Paramount wants the next Trek to be in 3D
- Thread starter Admiral Buzzkill
- Start date
Actually, I've discovered that my opinion of Avatar did a complete 180 after I watched it in 2D on Blu-Ray. My opinion after watching it in 3-D was that it sucked and I spent a lot of the time focusing on how it stole this idea from "Call Me Joe" and that idea from "Dances With Wolves" because the 3-D took me out of the film and as such sabotaged the story.
Then I saw the 2-D version - which (and I'll keep repeating this till the cows come home) James Cameron told Sun Media in Canada looks BETTER than the 3-D version - and I realized the story wasn't that bad, the acting was pretty good, and the effects were amazing. And watching the featurettes convinced me further that after all the other innovations Cameron introduced, the 3-D was overkill. I still refuse to drink the Kool Aid and call Avatar the best movie ever made - I have a list of about 50 films that deserve that accolade more, including Fritz Lang's Metropolis - but it's a better film than I initially gave it credit for.
Back to Trek - I guess we have to decide now what we want Star Trek to be in the 2010s. Do we want style and special effects to dominate at the expense of story and emotion? Then it's got to be 3-D. Do we want story over style, the way Roddenberry conceived Star Trek back in 1964-65? Then we don't need the 3-D. But then, as recently as 10 years ago people were saying that Roddenberry's concept was outdated and commercially non-viable to modern audiences, etc. So maybe we'll have to agree to let Pocket Books, IDW, James Cawley & Co. and the fan fic writers tell the stories, and let Paramount give us the eye candy.
And if they do that, I'm not dropping dime on anything connected to Star Trek ever again. And not out of any blind loyalty to Abrams, either.
Alex
kkozoriz1
Fleet Captain
Maybe they can bring back Sensurround as well. It adds about the same amount to the story as 3-D does.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensurround
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensurround
Pop quiz: how many versions of Romeo and Juliet had been staged before Shakespeare wrote his? It's possible that one of the earlier versions was better than his - if so, it's lost in obscurity and we will never know.
Be that as it may, I'd like to point out that Romeo and Juliet was originally shown to audiences in 3-D, as were all of Shakespeare's plays
1bulma1
Lieutenant Commander
Star Trek 2 in 3D...hasn’t 3D ruined enough movies already?
I found the latest news on star trek sequel and they are both bad news
1. JJ isn’t even sure if he will direct (he needs to read the script first) which meas if he thinks the script sucks then he wont direct.
2. Like every other summer blockbuster films, Paramount wants the film to be in 3D
May be I am been irrational but I really hate films in 3D,
Why does every film now has to be in 3D, if a movie is good then u don’t need to make it in 3D, people will still see it in millions
Also 3D are for films that sucks in general , that is why they make it 3 dimensional; to make money and distract movie goers from how bad the film is
No offence but star trek 2009 was a better film than avater, (with avatar the story was pointless ) if you take away the special effect and remove your 3D glasses, U GET NOTHING OUT OF THE MOVIE
Avater was an average film at best….star trek 09 was an excellent film....way better than avater
As a star trek and star wars fan I am one of those pissed at George Lucas for releasing the original trilogy in 3D
I can’t take it from both trek and wars
So to all trekkies…..SAY NO TO 3D.
here are the links
http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplayl...t_already_asking_for_star_trek_2_to_be_in_3d/
http://www.airlockalpha.com/node/8178/paramount-pushing-for-star-trek-12-to-go-3-d.html
I found the latest news on star trek sequel and they are both bad news
1. JJ isn’t even sure if he will direct (he needs to read the script first) which meas if he thinks the script sucks then he wont direct.
2. Like every other summer blockbuster films, Paramount wants the film to be in 3D
May be I am been irrational but I really hate films in 3D,
Why does every film now has to be in 3D, if a movie is good then u don’t need to make it in 3D, people will still see it in millions
Also 3D are for films that sucks in general , that is why they make it 3 dimensional; to make money and distract movie goers from how bad the film is
No offence but star trek 2009 was a better film than avater, (with avatar the story was pointless ) if you take away the special effect and remove your 3D glasses, U GET NOTHING OUT OF THE MOVIE
Avater was an average film at best….star trek 09 was an excellent film....way better than avater
As a star trek and star wars fan I am one of those pissed at George Lucas for releasing the original trilogy in 3D
I can’t take it from both trek and wars
So to all trekkies…..SAY NO TO 3D.
here are the links
http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplayl...t_already_asking_for_star_trek_2_to_be_in_3d/
http://www.airlockalpha.com/node/8178/paramount-pushing-for-star-trek-12-to-go-3-d.html
Re: Star Trek 2 in 3D...hasn’t 3D ruined enough movies already?
Well, I don't know if that would be it necessarily, though he should probably watch the way he's wording that. For what it's worth, J.J.'s wife was the one who convinced him to direct the first film (it may not have even crossed his mind to be the director at that point to be fair.)
The film will, of course, be in 2-D as well. Unless I'm mistaken, 3-D films only make up a fraction of the sales for films, so you'll have a choice. I'll probably watch in 2-D first, and then see it in 3-D in a second or third viewing. I do not intend to buy a 3-D TV so I'll just see it when I can.
Well, I don't know if that would be it necessarily, though he should probably watch the way he's wording that. For what it's worth, J.J.'s wife was the one who convinced him to direct the first film (it may not have even crossed his mind to be the director at that point to be fair.)
The film will, of course, be in 2-D as well. Unless I'm mistaken, 3-D films only make up a fraction of the sales for films, so you'll have a choice. I'll probably watch in 2-D first, and then see it in 3-D in a second or third viewing. I do not intend to buy a 3-D TV so I'll just see it when I can.
Re: Star Trek 2 in 3D...hasn’t 3D ruined enough movies already?
There's already a thread about this, but you've got some new links, so I'm going to merge this one with that. Please stand by...
A
Amaris
Guest
Me too. I never saw Avatar in 3D, only in 2D, and only on my 20" HDTV, and I still enjoyed it.
Filming it in 3D will make the raping of one's childhood much more visceral. 
The movie will be fine in 3D and will make that much more money. This is a good thing.
People who bellyache and complain that even though every 3D movie is still booked into numerous theaters in 2Ds version that "they don't run it in 2D in my area" need to post proof or retract.
People who bellyache and complain that even though every 3D movie is still booked into numerous theaters in 2Ds version that "they don't run it in 2D in my area" need to post proof or retract.
well. it's a common practice at the cinemas in my area: when there is a 3d version, then it will be shown in 3d and in 3d only because that version makes more money. if you want to see it in 2d you have to go to the smaller cinemas who can't show 3d. but the smaller cinemas only show more arty movies and not blockbusters.
This area usually runs both the 2D and 3D versions although after a while, the 2D one is the only one that is still running. It would help if the glasses you buy at one theater would work at the other theaters.
Whether or not it's shot in 3-D is the least of my concerns. After all, to paraphrase James Carville, "It's the script, stupid." So, go for it. What the hell. It's about time Trek was on the cutting edge of something.
And if the movie is boring, we can all try to reach out and grab the 3-D lens flares as the shoot over our heads. That'll be fun.
And if the movie is boring, we can all try to reach out and grab the 3-D lens flares as the shoot over our heads. That'll be fun.
Similar threads
