The trouble with trailers for 3D films.....

Transwarp Drive · October 20 2012, 09:35 PM

........is that they need to be attached to a 3D movie.

What's coming up in the next few months that is going to be released in 3D? JJ will want to show off what's he done won't he?

That aside, 3D equals effects which equals a focus that just isn't Trek, Trek is character driven and there's another thread here which went off at a bit of a tangent about the possibility that the film could turn out to be a stinker. A stinker because the focus is all wrong, 3D could exacerbate this and there's some conjecture that Quinto may have hinted at this.

I'm actually feeling extremely nervous about this.

Kruezerman · October 20 2012, 09:51 PM

The trailer will be 2D probably also don't forget, Abrams didn't want it to be in 3D, Paramount made him. Also, it's dangerous to assume that because it'll be in 3D, it'll suck because we really don't know what the hell it'll be about.

We must wait for more information.

serenitytrek1 · October 20 2012, 10:15 PM

urgh

I hate 3d....when I saw Avengers in 3d, it was just a complete waste of money.its like Paramount 3d films sucks just like GI JOE 2 will suck and they pushed that film back 6-12 months to convert it to 3D

Only james cameron (Avatar) and martin scoresese (Hugo) can pull off 3D films. I hope JJ joins the rank though since Trek 2013 is in 3D.

sbk1234 · October 20 2012, 10:24 PM

Honestly, I'm not crazy about 3D. But what I've noticed is the focus in 3D has shifted from concentrating on gratuitous, in-your-face, jump-out-at-the-camera 3D to simply a more realistic depth. So I'm not too worried about the 3D changing the emphasis from character. At least no more than it already was.

Transwarp Drive · October 20 2012, 10:26 PM

Kruezerman wrote:

The trailer will be 2D probably also don't forget, Abrams didn't want it to be in 3D, Paramount made him. Also, it's dangerous to assume that because it'll be in 3D, it'll suck because we really don't know what the hell it'll be about.

We must wait for more information.

And you know all this how?

You said we need to wait for more info.

IMAX and 3D is a fact, it sends a very specific message.

teacake · October 20 2012, 10:31 PM

I hate 3D.

But there will be a wonderful wonderful wonderful 2D dvd that will be with me long after I throw away my dorky glasses.

Transwarp Drive · October 20 2012, 10:57 PM

teacock wrote:

I hate 3D.

But there will be a wonderful wonderful wonderful 2D dvd that will be with me long after I throw away my dorky glasses.

I wear dorky glasses normally, to have to wear a pair of dorky glasses on top of a pair of dorky glasses to watch a dorky movie with lots of other dorks seems a bit............excessive...........to me.

Hmmmmm.

teacake · October 20 2012, 11:02 PM

Yeah it is horrible wearing them over glasses, I concur. No one seems to give a shit about this issue presumably because glasses are less common these days.

Jackson_Roykirk · October 21 2012, 12:45 AM

Not all 3D movies always have 3D trailers. It is quite possible that there will be a 2D version of the trailer (to be shown in 2d theaters).
I mean, there will be TV commercials in 2D (maybe even a big one during the Superbowl, like last time), so why not a trailer in 2D?

...And, yes. Abrams said he would have preferred the movie to be in 2D, but Paramount overruled him.

Transwarp Drive · October 21 2012, 01:06 AM

Jackson_Roykirk wrote:

Not all 3D movies always have 3D trailers. It is quite possible that there will be a 2D version of the trailer (to be shown in 2d theaters).
I mean, there will be TV commercials in 2D (maybe even a big one during the Superbowl, like last time), so why not a trailer in 2D?

...And, yes. Abrams said he would have preferred the movie to be in 2D, but Paramount overruled him.

The teaser trailer to this movie will be first shown in 3D, its too big a movie for the studio to do otherwise. What's coming out in the next 8 weeks or so, in 3D, that Paramount can use?

There will be a trailer attached.

The Keeper · October 21 2012, 03:30 AM

Transwarp Drive wrote:

The trouble with trailers for 3D films..... ........is that they need to be attached to a 3D movie.

I am not sure this is correct. I've been to 3D films when, during the previews, I noticed some random previews were not in 3D. Upon removing the glasses sure enough, a 2D preview set among 3D previews.

teacake · October 21 2012, 08:42 AM

Is this movie being shot (yeah that is probably the wrong way to say it, whatever Avatar did) in 3D or is it being made in 2D and rendered into 3D later like we got with TPM this year?

Oso Blanco · October 21 2012, 09:05 AM

teacock wrote:

Is this movie being shot (yeah that is probably the wrong way to say it, whatever Avatar did) in 3D or is it being made in 2D and rendered into 3D later like we got with TPM this year?

I read somewhere that the movie was shot in 2D for the most part, and that only some special scenes were shot in 3D.

teacake · October 21 2012, 09:08 AM

BLEH. It will look like a pop up book.

Gep Malakai · October 21 2012, 09:11 AM

Abrams shoots his movies on 35mm film. 3D cameras are digital-only, so the film will not be natively 3D.

October 20 2012, 09:35 PM	#1
Transwarp Drive Lieutenant Location: New Zealand	The trouble with trailers for 3D films..... ........is that they need to be attached to a 3D movie. What's coming up in the next few months that is going to be released in 3D? JJ will want to show off what's he done won't he? That aside, 3D equals effects which equals a focus that just isn't Trek, Trek is character driven and there's another thread here which went off at a bit of a tangent about the possibility that the film could turn out to be a stinker. A stinker because the focus is all wrong, 3D could exacerbate this and there's some conjecture that Quinto may have hinted at this. I'm actually feeling extremely nervous about this.

October 20 2012, 09:51 PM	#2
Kruezerman Commander Location: South Texas	Re: The trouble with trailers for 3D films..... The trailer will be 2D probably also don't forget, Abrams didn't want it to be in 3D, Paramount made him. Also, it's dangerous to assume that because it'll be in 3D, it'll suck because we really don't know what the hell it'll be about. We must wait for more information. __________________ Of course I don't want to eat something called a spittle pod. Go away. -Montgomery Scott-

October 20 2012, 10:15 PM	#3
serenitytrek1 Lieutenant Commander	Re: The trouble with trailers for 3D films..... urgh I hate 3d....when I saw Avengers in 3d, it was just a complete waste of money.its like Paramount 3d films sucks just like GI JOE 2 will suck and they pushed that film back 6-12 months to convert it to 3D Only james cameron (Avatar) and martin scoresese (Hugo) can pull off 3D films. I hope JJ joins the rank though since Trek 2013 is in 3D.

October 20 2012, 10:24 PM	#4
sbk1234 Rear Admiral Location: Los Angeles	Re: The trouble with trailers for 3D films..... Honestly, I'm not crazy about 3D. But what I've noticed is the focus in 3D has shifted from concentrating on gratuitous, in-your-face, jump-out-at-the-camera 3D to simply a more realistic depth. So I'm not too worried about the 3D changing the emphasis from character. At least no more than it already was. __________________ In all the history of the world, a riot has NEVER broken out at a Sci-Fi convention. "It's a fucking TV show!" - Gary Lockwood

October 20 2012, 10:31 PM	#6
teacake Admiral Location: Militant Janeway True Path Devotees Compound. With Sehlats.	Re: The trouble with trailers for 3D films..... I hate 3D. But there will be a wonderful wonderful wonderful 2D dvd that will be with me long after I throw away my dorky glasses. __________________ Rider: I can't believe you'd kill me for a field of empty holes. J'onn: It's all I have. ■ ■ ■ Janeway does Melbourne

STAR TREK

CSI

ABOUT US

October 20 2012, 11:02 PM	#8
teacake Admiral Location: Militant Janeway True Path Devotees Compound. With Sehlats.	Re: The trouble with trailers for 3D films..... Yeah it is horrible wearing them over glasses, I concur. No one seems to give a shit about this issue presumably because glasses are less common these days. __________________ Rider: I can't believe you'd kill me for a field of empty holes. J'onn: It's all I have. ■ ■ ■ Janeway does Melbourne

October 21 2012, 12:45 AM	#9
Jackson_Roykirk Commodore Location: Pennsylvania, USA	Re: The trouble with trailers for 3D films..... Not all 3D movies always have 3D trailers. It is quite possible that there will be a 2D version of the trailer (to be shown in 2d theaters). I mean, there will be TV commercials in 2D (maybe even a big one during the Superbowl, like last time), so why not a trailer in 2D? ...And, yes. Abrams said he would have preferred the movie to be in 2D, but Paramount overruled him. __________________ ...With shoes that cut, and eyes that burn like cigarettes With fingernails that shine like justice and a voice that is dark like tinted glass...

October 21 2012, 08:42 AM	#12
teacake Admiral Location: Militant Janeway True Path Devotees Compound. With Sehlats.	Re: The trouble with trailers for 3D films..... Is this movie being shot (yeah that is probably the wrong way to say it, whatever Avatar did) in 3D or is it being made in 2D and rendered into 3D later like we got with TPM this year? __________________ Rider: I can't believe you'd kill me for a field of empty holes. J'onn: It's all I have. ■ ■ ■ Janeway does Melbourne

October 21 2012, 09:08 AM	#14
teacake Admiral Location: Militant Janeway True Path Devotees Compound. With Sehlats.	Re: The trouble with trailers for 3D films..... BLEH. It will look like a pop up book. __________________ Rider: I can't believe you'd kill me for a field of empty holes. J'onn: It's all I have. ■ ■ ■ Janeway does Melbourne

October 21 2012, 09:11 AM	#15
Gep Malakai Vice Admiral	Re: The trouble with trailers for 3D films..... Abrams shoots his movies on 35mm film. 3D cameras are digital-only, so the film will not be natively 3D. __________________ "From the darkness you must fall, failed and weak, to darkness all." -Kataris