Ebert gives Titanic 3D's 3D the ol' thumbs-down

[Robert Maxwell]

 

[Owain Taggart]

The Hobbit is being conceptualized and shot from the ground up in 3D, it is not a post-conversion.

PJ even had concept artists doing their work in red/blue shades of pencil so he could throw on some old fashioned 3D glasses to get a grasp of their work.

And yet, I didn't even mention The Hobbit. I was speaking about post-conversions in general. I think you may have meant to quote Jax. I was more or less agreeing with him over Avatar sequels and expanded on movies shot in 3D.

He said he was going to see the Hobbit in 2D, and that he wouldn't be bothering with any movie in 3D besides Avatar. You said "Agreed", and then talked about how you'd only see movies that were done from the ground up in 3D. Surely you can see why I thought you might think the Hobbit was a 2D-3d conversion?

Yeah, I guess I can see where it was my fault in not being specific enough. It's interesting though now that you bring it up as it hadn't even occured to me until you mentioned it that it was done from the ground up in 3D.

 

[Gaith]

Wasn't Cameron extremely critical of movies that were not 'true 3D' and just post-conversion movies with some 3D shots. I think I remember him criticizing Prince of Persia or Harry Potter or something.

Clash of the Titans. He was criticizing rushed jobs and not shooting natively in 3D now that good 3D cameras exist, not the idea of post-converting older movies as a whole.

Is there an easy way of finding out if upcoming films are real 3D or the garbage post-conversion? Me and my friends were going to see Ghost Rider this weekend but found out from a review that it was post-conversion, so we're going to pass on that. There has to be website that reports on what 3D process the films use.

The recurring CinemaBlend feature To 3D or not to 3D.

 

[23skidoo]

Coverting to 3-D is this generation's colorization. I was forever turned off colorization (except for restorative purposes as is being done right now with some 1970s Doctor Who episodes) when I saw John Huston and Orson Welles making tearful pleas to leave their movies alone.

We haven't quite had the same melodrama with the 3-D conversions because so far Lucas and Cameron are inflicting the injuries on themselves. But wait till some idiot decides to covert Citizen Kane or something iconic like that to 3-D.

Me, I'm voting with my wallet and I don't support 3-D movies of any sort, whether native or converted. If there's a 2-D version I pay to see it in that format or buy it on Blu-ray. If there isn't then I don't see the movie.

I no longer look forward to new movie releases as a result, I'm afraid, due to the fact the 2-D option is not as widely available as 3-D apologists claim. It's destroyed one of the few joys I have left. But c'est la vie. Fortunately 3D-TV is dead on arrival (seriously, it is) so I don't expect to see 2-D releases stopping any time soon.

Fortunately I will at least enjoy a bit of vindication this Sunday when The Artist wins Best Picture.

Alex

 

[Gaith]

Coverting to 3-D is this generation's colorization. I was forever turned off colorization (except for restorative purposes as is being done right now with some 1970s Doctor Who episodes) when I saw John Huston and Orson Welles making tearful pleas to leave their movies alone.

To play devil's advocate, apart from the daunting technical challenges of adequately coloring native B&W material, by introducing hues, colorization adds (and therefore changes) the emotional content of a source. B&W movies were meant to be viewed as taking place in B&W world, but not in 2D ones. Change a character's jacket from an ambiguous gray to a dark red, and you've introduced an element the original filmmakers probably never intended. Use 3D software to make it look as though that same character really is standing in front of that car, however, and you're not really adding or subtracting much to the original intent, just fiddling around with optics.

But then, that isn't really a very compelling argument for the process either, is it?

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

I'm not for colorizing B&W films, this remark is interesting

B&W movies were meant to be viewed as taking place in B&W world,

My only possible objection was that if they had color, the probably would have used it, at least in some instances...

 

[Trekker4747]

I actually agree with your point, colorizing a movie can dramatically change the look and mood of it because it was originally shot and filmed with B&W in mind and when it's colorized most of the time the colors are exaggerated to take advantage of the new color TVs of the time. (Where bright, vibrant, colors were expected instead of muted natural colors.)

But converting a movie into 3D from 2D isn't really going to do much to change the look and mood of scene other than maybe in poorer conversion processes maybe muting colors or making background images a little less clear but still in the end the look and mood of the scene is going to remain largely unchanged.

Still, the conversion process rarely looks good so the underlining point that the conversion is just today's "fad" like colorization was sort of stands (even if the two are not equally comparable.)

 

[Brikar99]

Y'know, I don't think I've ever actually seen a colorized black and white movie.

 

[scotpens]

I actually agree with your point, colorizing a movie can dramatically change the look and mood of it because it was originally shot and filmed with B&W in mind and when it's colorized most of the time the colors are exaggerated to take advantage of the new color TVs of the time.

Exqueeze me? Computer-aided colorization of B&W movies started in 1983. Color TV had been around a good 25 years by then.

My only possible objection was that if they had color, the probably would have used it, at least in some instances...

The reason why a movie was made in black-and-white is irrelevant. The point is, it was made in black-and-white. The visual aspects of filming in B&W are different than filming in color. Even if colorization looked totally natural (and it never does), a B&W film that’s been colorized will NEVER look the way it would look had it been filmed in color. Just like simulated 3D will never look as if the movie was shot in 3D.

Y'know, I don't think I've ever actually seen a colorized black and white movie.

You haven’t missed anything.

 

[Trek4Ever]

Is there an easy way of finding out if upcoming films are real 3D or the garbage post-conversion? Me and my friends were going to see Ghost Rider this weekend but found out from a review that it was post-conversion, so we're going to pass on that. There has to be website that reports on what 3D process the films use.

http://realorfake3d.com/

Many thanks!

 

[Gaith]

a B&W film that’s been colorized will NEVER look the way it would look had it been filmed in color. Just like simulated 3D will never look as if the movie was shot in 3D.

Not only that, but I'm not at all sure a B&W movie in 3D wouldn't be really weird. 2D B&W is one thing; it's something we're used to from pictures and older movies, but B&W in 3D? That isn't like real life at all. I'd be fascinated to see it attempted - say, if a movie like Good Night, and Good Luck. were shot in 3D, I'd definitely see it that way out of sheer curiosity - but it might well be a singularly unsettling and distracting experience.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

a B&W film that’s been colorized will NEVER look the way it would look had it been filmed in color. Just like simulated 3D will never look as if the movie was shot in 3D.

Not only that, but I'm not at all sure a B&W movie in 3D wouldn't be really weird. 2D B&W is one thing; it's something we're used to from pictures and older movies, but B&W in 3D? That isn't like real life at all. I'd be fascinated to see it attempted - say, if a movie like Good Night, and Good Luck. were shot in 3D, I'd definitely see it that way out of sheer curiosity - but it might well be a singularly unsettling and distracting experience.

Creature from the Black Lagoon (1954) was black and white and 3D.

 

[Tosk]

Why would a B&W 3D film be any weirder than watching 3D blue aliens for two hours?

 

[Professor Zoom]

So the conversion to 3D made the story, acting and dialogue bad?

Cameron did that on his own. It was crappy then, it's crappy now.

 

[scotpens]

Creature from the Black Lagoon (1954) was black and white and 3D.

So was It Came From Outer Space (1953).

 

[nvek86]

And for a more modern film: A long version of Tim Burton's Frankenweenie will be released later this year: stop-motion, black & white and in 3D!

 

[Trekker4747]

Revenge of the Creature also was B&W and in 3D. It was a sequel to "Creature from the Black Lagoon", the only 3D picture released in 1955 and the only 3D sequel to a 3D movie. The movie also features the first ever screen appearance of Clint Eastwood (as pretty much an uncredited speaking extra in one scene.)

The movie was riffed in an episode of Mystery Science Theater 3000 (Season 8) and also it's the poster Marty references in Back to the Future III when Doc asks who Clint Eastwood is while in 1955.

 

[Harvey]

But wait till some idiot decides to covert Citizen Kane or something iconic like that to 3-D.

It woulld be decried, certainly, but the funny thing is the deep focus photography in Citizen Kane would lend itself extraordinarily well to a 3-D conversion (at least, as good as a 2-D movie can look in "3-D"). Orson Welles had it in his contract that the movie could not be altered, though, so I doubt a 3-D conversion would ever happen (this contractual language also prevented the movie from being colorized in the 1980s).

It was a sequel to "Creature from the Black Lagoon", the only 3D picture released in 1955 and the only 3D sequel to a 3D movie.

I wonder, was Journey 2 Mysterious Island the first 3-D movie sequel to a 3-D movie since then, or are there other examples?

 

[Trekker4747]

It might be, I can't think of any other back-to-back movies in a series that had 3D since 3D is a "gimmick" usually used to boost sales in a failing franchise or to capitalize on a current trend.

 

[Tosk]

I wonder, was Journey 2 Mysterious Island the first 3-D movie sequel to a 3-D movie since then [...] ?

Not even close.

Spy Kids 3 and 4, several of the Harry Potter films, all three Toy Story films, and Final Destination 4 and 5 are in 3D.