RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,540
Posts: 5,513,244
Members: 25,142
Currently online: 408
Newest member: lergondo

TrekToday headlines

Two New Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Dec 26

Captain Kirk’s Boldest Missions
By: T'Bonz on Dec 25

Trek Paper Clips
By: T'Bonz on Dec 24

Sargent Passes
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

QMx Trek Insignia Badges
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

And The New Director Of Star Trek 3 Is…
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

TV Alert: Pine On Tonight Show
By: T'Bonz on Dec 22

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > TV & Media

TV & Media Non-Trek television, movies, books, music, etc.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old February 22 2012, 03:20 AM   #1
Gaith
Rear Admiral
 
Gaith's Avatar
 
Location: Washington, DC
Ebert gives Titanic 3D's 3D the ol' thumbs-down

Not at all surprising - with only rare exceptions (The Polar Express, Avatar, Hugo, and Immortals are a few), Ebert has inveighed against 3D, and here he is taking on Big Jim re: Titanic:
Now for the final flaw. It is, of course, the 3D process. Cameron has justly been praised for being one of the few directors to use 3D usefully, in "Avatar." But "Titanic" was not shot for 3D, and just as you cannot gild a pig, you cannot make 2D into 3D. What you can do, and he tries to do it well, is find certain scenes that you can present as having planes of focus in foreground, middle and distance. So what? Did you miss any dimensions the first time you saw "Titanic?" No matter how long Cameron took to do it, no matter how much he spent, this is retrofitted 2D. Case closed.

But not quite. There's more to it than that. 3D causes a noticeable loss in the brightness coming from the screen. Some say as much as 20 percent. If you saw an ordinary film dimmed that much, you might complain to the management. Here you're supposed to be grateful you had the opportunity to pay a surcharge for this defacement. If you're alert to it, you'll notice that many shots and sequences in this version are not in 3D at all, but remain in 2D. If you take off your glasses, they'll pop off the screen with dramatically improved brightness. I know why the film is in 3D. It's to justify the extra charge. That's a shabby way to treat a masterpiece.
Again, not a surprising verdict, but a shame nonetheless. If even Big Jim can't make retrofitted 3D work, maybe the case really is, as Ebert says, closed.
Gaith is online now   Reply With Quote
Old February 22 2012, 05:06 AM   #2
Flying Spaghetti Monster
Vice Admiral
 
Flying Spaghetti Monster's Avatar
 
Location: Flying Spaghetti Western
Re: Ebert gives Titanic 3D's 3D the ol' thumbs-down

Avatar was a fun experience in 3-D. I had no problems with it as a film-going experience, even given its length.

I went to see Phantom Menace and 3-D and did enjoy the restraint in its use. Still, for some reason, i had a huge headache when it was over. Really. I'm afraid if I see Titanic in 3-D (a film that I generally like) I'm not sure if my head will be able to take it. I guess if i got it on blu-ray with sharp colors, I'd probably appreciate it more. Maybe the difference is that Avatar was indeed meant for 3-D so maybe something about it didn't bug me as even a good retrofit did.
__________________
See, the problem is that you are using your cards to show me what cards you have, and if you can't see that this is viciously circular, then there is no point in continuing
Flying Spaghetti Monster is online now   Reply With Quote
Old February 22 2012, 06:23 AM   #3
Santa Claus
Believe
 
Santa Claus's Avatar
 
Location: J. Allen's Rooftop
Send a message via ICQ to Santa Claus Send a message via AIM to Santa Claus Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Santa Claus Send a message via Yahoo to Santa Claus
Re: Ebert gives Titanic 3D's 3D the ol' thumbs-down

The thing is, I loved Titanic back in '97 when I saw it in theaters. I'd pay a regular ticket price to see it again in theaters, as it's 2D self. But a 100% price markup for a 3D retrofit? Nope.
__________________
---------
"I believe... I believe... It's silly, but I believe." - Susan Walker
---------
❄ A Joyful Holiday Season to You All! ❄

Santa Claus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 22 2012, 07:04 AM   #4
Cookies and Cake
Admiral
 
Location: North America
Re: Ebert gives Titanic 3D's 3D the ol' thumbs-down

This is no surprise, and is exactly what I would expect, based on the 3D trailer for Titanic that I saw, which was totally shitty. It looked like 2.1D, if that.
__________________
CorporalCaptain
Cookies and Cake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 22 2012, 10:56 AM   #5
Jax
Admiral
 
Jax's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland
Re: Ebert gives Titanic 3D's 3D the ol' thumbs-down

2D films being made into 3D has always struck me as a stupid idea. It needs to be that from the start like Avatar or not at all.
__________________
If Fidelity to freedom and democracy is the code of our civic religion then surely the code of our humanity is faithful service to that unwritten commandment that says we shall give our children better than we ourselves received
Jax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 22 2012, 03:21 PM   #6
Ugly Sweater
Trekker4747
 
Ugly Sweater's Avatar
 
Location: Kansas City
Re: Ebert gives Titanic 3D's 3D the ol' thumbs-down

Yeah, I never understood the idea of converting 2D into 3D as it's just really faking things beyond faking things and much more of the "colorforms 3D" that I hate so much.

However, it has been my understanding Cameron was using the best possible techniques for converting Titanic and none-the-less given that this April is the 100th anniversary of the ship's sinking and I love the movie Titanic I'll go see it this spring 3D or no, I'd love the chance to see the movie again on the big screen.
__________________
Just because it's futuristic doesn't mean it's practical.
Ugly Sweater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 22 2012, 03:24 PM   #7
Solstice
Sexy Wizard
 
Solstice's Avatar
 
Location: I'm so lost T_T
View Solstice's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to Solstice Send a message via AIM to Solstice Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Solstice Send a message via Yahoo to Solstice
Re: Ebert gives Titanic 3D's 3D the ol' thumbs-down

Trekker4747 wrote: View Post
Yeah, I never understood the idea of converting 2D into 3D as it's just really faking things beyond faking things and much more of the "colorforms 3D" that I hate so much.

However, it has been my understanding Cameron was using the best possible techniques for converting Titanic and none-the-less given that this April is the 100th anniversary of the ship's sinking and I love the movie Titanic I'll go see it this spring 3D or no, I'd love the chance to see the movie again on the big screen.
Conversions are only done so that the theater can charge more for tickets. There's really no other reason to do it since it adds so little to the experience when done in post. It's just a naked money grab.
__________________
Robert Maxwell
I has a blag.
I put on my robe and wizard hat...
Solstice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 22 2012, 03:28 PM   #8
Tosk
Rear Admiral
 
Tosk's Avatar
 
Location: On the run.
Re: Ebert gives Titanic 3D's 3D the ol' thumbs-down

Considering how little even real 3D adds to a film, I'm not surprised Ebert gave a conversion thumbs down. "Best technology" or not, it's still a film shot in 2D for 2D.
Tosk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 22 2012, 03:28 PM   #9
FordSVT
Vice Admiral
 
FordSVT's Avatar
 
Location: Atlantic Canada
Re: Ebert gives Titanic 3D's 3D the ol' thumbs-down

I can't wait to see what PJ does with The Hobbit in 3D. I'm going to go out of my way to ensure I see it in a theatre with the proper projector lenses and brightness too.
__________________
-FordSVT-
FordSVT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 22 2012, 04:43 PM   #10
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Ebert gives Titanic 3D's 3D the ol' thumbs-down

So the conversion to 3D made the story, acting and dialogue bad?
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 22 2012, 04:48 PM   #11
Flying Spaghetti Monster
Vice Admiral
 
Flying Spaghetti Monster's Avatar
 
Location: Flying Spaghetti Western
Re: Ebert gives Titanic 3D's 3D the ol' thumbs-down

FordSVT wrote: View Post
I can't wait to see what PJ does with The Hobbit in 3D. I'm going to go out of my way to ensure I see it in a theatre with the proper projector lenses and brightness too.
I heard he's filming it with double frame rate. I am still wondering why (don't take that as a criticism yet) but after watching the trailer, I'm wondering why it's necessary. The images moved fine at the normal frame rate.
__________________
See, the problem is that you are using your cards to show me what cards you have, and if you can't see that this is viciously circular, then there is no point in continuing
Flying Spaghetti Monster is online now   Reply With Quote
Old February 22 2012, 04:49 PM   #12
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Ebert gives Titanic 3D's 3D the ol' thumbs-down

Flying Spaghetti Monster wrote: View Post
FordSVT wrote: View Post
I can't wait to see what PJ does with The Hobbit in 3D. I'm going to go out of my way to ensure I see it in a theatre with the proper projector lenses and brightness too.
I heard he's filming it with double frame rate. I am still wondering why (don't take that as a criticism yet) but after watching the trailer, I'm wondering why it's necessary. The images moved fine at the normal frame rate.
Did you watch in 2D or 3D?
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 22 2012, 04:57 PM   #13
Flying Spaghetti Monster
Vice Admiral
 
Flying Spaghetti Monster's Avatar
 
Location: Flying Spaghetti Western
Re: Ebert gives Titanic 3D's 3D the ol' thumbs-down

2-D
I see what you're saying. I'm just thinking that clarity is one thing, but I miss traditional film and film techniques
__________________
See, the problem is that you are using your cards to show me what cards you have, and if you can't see that this is viciously circular, then there is no point in continuing
Flying Spaghetti Monster is online now   Reply With Quote
Old February 22 2012, 05:04 PM   #14
CaptainCanada
Admiral
 
CaptainCanada's Avatar
 
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada
Re: Ebert gives Titanic 3D's 3D the ol' thumbs-down

Most of the reviews I've seen of the 3D transfer for Titanic were extremely praiseworthy, even from reviewers who overall aren't fond of the process.
__________________
"I'm a white male, age 18 to 49. Everyone listens to me, no matter how dumb my suggestions are!"

- Homer Simpson
CaptainCanada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 22 2012, 05:14 PM   #15
Jax
Admiral
 
Jax's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland
Re: Ebert gives Titanic 3D's 3D the ol' thumbs-down

FordSVT wrote: View Post
I can't wait to see what PJ does with The Hobbit in 3D. I'm going to go out of my way to ensure I see it in a theatre with the proper projector lenses and brightness too.
Hobbit, 2-D for me, among all my other movies this year I like the price hike for 3-D. The only movie I would consider 3D for is the Avatar sequels.
__________________
If Fidelity to freedom and democracy is the code of our civic religion then surely the code of our humanity is faithful service to that unwritten commandment that says we shall give our children better than we ourselves received
Jax is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:06 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.