Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Movies' started by ThomasC, Feb 3, 2004.
Click here for the full story.
Well, if he has to inflict another one of these on us, at least distribute it in the polarized (clear glasses) format and avoid the red/cyan anaglyph junk this time!
It can easily be done as we had wide releases of dozens and dozens of 3-D movies in polarized format since 1952. As recently as the early 80s, we had 20+ 3-D films released widely, many on over 1000 screens at once. it isn't impossible.
Since there are several 3-D projects in the works (Cameron's film, House of Wax remake) now is the time to order the silver screens and projection lenses!
No more anaglyph! Yuck!
Hey, if he releases it in polarized, we're ready. Hell, he should release it dual-strip, we're now equipped for it!
3 DAYS OF 3-D at the Lafayette Theatre
In an ironic twist, Rodriguez supplied Sensio 3D L/R untampered clips of Spy Kids 3-D, who displayed it at the 2004 CES show using their side by side / shutterglasses system. The kicker is the 3-D left / right cancellation and color fidelity was better than when it was shown in theaters in 3-D, and certainly better than the upcoming anaglyph 3-D DVD can ever offer.
In short.. I agree with Steve. 'Crap-a-glyph' red/blue movies were great for the 1930's, but there are better alternatives for 21st century 3-D cinema and for 3-D home use as well.
There's no way in hell I can sit through a whole movie in anaglyph.
Yet if he releases it polarized, very few theaters will show it.
As I said, that doesn't have to be the case.
The success of the poorly made western COMIN AT YA! in 1981 made the studios commit to a few 3-D projects, which in turn gave theatres a reason to install the silver screens. There was no problem with wide releases of polarized 3-D twenty years ago, so they can easily do it again with a little advance warning.
Sort of the classic chicken and egg situation...no one wants to install the screens unless they know there are some 3-D films coming and no one wants to green light the films unless they can get distribution.
James Cameron is trying for 1000 screens for his 3-D feature. That is a reasonable number. They could do a concurrent IMAX 3-D release which would add a few dozen more.
If we could get JAWS 3-D, FRIDAY THE 13TH PART 3, SPACEHUNTER, AMITYVILLE 3-D and others on 1000 screens in polarized 3-D then, it can surely be done now with people like James Cameron behind it.
If all they will consider is anaglyph, then simply shoot these films flat !
I'm thrilled to hear this because because I absolutely love 3D. Done properly it is fantastic. "Properly" is the operative word, though. It isn't as easy as it seems. When "Comin' At Ya" came out, many theatres still had houses with silver screens. Most have gone to matte now for better viewing from the sides.
They won't install silver screen's for one film. Beyond the screen are other complications. The lamps need to be brighter for 3D - or you have to reduce the size of the picture for the effects to work right. Adding the polarizing 3D lense set is another expense they probably won't do for one film - and then setting the convergence isn't exactly easy.
None of it is particularly difficult, but it isn't easy either. I am involved in one of the very few active 3D venues in the US and it definitely takes a fair amount of knowledge and the strong willingness to make it right.
As discussed in another thread, the quality of presentations seems to have gone downhill and many theaters don't have true projectionists running their booths.
If Rodriguez can overcome these hurdles, then WAHOOO! Bring it on. I hope he can.
Peter- Excellent Project ! I'll email you direct - maybe make a road trip!
No doubt about it, 3-D movies are much more complicated to project than ordinary flat films are, and many theatres can't even get that right these days!
It is being reported in various press today that they've decided to shoot HOUSE OF WAX (2004) flat after all.
Likely they decided it was over their heads to shoot this in 3-D, and they probably also came to the conclusion it would be too hard to do a good quality 3-D release on a wide basis. At the very least, I give them credit for opting against using the red/cyan anaglyph route.
Considering the script details I read, I don't think it is going to be a good film and would likely have done further harm to the reputation of the process anyway. It may be a good thing for 3-D fans that this film will be shot flat!
I absolutely fell in love with the first two Spy Kids films. The third let me down so hard I could cry. The entire film was based on pandering to the 3D effects. The effects (like and SFX) should be used to enhance the story (as was the cas in the first two films). I wish he would just leave the 3D world alone and make good films again.
I was about to post and make the exact same comment, but Chad got in ahead of me.
When I heard SK3 was to be in 3D, I was excited, because the first two films were good films. Sadly, the third film was a nonsense film, with an incoherent poorly-considered plot that served simply as an excuse to throw stuff at you. And the Red/Blue glasses were awful as well.
I have zero interest in this project until I hear word that it's actually good.