto a large screen rather than a TV to get the bigger picture as it were, its been really amazing to see the original classic 3D films of the 50's become available which I certainly never thought would happen in my lifetime and huge applause to those who make it all happen for us to run at home. Wonderful times for vintage 3D fans.

 

[Edwin-S]

I'll opt for the 3D version if a film I want was released in the theater that way. I won't reward a studio that is following a policy of putting out separate 3D and a 4K versions, expecting that a collector will double dip for both. The 4K can sit on the shelf in that event.

 

[Robert Crawford]

I'll opt for the 3D version if a film I want was released in the theater that way. I won't reward a studio that is following a policy of putting out separate 3D and a 4K versions, expecting that a collector will double dip for both. The 4K can sit on the shelf in that event.

It depends on the 3-D presentation to me and whether the disc is derived from 4K elements. Not all 3-D nor 4K/UHD presentations are created equal. Some are better than others.

 

[Edwin-S]

It depends on the 3-D presentation to me and whether the disc is derived from 4K elements. Not all 3-D nor 4K/UHD presentations are created equal. Some are better than others.

That is certainly another way to approach it. The problem, in my case, is that I would have to buy both in order to see which I prefer and I just will not give a studio money twice for a film that has two separate releases at the same time. I might be more inclined to buy the 4K version if I knew ahead of time that it was taken from a true 4K element; however, there again I have no way of telling which might be the preferred version unless I can watch both.

 

[Panman40]

Just finished watching fantastic beasts, I thought the 3D was excellent, it reminded me of the way Hugo was done. My only gripes were probably down to my display the Epson tw9300 projector, I've thought this for a while now that maybe just maybe it's not Full 3D HD... a lot of scenes appeared quite soft and almost SD, I take it this is not the norm for this 3D blu ?.

Anyway we really enjoyed it

 

[John Sparks]

Just purchased THE MAD MAGICIAN from Screen Archives before it goes out of print.

 

[Panman40]

Disneys Moana arrived yesterday, will be the weekend before its watched though.