Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie Musings >> RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion Page: <<   < prev  46 47 [48] 49 50   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 12/12/2013 6:15:07 PM   
MonsterCat


Posts: 7934
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire
quote:

ORIGINAL: DONOVAN KURTWOOD

But i hardly ever post in this thread and when i do, you're telling me to go elsewhere LOL. A friendly bunch you lot . All i see in this thread is constant endless negativity, you moan and moan and moan and then you moan some more and whine and complain. Don't you ever get tired of being negative?



To be honest, I could ask you if you ever get tired of being relentlessly positive and hyperbolic where 3D is concerned but I don't because that's your view, I respect it and you're absolutely entitled to it. Not everybody thinks that 3D is the best thing to happen to the world since Jesus, so stop getting in a flap about it and deal with it.

< Message edited by MonsterCat -- 13/12/2013 1:41:04 AM >


_____________________________

"I am a writer, a doctor, a nuclear physicist and a theoretical philosopher. But above all, I am a man, a hopelessly inquisitive man, just like you."

Films watched in 2013

(in reply to DONOVAN KURTWOOD)
Post #: 1411
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 12/12/2013 6:33:13 PM   
sanchia


Posts: 18328
Joined: 3/1/2006
From: Norwich
quote:

ORIGINAL: DONOVAN KURTWOOD


quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

To be honest, I'm kinda straining to see where I might have insulted you or anyone on this thread. When you start playing the imagined insult card that's a sure sign that you don't how to argue your position properly.

Also, this a message board for people to air their views both negative and positive. It's unrealistic to expect people to say only good things about 3D because it's a highly divisive and subjective issue. I mean, if you can't handle anyone being nasty about your precious 3D maybe you should take your own advice and go somewhere else on the forum.

Not everything about 3D is awesome and mind-blowing, and the other members reserve the right to air those perfectly understandable and intelligently explained grievances in this forum. I really don't give a monkeys if you don't like it.


But i hardly ever post in this thread and when i do, you're telling me to go elsewhere LOL. A friendly bunch you lot . All i see in this thread is constant endless negativity, you moan and moan and moan and then you moan some more and whine and complain. Don't you ever get tired of being negative?

I kind of feel like people have made their points but just can't let go and have to keep repeating themselves over and over. Yes we get it, you hate 3D! In that case just go off and find something you do enjoy! Anyway, i've said my peace, the content of this thread is pretty samey and there's only so much complaining one can put up with so i'll leave you all to it.


The thing is I don't hate 3D, I can't watch it personally without feeling ill but I do not hate it and can see that people can enjoy it. I hate the lack of choice to watch a film in 3D or to 2D with the present choice being to not watch it at all which I think is something which most people feel. When I have put up with the discomfort caused by 3D (not because I do not know how to watch it but because I am physically unable to watch it without symptoms as apparently are more then 50% of the population if the figures are correct) the screenings are half empty including an IMAX showing of Iron Man 3 shortly after release where I was the only person in the screen. When I have managed to watch a 2D showing every time the screen is packed, which may be because it is always in the broom closet screen but also because they seem more popular. I don't see why this trend is not recognised by the cinemas who are putting off their customers?


< Message edited by sanchia -- 12/12/2013 6:35:12 PM >


_____________________________

Nothing to see here.



(in reply to DONOVAN KURTWOOD)
Post #: 1412
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 12/12/2013 8:02:02 PM   
Cool Breeze


Posts: 2361
Joined: 9/11/2011
From: The Internet
quote:

ORIGINAL: DONOVAN KURTWOOD


quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

To be honest, I'm kinda straining to see where I might have insulted you or anyone on this thread. When you start playing the imagined insult card that's a sure sign that you don't how to argue your position properly.

Also, this a message board for people to air their views both negative and positive. It's unrealistic to expect people to say only good things about 3D because it's a highly divisive and subjective issue. I mean, if you can't handle anyone being nasty about your precious 3D maybe you should take your own advice and go somewhere else on the forum.

Not everything about 3D is awesome and mind-blowing, and the other members reserve the right to air those perfectly understandable and intelligently explained grievances in this forum. I really don't give a monkeys if you don't like it.


But i hardly ever post in this thread and when i do, you're telling me to go elsewhere LOL. A friendly bunch you lot . All i see in this thread is constant endless negativity, you moan and moan and moan and then you moan some more and whine and complain. Don't you ever get tired of being negative?

I kind of feel like people have made their points but just can't let go and have to keep repeating themselves over and over. Yes we get it, you hate 3D! In that case just go off and find something you do enjoy! Anyway, i've said my peace, the content of this thread is pretty samey and there's only so much complaining one can put up with so i'll leave you all to it.


Perhaps its because the majority of people here think that 3D is a pointless money grabbing gimmick and that you are in the minority in thinking that '' 3D BLU RAY IS THE FUTURE! ''?

Thats not being consistently negative for the sake of it.It means that the majority of people here disagree with your opinion.Given your taste in films is that really surprising?

< Message edited by Cool Breeze -- 12/12/2013 8:05:34 PM >


_____________________________

'' Iv played Oskar Schindler, Michael Collins, Rob Roy Mcgregor, even ZEUS for gods sake! No one is going to believe me to be a green grocer! ''

(in reply to DONOVAN KURTWOOD)
Post #: 1413
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 12/12/2013 8:09:20 PM   
horribleives

 

Posts: 5110
Joined: 12/6/2009
From: The North

quote:

ORIGINAL: DONOVAN KURTWOOD


quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

To be honest, I'm kinda straining to see where I might have insulted you or anyone on this thread. When you start playing the imagined insult card that's a sure sign that you don't how to argue your position properly.

Also, this a message board for people to air their views both negative and positive. It's unrealistic to expect people to say only good things about 3D because it's a highly divisive and subjective issue. I mean, if you can't handle anyone being nasty about your precious 3D maybe you should take your own advice and go somewhere else on the forum.

Not everything about 3D is awesome and mind-blowing, and the other members reserve the right to air those perfectly understandable and intelligently explained grievances in this forum. I really don't give a monkeys if you don't like it.


But i hardly ever post in this thread and when i do, you're telling me to go elsewhere LOL. A friendly bunch you lot . All i see in this thread is constant endless negativity, you moan and moan and moan and then you moan some more and whine and complain. Don't you ever get tired of being negative?

I kind of feel like people have made their points but just can't let go and have to keep repeating themselves over and over. Yes we get it, you hate 3D! In that case just go off and find something you do enjoy! Anyway, i've said my peace, the content of this thread is pretty samey and there's only so much complaining one can put up with so i'll leave you all to it.


I think film fans being denied the opportunity to see a film they way they want to see it (y'know, like we did for decades before Cameron split the atom with his sci-fi snoozefest) is more than enough reason to 'moan' and 'complain'.
For the record: I don't hate 3D. I've enjoyed several films in 3D. What I and others hate is the lack of 2D screenings. If you can't empathise with that because you personally have the time and resources to travel 30 miles to a cinema then yes, you're right, it's pointless debating this further.


_____________________________

www.hollywoodunbound.co.uk - some nonsense about alien film directors and musclebound man-children.

(in reply to DONOVAN KURTWOOD)
Post #: 1414
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 10:44:45 AM   
NCC1701A


Posts: 4487
Joined: 12/3/2011
From: Space Dock

Wow so much negativity if you are so unhappy about the lack of 2D screening talk to the cinema manager about it. I get that people hate 3D but there are some people who enjoy it and should not be mocked for it. I like 3D its a fun way to watch films but this thread is just full of people saying the same thing over and over again.

_____________________________

Trench: I'll be back.

Church: You've been back enough. I'll be back.

[leaves]

Trench: Yippee-ki-yay.


The Expendables 2 (2012)

(in reply to horribleives)
Post #: 1415
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 11:02:52 AM   
DancingClown


Posts: 4262
Joined: 8/1/2006
From: The Lot
quote:

ORIGINAL: NCC1701A


Wow so much negativity if you are so unhappy about the lack of 2D screening talk to the cinema manager about it.


Yeah, problem solved...

quote:

I get that people hate 3D but there are some people who enjoy it and should not be mocked for it. I like 3D its a fun way to watch films but this thread is just full of people saying the same thing over and over again.


Again...it's not about hating 3D. Many people here are just indifferent. Like me, they enjoy it occasionally, but they resent the cynical and insidious ways that distributors and cinema-chains are foisting it upon us. Repetition of opinion tends to occur on a forum with many different members, and in this case it's mainly because those who advocate it are failing to acknowledge or comprehend why others are having problems, be they physical or financial. You love 3D? Good for you. Not everyone does, and they have very good reasons for not loving it, and when those reasons are placing a barrier against their pursuit of what they love to do - i.e watching films because that's their passion - they have every right to vocalise that anger. This annoys you? Tough shit. Go to a more pro-3D thread, I'm sure there are plenty out there.


< Message edited by DancingClown -- 13/12/2013 11:04:12 AM >


_____________________________

Astronomic Tune Boy

'The town knew darkness, and darkness was enough.'

"Storm just bleeewwww me away..."

(in reply to NCC1701A)
Post #: 1416
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 11:17:30 AM   
shool


Posts: 10162
Joined: 24/3/2006
From: In The Pipe, Five by Five.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NCC1701A


Wow so much negativity if you are so unhappy about the lack of 2D screening talk to the cinema manager about it. I get that people hate 3D but there are some people who enjoy it and should not be mocked for it. I like 3D its a fun way to watch films but this thread is just full of people saying the same thing over and over again.




_____________________________

Invisio Text for Spoilers
[ color=#F1F1F1 ] Spoiler text [ /color ] , remove spaces between square brackets

"No one knows what it means, but it's provocative... It gets the people going!"

(in reply to NCC1701A)
Post #: 1417
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 11:20:18 AM   
NCC1701A


Posts: 4487
Joined: 12/3/2011
From: Space Dock

quote:

ORIGINAL: shool


quote:

ORIGINAL: NCC1701A


Wow so much negativity if you are so unhappy about the lack of 2D screening talk to the cinema manager about it. I get that people hate 3D but there are some people who enjoy it and should not be mocked for it. I like 3D its a fun way to watch films but this thread is just full of people saying the same thing over and over again.





In your opinion.

_____________________________

Trench: I'll be back.

Church: You've been back enough. I'll be back.

[leaves]

Trench: Yippee-ki-yay.


The Expendables 2 (2012)

(in reply to shool)
Post #: 1418
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 11:36:16 AM   
shool


Posts: 10162
Joined: 24/3/2006
From: In The Pipe, Five by Five.
Think you misunderstand. I was posting that with regards to the discussion as a whole. Which is very much down to subjective opinion.

My view on 3D is that on certain flagship releases it is great like Gravity, Avatar etc. But in a lot of cases is unnecessary.
I will usually avoid a 3D showing unless reviews or word of mouth say that the 3D really adds to the experience. In my experience at the Cinema I go to (Vue cinema, Cheshire Oaks) there is always options for both 3D and 2D. I've never felt forced one way or the other.

_____________________________

Invisio Text for Spoilers
[ color=#F1F1F1 ] Spoiler text [ /color ] , remove spaces between square brackets

"No one knows what it means, but it's provocative... It gets the people going!"

(in reply to NCC1701A)
Post #: 1419
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 11:37:43 AM   
NCC1701A


Posts: 4487
Joined: 12/3/2011
From: Space Dock
quote:

ORIGINAL: DancingClown

quote:

ORIGINAL: NCC1701A


Wow so much negativity if you are so unhappy about the lack of 2D screening talk to the cinema manager about it.


Yeah, problem solved...




quote:

I get that people hate 3D but there are some people who enjoy it and should not be mocked for it. I like 3D its a fun way to watch films but this thread is just full of people saying the same thing over and over again.


Again...it's not about hating 3D. Many people here are just indifferent. Like me, they enjoy it occasionally, but they resent the cynical and insidious ways that distributors and cinema-chains are foisting it upon us. Repetition of opinion tends to occur on a forum with many different members, and in this case it's mainly because those who advocate it are failing to acknowledge or comprehend why others are having problems, be they physical or financial. You love 3D? Good for you. Not everyone does, and they have very good reasons for not loving it, and when those reasons are placing a barrier against their pursuit of what they love to do - i.e watching films because that's their passion - they have every right to vocalise that anger. This annoys you? Tough shit. Go to a more pro-3D thread, I'm sure there are plenty out there.



I get that people have problems watching 3D that I have not problems with. What pissess me off is people going on and on about how it is a gimmick and that in there world nobady wants it, like they speak for the whole world. And has for cinema-chains foisting 3D on you they have to make money some how do you want they to go out of bussiness ?.film is a big passion for me as well. And so while people hate 3D there are people who love 3D. Film on a whole is subjective no one is right and no one is wrong.



< Message edited by NCC1701A -- 13/12/2013 11:38:41 AM >


_____________________________

Trench: I'll be back.

Church: You've been back enough. I'll be back.

[leaves]

Trench: Yippee-ki-yay.


The Expendables 2 (2012)

(in reply to DancingClown)
Post #: 1420
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 11:42:41 AM   
NCC1701A


Posts: 4487
Joined: 12/3/2011
From: Space Dock

quote:

ORIGINAL: shool

Think you misunderstand. I was posting that with regards to the discussion as a whole. Which is very much down to subjective opinion.

My view on 3D is that on certain flagship releases it is great like Gravity, Avatar etc. But in a lot of cases is unnecessary.
I will usually avoid a 3D showing unless reviews or word of mouth say that the 3D really adds to the experience. In my experience at the Cinema I go to (Vue cinema, Cheshire Oaks) there is always options for both 3D and 2D. I've never felt forced one way or the other.



Sorry about the misunderstanding.

_____________________________

Trench: I'll be back.

Church: You've been back enough. I'll be back.

[leaves]

Trench: Yippee-ki-yay.


The Expendables 2 (2012)

(in reply to shool)
Post #: 1421
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 1:07:40 PM   
superdan


Posts: 8307
Joined: 31/7/2008

quote:

ORIGINAL: NCC1701A
I get that people have problems watching 3D that I have not problems with. What pissess me off is people going on and on about how it is a gimmick and that in there world nobady wants it, like they speak for the whole world.


And yet, if everyone here was in agreement with you I doubt you'd have the same criticism. If people didn't express their opinions (or 'go on and on about it') then this would be a bloody boring thread. There is nothing that says all comment must be positive. It's also worth bearing in mind that for all you (and others) think this thread is full of people saying the same thing, well, that's exactly what you do too. You are as bad. People say "3D is crap/a gimmick/etc", and you say "I think it's great, if you don't like it watch something else etc". It's a forum mobius strip. The Star Wars thread suffers the same affliction.

quote:


And has for cinema-chains foisting 3D on you they have to make money some how do you want they to go out of bussiness ?.film is a big passion for me as well. And so while people hate 3D there are people who love 3D. Film on a whole is subjective no one is right and no one is wrong.


Cinema chains largely do what distributors tell them to do, and the distributors will be telling them to put more 3D showings on (since they gobble up most of the inflated ticket revenue). Cinemas themselves will be seeing a relatively minimal benefit from 3D. No one is right or wrong on the merits of 3D as a technology, however there most definitely is an argument to be made that it is being forced onto the customer.

(in reply to NCC1701A)
Post #: 1422
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 1:12:40 PM   
Keyser Sozzled


Posts: 6001
Joined: 1/10/2006
From: Dublin
I've been following this thread with interest and thought I might as well throw my two cents in...

Personally if a film is showing I will always select the 2D option. I am not saying all 3D is bad, it's clearly not. However my preference is to see it in 2D. I prefer the way it looks, the way it feels. I also like the fact that it is not as expensive as 3D.

I don't appreciate anyone saying that the fact I don't enjoy 3D is basically my fault. Reminds me of Apple coming out and saying calls were dropping on the iPhone 4s because customers were "holding it wrong".I also don't appreciate having it forced down my throat in terms of the listings, it is becoming increasingly difficult to find a 2D showing of major films.

Look its simple, make a 3D movies better. Make them more enjoyable for the undecided like me and there is more of a chance you will get me in the door. There is literally no downside to this. If I think itis better then the 3D fans will obviously think the same. If this was the way to go it would immediately kill the shitty post conversaions which have done more damage to the reputation to 3D than anything else.

Some 3D advocates are going on about "negativity" on this thread. The fact is that I am spending MY fucking money. You want the money? Give me something worth spending it on. Otheriwse I am going to retain my consumer right to choice and if I have to pay a premium then I demand a better product. If it's not better then I am going to complain about it. I don't give a toss about how great the technology is unless everything is left on the screen. I don't give a toss about how its going to do XYZ in the future, i'll worry about that then.

Anyone who uses the argument that it is the consumers fault for complaining about the product just because they themselves enjoy it should really look at themselves in the mirror.

< Message edited by Keyser Sozzled -- 13/12/2013 1:13:37 PM >


_____________________________

I have no idea who any of them are, apart from Terry Pratchett who I know has got a beard and keeps going on about killing himself but never does.

(in reply to NCC1701A)
Post #: 1423
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 2:51:03 PM   
spark1

 

Posts: 7081
Joined: 18/11/2006
so how's the 3d hfp for 'hobbit 2' looking?

(in reply to Keyser Sozzled)
Post #: 1424
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 3:00:24 PM   
DancingClown


Posts: 4262
Joined: 8/1/2006
From: The Lot
I dunno, I haven't seen it yet.

_____________________________

Astronomic Tune Boy

'The town knew darkness, and darkness was enough.'

"Storm just bleeewwww me away..."

(in reply to spark1)
Post #: 1425
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 7:17:21 PM   
porntrooper

 

Posts: 2616
Joined: 6/9/2006
From: Sheffield

quote:

ORIGINAL: horribleives

I think film fans being denied the opportunity to see a film they way they want to see it



What about the cinema industry obligation to present a film the way the director wants it to be seen? If Cameron, Lee, Spielberg, Snyder, Cuaron, Scott, whoever decides to create film and they choose to invest their considerable talents (and studio costs) in creating an immersive 3D visual experience, and they agree that the 3D version is the preferred presentation technique, who are we to argue? Id Spielberg decides his next movie is going to be presented in a foreign language and in black and white, I dont seek out a dubbed and colorised version, I see it how its intended. I dont see why 3D would be any different. 3D is like any other film making technique, when used well it can be stunning and it can enhance a movies quality, used poorly and it will look like shit and be distracting. Just like shitty CG. Can 3D make a shit film good? No. Can a 3D movie be good without 3D? Sure. Can 3D drastically improve the visual presentation and experience of watching a film? Too right it can. And where film makers choose to go that route, I'll trust enough to watch it the way its intended.

Should alternative 2D presentations be available for those that cant cope with a 3D image presentation? Of course, but in smaller cinemas with limited screens there has to be a decision made either way - do we show more 2D screenings of Gravity or more 3D? I hope the cinemas go with the presentation method intended by the film maker....... I hope they do that every fucking time.


_____________________________

"I've got an idea for a special infiltration technique. It involves draining a man of his blood and replacing it with Tizer."

(in reply to horribleives)
Post #: 1426
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 7:31:41 PM   
DancingClown


Posts: 4262
Joined: 8/1/2006
From: The Lot

quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper


quote:

ORIGINAL: horribleives

I think film fans being denied the opportunity to see a film they way they want to see it



What about the cinema industry obligation to present a film the way the director wants it to be seen? If Cameron, Lee, Spielberg, Snyder, Cuaron, Scott, whoever decides to create film and they choose to invest their considerable talents (and studio costs) in creating an immersive 3D visual experience, and they agree that the 3D version is the preferred presentation technique, who are we to argue? Id Spielberg decides his next movie is going to be presented in a foreign language and in black and white, I dont seek out a dubbed and colorised version, I see it how its intended. I dont see why 3D would be any different. 3D is like any other film making technique, when used well it can be stunning and it can enhance a movies quality, used poorly and it will look like shit and be distracting. Just like shitty CG. Can 3D make a shit film good? No. Can a 3D movie be good without 3D? Sure. Can 3D drastically improve the visual presentation and experience of watching a film? Too right it can. And where film makers choose to go that route, I'll trust enough to watch it the way its intended.

Should alternative 2D presentations be available for those that cant cope with a 3D image presentation? Of course, but in smaller cinemas with limited screens there has to be a decision made either way - do we show more 2D screenings of Gravity or more 3D? I hope the cinemas go with the presentation method intended by the film maker....... I hope they do that every fucking time.



It's an excellent point. But apart from films like Avatar and Hugo - which were shot specifically in 3D - how do we know which directors intended their films to be converted into 3D? How do we know that they were happy with that? Were they strong-armed by the studios? How can we be sure that the 3D experience was involved in the director's original vision? Obviously with Cameron and Jackson we know what their intention was. Obviously Cameron wanted to push the envelope. But since 2009 we can't pretend that the 3D drive has been driven solely by artistic intent; it's been mostly about the money, and therefore that makes the line between artistic freedom and financial obligation a lot more difficult to discern.

_____________________________

Astronomic Tune Boy

'The town knew darkness, and darkness was enough.'

"Storm just bleeewwww me away..."

(in reply to porntrooper)
Post #: 1427
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 7:38:59 PM   
Cool Breeze


Posts: 2361
Joined: 9/11/2011
From: The Internet

quote:

And has for cinema-chains foisting 3D on you they have to make money some how do you want they to go out of bussiness ?


Thats an absolutely ridiculous statement.There are many, many hugely profitable movies being made which have no 3D at all.The Dark Knight Rises made over a billion dollars last year and it didnt need 3D to do it.

You might suggest that the success of Avatar is because of 3D but it clearly isnt , just look at the massive failure of movies like John Carter and Mars Needs Moms.


_____________________________

'' Iv played Oskar Schindler, Michael Collins, Rob Roy Mcgregor, even ZEUS for gods sake! No one is going to believe me to be a green grocer! ''

(in reply to NCC1701A)
Post #: 1428
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 7:41:02 PM   
horribleives

 

Posts: 5110
Joined: 12/6/2009
From: The North
What about post-conversion jobs when, in all likelihood, the directors didn't have a lot of say in the matter? I watched the first Thor in 3D because it was the only screening I could get to and the 3D was completely pointless. Ditto Avengers Assemble and god knows how many more (the last Harry Potter springs to mind but I managed to see that in 2D). Do you really think Kenneth Branagh, Joss Whedon and David Yates had grand artistic visions to make films in which the screen is a bit darker and something jumps out of it once in a while?

< Message edited by horribleives -- 13/12/2013 7:46:00 PM >


_____________________________

www.hollywoodunbound.co.uk - some nonsense about alien film directors and musclebound man-children.

(in reply to porntrooper)
Post #: 1429
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 7:48:45 PM   
Cool Breeze


Posts: 2361
Joined: 9/11/2011
From: The Internet
quote:

ORIGINAL: horribleives

What about post-conversion jobs when, in all likelihood, the directors didn't have a lot of say in the matter? I watched the first Thor in 3D because it was the only screening I could get to and the 3D was completely pointless. Ditto Avengers Assemble and god knows how many more (the last Harry Potter springs to mind but I managed to see that in 2D). Do you really think Kenneth Branagh, Joss Whedon and David Yates had grand artistic visions to make a film in which something jumps out of the screen once in a while and the rest just looks slightly darker?


Agreed.my feeling is that the likes of Branagh, Whedon, and Yates didnt really want the 3D but were team players with the studio enough to go along with it.

The most recent example being Gullermo Del Toro who initally said that Pacific Rim would NOT be converted to 3D and then it came out that the studio wanted it.Del toro spoke of his disappointment of that decision but miraculously changed his mind ( Probably after the studio had a few words with him ).

< Message edited by Cool Breeze -- 13/12/2013 7:49:35 PM >


_____________________________

'' Iv played Oskar Schindler, Michael Collins, Rob Roy Mcgregor, even ZEUS for gods sake! No one is going to believe me to be a green grocer! ''

(in reply to horribleives)
Post #: 1430
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 7:52:30 PM   
porntrooper

 

Posts: 2616
Joined: 6/9/2006
From: Sheffield
Of course the vast majority of 3D films have been driven by a studio intent to drive the format, but even still, if a studio wants to put the money in and wants to present it that way - who are we to argue? It's their product. The thing is, most 3D films get a 2D release too and in bigger multiplexes you wont have too much issue finding a 2D showing. However in cinemas with limited screens a choice has to be made - one or the other. And if the studios/directors make the choice to have 3D as the primary presentation method, then thats that. There will be dissapointed parties - either those that dont like 3D or those that cant process it (vision impairments and such) but studios and film makers cant do things for that minority if their choice is 3D.

As for artistic intent of film makers, i think most (even those seemingly doing 3D on a studio whim - Marvel directors for example?) seem to give it a decent consideration as to how it will look in 3D. Those that intend the 3D experience from the outset, such as Ang Lee, Cameron, Cuaron etc really deserve their time and effort being rewarded by people viewing their films as intended. As I say, balance is key, but in cases there are going to be choices to be made by cinema chains - and i genuinely hope they follow the studio and film makers choices.

As for 3D presentation quality - it seems to vary massively, not just location to location but in the same cinemas but on different screens. At Cineworld Sheffield, I,ve seen amazing 3D presentations (Prometheus, Gravity) and some utter shite (The Wolverine, Iron Man 3) and some 'okay' (Man of Steel). In the case of Man of Steel and Iron Man 3, both 3D viewings at home improved the experience and were better than the cinema presentation in terms of image quality. Even the good and amazing 3D screenings ive seen have been as good or better on my home set up. Poor set up and projection in cinemas can definately have an adverse effect on the quality of 3D being shown.

_____________________________

"I've got an idea for a special infiltration technique. It involves draining a man of his blood and replacing it with Tizer."

(in reply to DancingClown)
Post #: 1431
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 7:59:08 PM   
porntrooper

 

Posts: 2616
Joined: 6/9/2006
From: Sheffield

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze

quote:

ORIGINAL: horribleives

What about post-conversion jobs when, in all likelihood, the directors didn't have a lot of say in the matter? I watched the first Thor in 3D because it was the only screening I could get to and the 3D was completely pointless. Ditto Avengers Assemble and god knows how many more (the last Harry Potter springs to mind but I managed to see that in 2D). Do you really think Kenneth Branagh, Joss Whedon and David Yates had grand artistic visions to make a film in which something jumps out of the screen once in a while and the rest just looks slightly darker?


Agreed.my feeling is that the likes of Branagh, Whedon, and Yates didnt really want the 3D but were team players with the studio enough to go along with it.

The most recent example being Gullermo Del Toro who initally said that Pacific Rim would NOT be converted to 3D and then it came out that the studio wanted it.Del toro spoke of his disappointment of that decision but miraculously changed his mind ( Probably after the studio had a few words with him ).


You have no idea why Del Toro changed his mind on Pacific Rim. You're making an assumption that just cos you dont like it, no one else can. Youre talking out of your arse. Maybe the studio did push it, maybe Del Toro saw some demo's of it and was won over. Given that Pacific Rim in 3D looked pretty fucking great and some scenes and shots seemed absolutely designed with 3D in kind, I'd be inclined to beleive that Del Toro embraced it and went with it. Who knows? You certainly dont.

As for the 3D Blu Ray and extras you keep banging on about - go back to the Prometheus Blu Ray thread, I explained there why the Blu Ray 3D business model is no different to the 'Special Edition' DVD model of old. If there is one person on this forum who's arguments on 3D I cant be arsed with, it's yours. They're tiresome. At least others seem to read other peoples posts. Jesus Christ.

_____________________________

"I've got an idea for a special infiltration technique. It involves draining a man of his blood and replacing it with Tizer."

(in reply to Cool Breeze)
Post #: 1432
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 8:10:03 PM   
sanchia


Posts: 18328
Joined: 3/1/2006
From: Norwich
It appears that sales of 3D televisions and Blu Rays are dropping quite rapidly as well although from the look of it the sale figures were not particularly brilliant to begin with. It appears to be very much a specialist market. There are some predictions of growth in the market (Futuresource consulting appears to be the only ones predicting growth) but these appear to be swimming well against the tide

_____________________________

Nothing to see here.



(in reply to porntrooper)
Post #: 1433
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 8:19:28 PM   
porntrooper

 

Posts: 2616
Joined: 6/9/2006
From: Sheffield

quote:

ORIGINAL: horribleives
Do you really think Kenneth Branagh, Joss Whedon and David Yates had grand artistic visions to make films in which the screen is a bit darker and something jumps out of it once in a while?


No, I dont think they did, but they only made those movies because a studio put their money in to make it. When Joss Whedon wants to tell Marvel to shove 3D up their arse and leave it behind, he can. But no, he is continuing in that system and is back for Avengers 2..... In 3D. So maybe he is embracing it?

At the end of the day 3D movies are being made, and they're being made with the intent of talented film makers, and as long as that is the case, i will always support the film makers vision and watch it as intended. If you dont want to, fine. Dont watch it. But youre making the other side of the KOK argument (3D sucks!) in as much the same way as he made his, it's like you want it your way or no way with no middle ground. Accept that film makers are using the format and want to present their films in 3D, in the same way I accept that some dont. As a film lover I take what is given to me in the hope its always great - some times it is, some times it isnt. Some times 3D works, some times it doesn't. Choice is out there for the vast majority of people. I am not entitled to anything or everything, and if for some reason a film is out of my reach (either cos it isnt showing near me, or i dont want to watch in 3D or I cant watch in 3D) then so be it, my choice isnt more important than someone elses. The industry cannot cater for every persons taste or personal circumstances.

_____________________________

"I've got an idea for a special infiltration technique. It involves draining a man of his blood and replacing it with Tizer."

(in reply to horribleives)
Post #: 1434
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 8:20:30 PM   
DancingClown


Posts: 4262
Joined: 8/1/2006
From: The Lot
I've just been checking out times at my local Vue for The Hobbit and there are more 2D showings than 3D. Interesting that.

_____________________________

Astronomic Tune Boy

'The town knew darkness, and darkness was enough.'

"Storm just bleeewwww me away..."

(in reply to sanchia)
Post #: 1435
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 8:28:58 PM   
porntrooper

 

Posts: 2616
Joined: 6/9/2006
From: Sheffield

quote:

ORIGINAL: sanchia

It appears that sales of 3D televisions and Blu Rays are dropping quite rapidly as well although from the look of it the sale figures were not particularly brilliant to begin with. It appears to be very much a specialist market. There are some predictions of growth in the market (Futuresource consulting appears to be the only ones predicting growth) but these appear to be swimming well against the tide


And?

If the majority of Joe Public dont wanna watch 3D, thats fine, but if James Cameron decides to make a 3D movie, I wanna see it as intended. I suspect there are markets for other types of cinema that are small - subtitled movies maybe? But if its there and i wanna see it, i wanna see it as intended. If 3D stops next year, never to return, I wont bat an eyelid, i'll keep watching what the industry puts in front of me, cos i love cinema. And yea , i'll return every now and then to watch Life of Pi in 3D. Why? Cos it is stunning. Regardless of other peoples opinion of the technology, to me, it works and as long as the industry wants it, and film makers use it. I'll be there as a paying consumer. You have a choice to do so, or not.

The issue is, does the industry support the choice of watching in either format and there is only so much they can do to appease both audiences - there arent unlimited screenings and there arent unlimited showings per day, so they have to make a decision what to show. And like i say, if the intended format is 3D, i want them to show it in 3D. If its 2D, thats what i want. If it's IMAX, thats what i want. If it's Black and White, thats what i want.

_____________________________

"I've got an idea for a special infiltration technique. It involves draining a man of his blood and replacing it with Tizer."

(in reply to sanchia)
Post #: 1436
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 8:36:53 PM   
porntrooper

 

Posts: 2616
Joined: 6/9/2006
From: Sheffield

quote:

ORIGINAL: DancingClown

I've just been checking out times at my local Vue for The Hobbit and there are more 2D showings than 3D. Interesting that.


I think Cineworld Sheffield is the same. I'll be seeing it in 3D IMAX, but I expect i will hate the presentation of it, as the first Hobbit looked terrible. The film was awful but Jacksons handling of the format was awful. As was his handling of CG. I've o doubt the better viewing of Hobbit 2 will be in 2D. Just cos a film maker intends the film to be shown in 3D doesnt mean theyre always gunna be successful at it... Exactly the same as with any other stylistic choice made i guess.

I suspect 3D fatigue is setting in with many, and its probably a result of the haphazard way films are put through the conversion process. Not every film needs to be 3D. Poor and pointless conversions, alongside inconsistent projection quality may well have soured the general publics taste for the format. No problem with that if the end result is fewer but better 3D movies, and as long as those that continue to use it, use it well, i'll be happy.

_____________________________

"I've got an idea for a special infiltration technique. It involves draining a man of his blood and replacing it with Tizer."

(in reply to DancingClown)
Post #: 1437
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 8:41:39 PM   
horribleives

 

Posts: 5110
Joined: 12/6/2009
From: The North

quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper


quote:

ORIGINAL: horribleives
Do you really think Kenneth Branagh, Joss Whedon and David Yates had grand artistic visions to make films in which the screen is a bit darker and something jumps out of it once in a while?


No, I dont think they did, but they only made those movies because a studio put their money in to make it. When Joss Whedon wants to tell Marvel to shove 3D up their arse and leave it behind, he can. But no, he is continuing in that system and is back for Avengers 2..... In 3D. So maybe he is embracing it?

At the end of the day 3D movies are being made, and they're being made with the intent of talented film makers, and as long as that is the case, i will always support the film makers vision and watch it as intended. If you dont want to, fine. Dont watch it. But youre making the other side of the KOK argument (3D sucks!) in as much the same way as he made his, it's like you want it your way or no way with no middle ground. Accept that film makers are using the format and want to present their films in 3D, in the same way I accept that some dont. As a film lover I take what is given to me in the hope its always great - some times it is, some times it isnt. Some times 3D works, some times it doesn't. Choice is out there for the vast majority of people. I am not entitled to anything or everything, and if for some reason a film is out of my reach (either cos it isnt showing near me, or i dont want to watch in 3D or I cant watch in 3D) then so be it, my choice isnt more important than someone elses. The industry cannot cater for every persons taste or personal circumstances.


Erm, I think you're getting me mixed up with someone else - at no point have I said 3D sucks. And I'm not sure where you get this 'you don't want any middle ground' stuff from either - I'm more than happy for 3D to exist. As I've said a couple of times now, I've enjoyed several films in 3D. And at no point did I or anyone else say our choice is more important than anyone else's - what myself and others are objecting to is a lack of choice. Which does exist in some areas whether you care or not. If anything you and DK are putting your preferences above everyone else's by basically saying 'life's a shit-house, get over it' to people who don't /can't watch films in 3D.

(in reply to porntrooper)
Post #: 1438
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 8:45:23 PM   
horribleives

 

Posts: 5110
Joined: 12/6/2009
From: The North

quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper


quote:

ORIGINAL: DancingClown

I've just been checking out times at my local Vue for The Hobbit and there are more 2D showings than 3D. Interesting that.


I think Cineworld Sheffield is the same. I'll be seeing it in 3D IMAX, but I expect i will hate the presentation of it, as the first Hobbit looked terrible. The film was awful but Jacksons handling of the format was awful. As was his handling of CG. I've o doubt the better viewing of Hobbit 2 will be in 2D. Just cos a film maker intends the film to be shown in 3D doesnt mean theyre always gunna be successful at it... Exactly the same as with any other stylistic choice made i guess.

I suspect 3D fatigue is setting in with many, and its probably a result of the haphazard way films are put through the conversion process. Not every film needs to be 3D. Poor and pointless conversions, alongside inconsistent projection quality may well have soured the general publics taste for the format. No problem with that if the end result is fewer but better 3D movies, and as long as those that continue to use it, use it well, i'll be happy.


I wholeheartedly agree with this though.


_____________________________

www.hollywoodunbound.co.uk - some nonsense about alien film directors and musclebound man-children.

(in reply to porntrooper)
Post #: 1439
RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion - 13/12/2013 8:50:55 PM   
superdan


Posts: 8307
Joined: 31/7/2008
quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper


quote:

ORIGINAL: DancingClown

I've just been checking out times at my local Vue for The Hobbit and there are more 2D showings than 3D. Interesting that.


I think Cineworld Sheffield is the same.


It's not. 7 shows in 2D today (which isn't a disgrace taken by itself), but 15 in 3D including IMAX. Or, in other words, more than double.

Edit:
Also I can't believe you wrote this:
quote:

You have no idea why Del Toro changed his mind on Pacific Rim. You're making an assumption that just cos you dont like it, no one else can. Youre talking out of your arse. Maybe the studio did push it, maybe Del Toro saw some demo's of it and was won over. Given that Pacific Rim in 3D looked pretty fucking great and some scenes and shots seemed absolutely designed with 3D in kind, I'd be inclined to beleive that Del Toro embraced it and went with it. Who knows? You certainly dont.

And then two posts later wrote this:
quote:

When Joss Whedon wants to tell Marvel to shove 3D up their arse and leave it behind, he can. But no, he is continuing in that system and is back for Avengers 2..... In 3D. So maybe he is embracing it?

You're in danger of making assumptions just as CB did. You've no idea if he wanted 3D in the first place, and no idea if he wants it for the sequel or if it's all been a studio decision.

< Message edited by superdan -- 13/12/2013 8:58:35 PM >

(in reply to porntrooper)
Post #: 1440
Page:   <<   < prev  46 47 [48] 49 50   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie Musings >> RE: Mark Kermode's 3 D Boycott & General 3-D Discussion Page: <<   < prev  46 47 [48] 49 50   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.063