RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,573
Posts: 5,514,561
Members: 25,153
Currently online: 549
Newest member: arielmare

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 > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 11 2013, 06:56 PM   #61
beamMe
Fleet Captain
 
beamMe's Avatar
 
Location: Europa
Re: The 3D-quality

M'Sharak wrote: View Post
Sit down, Jarod; you were not being addressed.
No, I was. And I have to thank JarodRussell for the support.
He is, of course, right. And I stand by my comment.

And now we should all take a deep breath and talk about more important things: is black really the best colour they could come up with for the seatbelts?
beamMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11 2013, 09:03 PM   #62
Cinema Geekly
Lieutenant Commander
 
Cinema Geekly's Avatar
 
View Cinema Geekly's Twitter Profile
Re: The 3D-quality

I've only seen 1 movie in 3D.....Avatar. It only added to my previous rule on 3D.

The first 3D movie I pay my money to see will be the first movie that uses 3D to such great effect that seeing the movie without it ruins the movie.

So far I have only seen 3D that either added nothing important to the story or the overall experience or as I've read....in some cases......actually hurt the movie because it was poorly done or distracting.
Cinema Geekly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11 2013, 09:19 PM   #63
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: The 3D-quality

Cinema Geekly wrote: View Post
The first 3D movie I pay my money to see will be the first movie that uses 3D to such great effect that seeing the movie without it ruins the movie.
What would that be?

It's a silly rule. Like insisting on only paying for a color movie when color is used to such great effect that seeing the movie without it ruins the movie.

There is NO single film that is ruined by removing color.
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11 2013, 10:13 PM   #64
Pindar
Rear Admiral
 
Pindar's Avatar
 
Location: 76 Totters Lane
View Pindar's Twitter Profile
Re: The 3D-quality

I've seen it in both now and 2D is much better. Better quality picture, easier to pick up the little background details I missed in 3D.

The sequences filmed for 3D looked better in 2D to me, also I only had to wear 1 pair of glasses.
Pindar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11 2013, 10:23 PM   #65
Nero's Shadow
Captain
 
Nero's Shadow's Avatar
 
Location: Into Darkness !!!
Send a message via Yahoo to Nero's Shadow
Re: The 3D-quality

Seen it at IMAX 3D today brilliant experience but after a while forgot the 3D was there but the sound and picture jaw dropping good !!! Going to see it in 2D tommorw can't wait for it !!!
__________________
That green blooded son of a bitch !!!!
Nero's Shadow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11 2013, 11:17 PM   #66
Chemahkuu
Vice Admiral
 
Chemahkuu's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom
Send a message via Yahoo to Chemahkuu
Re: The 3D-quality

Seeing the whole 'fall' sequence in 3D as the Enterprise spiralled in was almost enough to cause genuine vertigo, intense scene when you have the right depth of field going.
Chemahkuu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11 2013, 11:40 PM   #67
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
Re: The 3D-quality

JarodRussell wrote: View Post

There is NO single film that is ruined by removing color.
A film historian too, then?

How about films that are in B&W part of the time, color in others?

Better still, how about reflecting the intent of the film's makers by leaving it the hell alone.
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2013, 12:12 AM   #68
Therin of Andor
Admiral
 
Therin of Andor's Avatar
 
Location: New Therin Park, Andor (via Australia)
View Therin of Andor's Twitter Profile
Re: The 3D-quality

beamMe wrote: View Post
is black really the best colour they could come up with for the seatbelts?

Seatbelts in TAS by Therin of Andor, on Flickr


To stop people leaving early? by Therin of Andor, on Flickr

LOKAI of CHERON wrote: View Post
The contrast was stronger, the colours "popped" more - and overall - the image had an elevated sense of realism and, well, depth!
Haven't seen a 2D version yet, but got to see an IMAX 3D version last night (Sydney's IMAX at Darling Harbour gets billed as "the largest" IMAX screen in the world - and boy, there were lots of very large 3D nostrils and pores!

Still a very enjoyable movie, but I was a bit puzzled that the red vegetation on Nibiru didn't seem to be as startlingly red as at the world premiere screening (3D) and a local 3D Xtreme screening.
__________________
Thiptho lapth! Ian (Entire post is personal opinion)
The Andor Files @ http://andorfiles.blogspot.com/
http://therinofandor.blogspot.com/
Therin of Andor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2013, 12:23 AM   #69
Cinema Geekly
Lieutenant Commander
 
Cinema Geekly's Avatar
 
View Cinema Geekly's Twitter Profile
Re: The 3D-quality

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
Cinema Geekly wrote: View Post
The first 3D movie I pay my money to see will be the first movie that uses 3D to such great effect that seeing the movie without it ruins the movie.
What would that be?

It's a silly rule. Like insisting on only paying for a color movie when color is used to such great effect that seeing the movie without it ruins the movie.

There is NO single film that is ruined by removing color.
Actually it is a great rule that prevents me from ever spending money on 3D. I highly doubt there will ever be a movie using the current 3D system that will change that.

I'm saying 3D is a gimmick. Charging you extra for something that doesn't really add anything. If we lived in a world where they charged you extra for color over B/W I would likely say the same thing.
Cinema Geekly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2013, 12:36 AM   #70
Therin of Andor
Admiral
 
Therin of Andor's Avatar
 
Location: New Therin Park, Andor (via Australia)
View Therin of Andor's Twitter Profile
Re: The 3D-quality

Cinema Geekly wrote: View Post
Charging you extra for something that doesn't really add anything.
Why did I collect all those stereo cards out of the Weetbix boxes when I was a kid, when I coulda just collected 2D gum cards?

Why did I bug my mother for a View-Master, when I coulda just looked at family slides through a handheld slide viewer?

'Cos 3D is cool! And it adds a whole extra dimension!

If we lived in a world where they charged you extra for color over B/W I would likely say the same thing.
So you resisted the switch from b/w camera film to colour?
__________________
Thiptho lapth! Ian (Entire post is personal opinion)
The Andor Files @ http://andorfiles.blogspot.com/
http://therinofandor.blogspot.com/
Therin of Andor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2013, 12:48 AM   #71
MacLeod
Admiral
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: The 3D-quality

trevanian wrote: View Post
JarodRussell wrote: View Post

There is NO single film that is ruined by removing color.
A film historian too, then?

How about films that are in B&W part of the time, color in others?

Better still, how about reflecting the intent of the film's makers by leaving it the hell alone.
Film, is a buisness like any other. And like most buisness it is making money. If a studio thinks it'll make more money by saying colourising a film, redoing the FX etc.. The might just do it. Now do I have problem with watching a B&W film, do I object to seeing a colourised version of a B&W film not really. Do I mind B&W scenes or particular coloured lens filters being used in certain scenes during a film of course not. Film is as much a visual medium and sometimes a change in colour in a film either B&W/lens colour etc.. enhances the mood of the scene. Now of course others might have different opinions than me which is just fine.

If it's about respecting the original intent of the film makers to give an example, if Lucas said the re-mastered original SW trilogy was his original intent but the technology of the 70's/80's prevented him from achieving it why was there such an outcry about it?
__________________
On the continent of wild endeavour in the mountains of solace and solitude there stood the citadel of the time lords, the oldest and most mighty race in the universe looking down on the galaxies below sworn never to interfere only to watch.
MacLeod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2013, 04:18 PM   #72
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
Re: The 3D-quality

Therin of Andor wrote: View Post
Cinema Geekly wrote: View Post
Charging you extra for something that doesn't really add anything.
Why did I collect all those stereo cards out of the Weetbix boxes when I was a kid, when I coulda just collected 2D gum cards?

Why did I bug my mother for a View-Master, when I coulda just looked at family slides through a handheld slide viewer?

'Cos 3D is cool! And it adds a whole extra dimension!

If we lived in a world where they charged you extra for color over B/W I would likely say the same thing.
So you resisted the switch from b/w camera film to colour?
I'm in my 50s and I don't ever recall a time when B&W was cheaper than color for amateur use. To get B&W movie film was damned near impossible, in fact. I think at 16mm level B&W was cheaper, maybe.
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2013, 04:39 PM   #73
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
Re: The 3D-quality

MacLeod wrote: View Post
If it's about respecting the original intent of the film makers to give an example, if Lucas said the re-mastered original SW trilogy was his original intent but the technology of the 70's/80's prevented him from achieving it why was there such an outcry about it?
On the original intent question, I'll address that first.
Because he didn't wait till the 90s to make it. You create with what is at hand or what is now possible, or you wait until the tools are available.

Everything I've read indicates the delay in making the prequels relates to him waiting for the tech tools to be available to do them as he wished. And still he kept going back messing with them (how does Yoda look this week?)

After CE3K came out, Spielberg regretted not including Dreyfuss' big bathroom meltdown. So it went into the revised cut in 1980. And then? It came back out again after we'd gotten to see it that way.

On your comment about the outcry against his tampering:
I am of the opinion that part of what makes the original SW work so well for so many (and note that I am no huge fan, though I think that there are three or four reels that are truly excellent, as is a big hunk of EMPIRE) is that it doesn't reflect GL's intentions so perfectly, and that if he'd had Kubrick-level resources the result would have been far less entertaining ... mainly because I think his vision was flawed, and it was only through the collaboration of others that the whole thing came to fruition in the way it did. The product that succeeded so well wasn't as he intended, but it was what got brought forth, and to great acclaim, so everybody is 'why piss on the wedding cake?'

One aspect that deviated massively from his intent that he has never been able to do ANYTHING about is the film's cinematography, which in no way represented his confusing statement of intent that it should be documentary like, but with a fairytale diffusion. Call up a screen grab of LUCKY LADY and another from THE WORLD AT WAR; you're going to see apples and oranges, with STAR WARS looking like an artichoke by comparison ... and that is due to Gil Taylor, who fought with and disregarded instruction from Lucas and Gary Kurtz throughout, and was Fox's guy. If they'd actually gotten to keep their original choice for DP, they'd've had their LUCKY LADY look, and I swear, it would have went over about as well as ... well, LUCKY LADY did. As in NOT AT ALL.

I think that first film was absolutely the result of expert editing, a picture that evolved more thoroughly in post than he'd intended. All of that may have rankled him, but it also created a situation that let him do the rest of the pics largely as he wished. You'd figure he'd be happy with that.
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2013, 05:23 PM   #74
MacLeod
Admiral
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: The 3D-quality

Yes but with any creative work, is the artist/writer etc.. ever truly satisified with the final product. Or is it a case of it's the best they could give the tols/tech/time constraints they have? Or do they look back and think maybe I should have done Y instead.
__________________
On the continent of wild endeavour in the mountains of solace and solitude there stood the citadel of the time lords, the oldest and most mighty race in the universe looking down on the galaxies below sworn never to interfere only to watch.
MacLeod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 12 2013, 05:32 PM   #75
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: The 3D-quality

trevanian wrote: View Post
Better still, how about reflecting the intent of the film's makers by leaving it the hell alone.
So when the intent was to make it in 3D...
JarodRussell 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 07:12 PM.

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