Star Trek 2012 in 3D, Yes or No?

[FarStrider]

I would say that if 3-D actually adds any value to the movie, then go for it. . .but to have 3-D just to have it. . . no. . . that comes across as just a gimick (see "Clash of the Titans"). . . I also find that there are very few movies where the story or presentation truly needed 3-D for them to work. . . if the plot and characters are good, then what does 3-D really add?

~FS

 

[JarodRussell]

3D is really just what color was back then. Remember when they shot movies in black and white and then colored them? That's the same principle as when you shoot a movie in 2D and then convert it to 3D.

 

[metalheadj]

Newcomer responding...

Having seen my share of the return of 3D as a way of filming, it generally doesn't impress me anymore now, than it did in the age of red and blue plastic lenses...

 

[shapeshifter]

I would go see it in 2-D the first time or two, just so I would not be distracted by the 3-D, then check out the 3-D version for kicks.

 

[JewelsNeeJulian]

Trideo is turning into just another Gimmick that will be rolled out in lieu of actual plot writing

 

[timelord1010]

I think it should be in 4-D.

4-D film,

A 4-D film (sometimes written 4D film) is a marketing term that describes an entertainment presentation system combining a 3-D film with physical effects in the theatre, which occur in synchronization with the film. Because the physical effects are expensive to set up, 4-D films are usually presented only at special venues such as theme parks and amusement parks.

Somehow I don't think Paramount is going to talk the exhibitors into this.
Yes I'm being serious with my reply to your post.

When I worked for United Artists our nearest neighbor in Dallas had a 4-D auditorium complete with seats that moved. Guess what it is now. A regular auditorium.

You know it might be cool to have a 4D theater. I don't know if you have ever been to a theater showing "The Rocky Horror Picture Show" and the zombies come out and dance around the theater. Now imagine a Trek movie with Klingons or Borg coming out during the movie. On second thought the price of a movie ticket is too high to be distracted like this!

 

[Set Harth]

Now imagine a Trek movie with Klingons or Borg coming out during the movie.

Please God let this never ever happen, ever.

 

[Sector 7]

Now imagine a Trek movie with Klingons or Borg coming out during the movie.

Please God let this never ever happen, ever.

I wholeheartedly agree.

 

[jefferiestubes8]

news update

hollywood.com is reporting "Star Trek XI" will be in 3-D.

via
3dguy.tv

This happening would guarantee a double-dip Blu-ray from CBS Home Video.

 

[Hythlodeus]

hopefully not

 

[MvRojo]

I guess that's not surprising. I just don't like the fact that when it's a 3-D release, it's hard to find a non-3-D showing, except in older theatres (at least in LA).

 

[FarStrider]

Re: news update

hollywood.com is reporting "Star Trek XI" will be in 3-D.

via
3dguy.tv

This happening would guarantee a double-dip Blu-ray from CBS Home Video.

I'm not seeing that story on hollywood.com. . . the latest Star Trek news the site has is "Bruce Greenwood says 'Star Trek 2' to Film in January 2011": http://www.hollywood.com/news/EXCLU...ek_2_to_start_filming_in_January_2011/7026184

as to 3dguy.tv. . . who are they? Is this a credible source? Looking at that site's "About us" information doesn't exactly inspire confidence that it is chock-full of Hollywood insiders. . . And considering that there isn't even a script or director for ST12 yet, I don't know why anyone would announce that it is going to be filmed in 3-D. . .

~Fs

 

[Melete]

I voted "I dont' care either way.".It's a hard choice for me, cause the theatre in town shows 3D movies only in it's 3D version - but I haven't seen a movie in 3D yet (choices were either not my taste, stupid or bad conversions).

 

[jefferiestubes8]

Re: news update

I'm not seeing that story on hollywood.com. . . the latest Star Trek news the site has is "Bruce Greenwood says 'Star Trek 2' to Film in January 2011": http://www.hollywood.com/news/EXCLU...ek_2_to_start_filming_in_January_2011/7026184

as to 3dguy.tv. . . who are they?

Your link above is correct.

the 3-D guy link is
http://3dguy.tv/triple-the-trekkieness-new-star-trek-movie-to-be-in-3d/

my mobile phone would not let me copy and paste links yesterday when I originally posted.

Perhaps I misread it but the title indicated the film would be shot in 3-D.

 

[M'Sharak]

Re: news update

I'm not seeing that story on hollywood.com. . . the latest Star Trek news the site has is "Bruce Greenwood says 'Star Trek 2' to Film in January 2011": http://www.hollywood.com/news/EXCLU...ek_2_to_start_filming_in_January_2011/7026184

as to 3dguy.tv. . . who are they?

Your link above is correct.

There's nothing there about "Star Trek 2" being in 3D, though. Greenwood says that all he knows is that shooting is supposed to begin in January (2011) and that he hopes he has a part.

the 3-D guy link is
http://3dguy.tv/triple-the-trekkieness-new-star-trek-movie-to-be-in-3d/

my mobile phone would not let me copy and paste links yesterday when I originally posted.

Perhaps I misread it but the title indicated the film would be shot in 3-D.

Well, here's the complete text:

Bruce Greenwood, (Pike) was asked recently if he knew anything about Paramount’s developing Star Trek sequel set to be shot in 3D ! According to Greenwood, Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto and the entire crew of the Enterprise will energize in January 2011. The sequel to director J.J. Abrams 2009 ‘Star Trek’ reboot involving the young crew’s first mission onboard the U.S.S. Enterprise. On a journey filled with action, comedy and cosmic peril, the crew must find a way to stop an evil being whose mission of vengeance threatens all of mankind.

(emphasis mine)

The "set to be shot in 3D !" which I've underlined above doesn't even appear to be part of the sentence, grammatically -- it looks dropped in, almost as if at random, and no source is given to support it. The rest of the first sentence and all of the second more or less echo what was contained in the hollywood.com/Bruce Greenwood mini-interview. The other jazz about "a journey filled with action, comedy and cosmic peril" and "crew must find a way to stop an evil being whose mission of vengeance threatens all of mankind" is just meaningless fluff someone pulled from MovienewZ.com to use as padding, and it's topped off with an image obviously and not very skillfully doctored from one of the 2009 movie's posters.

 

[FarStrider]

Re: news update

I'm not seeing that story on hollywood.com. . . the latest Star Trek news the site has is "Bruce Greenwood says 'Star Trek 2' to Film in January 2011": http://www.hollywood.com/news/EXCLU...ek_2_to_start_filming_in_January_2011/7026184

as to 3dguy.tv. . . who are they?

Your link above is correct.

There's nothing there about "Star Trek 2" being in 3D, though. Greenwood says that all he knows is that shooting is supposed to begin in January (2011) and that he hopes he has a part.

the 3-D guy link is
http://3dguy.tv/triple-the-trekkieness-new-star-trek-movie-to-be-in-3d/

my mobile phone would not let me copy and paste links yesterday when I originally posted.

Perhaps I misread it but the title indicated the film would be shot in 3-D.

Well, here's the complete text:

Bruce Greenwood, (Pike) was asked recently if he knew anything about Paramount’s developing Star Trek sequel set to be shot in 3D ! According to Greenwood, Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto and the entire crew of the Enterprise will energize in January 2011. The sequel to director J.J. Abrams 2009 ‘Star Trek’ reboot involving the young crew’s first mission onboard the U.S.S. Enterprise. On a journey filled with action, comedy and cosmic peril, the crew must find a way to stop an evil being whose mission of vengeance threatens all of mankind.

(emphasis mine)

The "set to be shot in 3D !" which I've underlined above doesn't even appear to be part of the sentence, grammatically -- it looks dropped in, almost as if at random, and no source is given to support it. The rest of the first sentence and all of the second more or less echo what was contained in the hollywood.com/Bruce Greenwood mini-interview. The other jazz about "a journey filled with action, comedy and cosmic peril" and "crew must find a way to stop an evil being whose mission of vengeance threatens all of mankind" is just meaningless fluff someone pulled from MovienewZ.com to use as padding, and it's topped off with an image obviously and not very skillfully doctored from one of the 2009 movie's posters.

Exactly. . . who are the people behind this 3dguy.tv site? (and looking at their promotional videos is not exactly inspiring confidence that they are legitimate, IMO) Where are they getting their info (if they are not just pulling it out of their arses)? What makes them so credible? Especially since internet rumors are a dime a dozen and they basically ganked that hollywood.com interview and pasted it into a blurb relevant to their own site. . .

I will say it again: There is no script yet, and no director attached to ST12. . .it is much too early for anyone to be talking about 3D like it is a given. . . and until someone on the Supreme Court says it's true, it is all rumors. . hell, by June 2012, 3D may be considered passé.


~FS

 

[FarStrider]

I hate to have two posts in a row, but here is something interesting that JJ said at ComicCon today about 3-D movies:

"When you put the glasses on, everything gets dimmer. It all gets a little gray and muted. You get into it, my brain adjusts to it after a while, but for the first few minutes, it seems less than the experience…I’m not totally on board"

http://trekmovie.com/2010/07/22/jj-...-at-comic-con-full-abramswhedon-panel-report/

So if he *is* the director, there is a definitely a chance ST12 won't be in 3-D. . . we'll just have to wait and see. . .


~FS

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

3D is a gimmick whose novelty has already worn off.

If I'm proven wrong, so be it.

 

[JarodRussell]

I hate to have two posts in a row, but here is something interesting that JJ said at ComicCon today about 3-D movies:

"When you put the glasses on, everything gets dimmer. It all gets a little gray and muted. You get into it, my brain adjusts to it after a while, but for the first few minutes, it seems less than the experience…I’m not totally on board"

Well you simply should put the glasses on before you watch the first frame of the movie. Then there is no difference that you need to get used to.

 

[shapeshifter]

^Right. 3D movies today come with previews of coming attractions in 3D, so the eyes do have time to adjust.

Honestly though, until/if the day comes when the option to view a film in either 2D or 3D isn't available, I don't see why this matters so much.