I doubt GL will do anything new. It just depends how they handel the digital elements in TPM really... Will they make it work like it did in Avatar? Or more like the kinda not working 3D in Alice in Wonderland or Tron?
What was 3D about Tron Legacy???? I saw it in 3D in the IMAX theatre. Can't watch it in a better place. Yet, it didn't look very 3Dish... in fact... it looked like very decent 2D....
I'm not that fussy for 3d either and to tell the truth I can't really see it to well cause I have a lazy eye, unless the stuff is actually coming out of the screen. Like the floaty things in avatar, but for me tron had more things come out of the screen than avatar. And I will still see star wars in 3d just to see it on the big screen again!!!
I didn't see anything coming out of the screen. Only the opening fly shot through the buildings had a 3D effect.
And it's not about things coming out of the screen. Avatar looked 3D, it really did. They effect of 3D is lost when lenses are used that create a limited depth of field. For 3D to really work everything in the shot should be in focus. 3D will create depth, not focus. They did that very well in Avatar, they didn't do it in Alice in Wonderland (but that wasn't originally intended to be 3D) and they certainly didn't do it in Tron where everything is animated, so they have full control over focus of backgroudn and foregrounds... And yet... they limited the depth of dield of the shots...
I agree, Ive seen several of the films that were supposed #D and really only Avatar and Tangled to a certain extent gave me that 3D feeling, the rest were crap. Altho I suppose if anyone can convery a film to 3d with successful results I imagine its gonna be Lucas Films & ILM.
Exactly. The CG and background environments are on one layer, while the actors have been pasted onto it in a separate one.
Either way, it'll be nice to have SW back on the big screen. Even to those of you swearing you're not going....you know you will.
I'm just hoping now that enough time has passed and the craze has died down, perhaps people will be able to go back to these movies with their expectations in check and see that they aren't nearly the horrific films they were made out to be.
I also love people's reasoning for why the PT sucked. Bad acting, bad dialogue....too much CGI...then you ask them which one was the worst? "Oh, TPM...cause Jar Jar was the worstesest character ever."
But in reality, TPM had the least amount of CGI...the best acting, and the best dialogue of the 3 prequels....and probably felt the closest to all of the originals.
Wierd why people think it's the worst one. I think it's just because a lot of people are shallow minded and let the fact that they didn't like something about it (midichilorians) ruin their entire experience to the point where they can't even see any of the good behind it. Sad.
__________________
I like George.
Last edited by Sith Master X on Mar 8th, 2011 at 07:30 PM
What I don't get is this plan to only release one film a year in 3D.
When the 20th Anniversary happened we got all three of the OT films released between January & March 1997.
Is there that much of a demand for 3D screens that they can't schedule in all six films in one year?
__________________
"I'm not smart so much as I am not dumb." - Harlan Ellison
And money. Now people may and go see each movie more than once.
You forget that it's alos quite boring, it's about taxes and senate debates and stuff. The plot is rather muddled and it shows an extraordinarily wooden performance by Liam Neeson.
But it's not the worst one. AOTC is. But I am sure that one will look great in 3D. However... a 3D Shaak is not really something I look forward to, with that big butt sticking out to the audience...
Mar 4th, 2011 05:15 PM
