Home Your Ad Here

Go Back   IndieTalk - Indie Film Forum > The Biz > Hollywood

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-30-2016, 11:48 PM   #1
Cracker Funk
Basic Member
 
Cracker Funk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 9,570
Ang Lee and 3D

What are your thoughts on the 3D movement, in general, and specifically, what do you think about what Ang Lee is doing?

I'm a fan. In years past, we've had some pretty big debates regarding 3D. Is it a fad? Is it the future of filmmaking? For a while, I was convinced that it was somewhere in-between. I used to think that I liked it but only for animated films. That was during the time in which Marvel was sort-of leading the brigade of mediocre post-conversions. But things have changed. Though Marvel hasn't yet really used 3D as a storytelling technique, I do think that their more recent post-conversions have looked very good.

As for using 3D as a storytelling tool, I think Ang Lee will eventually be remembered as a groundbreaker and leader of the movement. I absolutely loved his use of 3D in The Life of Pi, and I'm really looking forward to seeing what he's done in Long Halftime Walk, especially since he shot it in 120FPS.

Agree/disagree? Other thoughts?
Cracker Funk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today   #1A
film guy
Basic Member
 
Posts: 17

 
Old 10-31-2016, 03:55 AM   #2
sfoster
IndieTalk Moderator
 
sfoster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Maryland
Posts: 5,038
the only 3d i've ever enjoyed was the hobbit and probably because it double the FPS

I'd love to see a high frame rate be employed for a martial arts movie, that's where i think it will really shine. I'm much more interested in HFR than 3d
sfoster is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-2016, 11:21 AM   #3
PaulWrightyThen
Basic Member
 
PaulWrightyThen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: MANCHESTER
Posts: 356
For me the problem with 3d is that people fall into the trap of shooting for it. I really hate it when blatantly 3d friendly shots go in as it breaks my concentration and takes me out of the film. One exception was Prometheus. I forgot I was watching it in 3d. So whats the point? It was still rubbish.

I also watched that trailer for the LHTW. High frame rate is superb for sports, its like your there, you get sweet slow mo replays and can see everyswing, super high def. When I'm watching something that's on a set I absolutely DONT want to be there. It's a set! People might say I'm being a little stuck in my ways (they might not, but you know) but I think that films that crisp and clear will lose character.

But, its what ever you want your vision to be in I guess.
PaulWrightyThen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2016, 05:39 AM   #4
jax_rox
IndieTalk Moderator
 
jax_rox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 2,825
I love immersive cinema. And I think 3D can help with that immersion. The right movie, on the right sized screen can be elevated, to some extent, by the use of 3D.

I think most importantly, you need a story that can be told well in 2D.

I never got around to seeing Life of Pi, unfortunately, and I don't know that I've seen a movie yet that's used 3D as a storytelling tool.

I personally think potentially the greatest 3D movies are the 'made for IMAX 3D' ones as they can quite liberally use 3D as a story tool. In a major release, you need to 'protect' for 2D release (which will be the majority of screens), but in a 3D-only movie you don't need to, and I've heard (though unfortunately not seen) of some great uses in those cases.

The fact that you will almost always need to protect for 2D viewing will always limit your 3D ability. And 3D at home will never take off until you can have a glasses-free environment, so it will be a long time before you don't have to protect for 2D.

Overall, is the extra cost and time across all facets of production, coupled with the fact that 3D glasses are often still somewhat uncomfortable to wear for an extended period, and that some people have major issues with 3D full stop... worth it?

That's for you, as the Director, to decide.

I'm on the fence.


As for HFR, I cannot get behind it at this stage (and hated viewing The Hobbit in HFR). For me, HDR is the next big thing (that may actually not turn out to be a gimmick!)

Last edited by jax_rox; 11-02-2016 at 05:46 AM.
jax_rox is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2016, 11:35 AM   #5
directorik
IndieTalk's Resident Guru
 
directorik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: hollywood
Posts: 9,228
I think 3D and high frame rates are a reaction to home viewing. It's been
seen before; when TV became widespread studios reacted with VistaVision,
Cinemascope and Cinerama. There were filmmaker who used it poorly and
those who used it well. Today we see great filmmakers using 3D well (Lee
and Scorsese) and studios doing post-conversion for no reason other than
higher ticket price.

3D is the future of filmmaking just as the super wide screen formats were
in the 1950's/60's. Still in use today for the right project but not every
movie needs to be 2:35 or 2:40. Studios hope formats that can't be seen
at home will get people into the theaters. I hope filmmaker use them well.
directorik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2016, 11:11 PM   #6
Cracker Funk
Basic Member
 
Cracker Funk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 9,570
And then Marvel completely changed this conversation by making Doctor Strange.

Seriously, I won't even consider your opinion on this subject if you haven't seen Doctor Strange in 3D. It's that good.

As directorik mentioned, yes, this is something that Hollywood is doing to entice people away from their televisions. Netflix, and a good number of other companies are giving traditional Hollywood studios some fierce competition.

Marvel is fighting back. Holy shit, the 3D in Doctor Strange is dope! That is definitely the way to see it!

And since we're on a filmmaker forum, maybe we should discuss the possibility that 3D is not a gimmick, but a legitimate aspect in which filmmakers can further their story.

Last edited by Cracker Funk; 11-04-2016 at 11:17 PM.
Cracker Funk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2016, 03:41 AM   #7
richy
Basic - Premiere Expired
 
richy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: u.s.a.
Posts: 2,864
Well I love it. I'm a four-eyes. If I had to wear glasses all the time, I might feel differently. But generally I find it does enhance the experience. Prometheus was awesome in 3D. I think I saw Doctor Strange in 2D. Oh well.

So, what are the industries doing? Are the TV makers sticking with 3D? Or will they abandon it for 4K as their "gimmick"?
richy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2016, 10:26 AM   #8
Cracker Funk
Basic Member
 
Cracker Funk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 9,570
I think 3D TV is dead. That's good for Hollywood. I don't know that 4K is a "gimmick"; I think it's just the next logical step in technological advance.

Hi richy!
Cracker Funk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2017, 07:03 AM   #9
richy
Basic - Premiere Expired
 
richy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: u.s.a.
Posts: 2,864
Hi, Cracker.

It's interesting that you said back then you thought 3D TV is dead. At some point since then I was at Best Buy and I asked a clerk about it. He more-or-less said yeah; everything has gone to 4K. I understand that's hardly authoritative evidence. But…if there are few 3D TVs on the market, then I have to think it is pretty much dead.

So then isn't the question: if 3D TV is dead, what kind of life is 3D likely to have at all?

This might sound silly, but I've been buying 3D + Blu-ray + Whatever Versions of home videos I like in anticipation of someday getting a 3D system. But now that seems likely pointless. I'm thinking of buying the 4K versions instead from here on out.
richy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2017, 11:59 PM   #10
Scoopicman
Premiere Member
 
Scoopicman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 1,765
Hi, Richy! Haven't seen you in a while. I hope you're doing well. I'll bet there will be more 3-D buzz when the new AVATAR movies start coming out. The success of the first movie pretty much hiked the interest.
__________________
midnightsunent
Scoopicman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2017, 06:40 AM   #11
richy
Basic - Premiere Expired
 
richy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: u.s.a.
Posts: 2,864
Hi, Scoop! Likewise! I've missed you! Yes, I've been wondering what Cameron makes of it all. Does he still hold out hope for it? I have to say I was really taken by Avatar in 3D (and on the IMAX). LOL, I left that experience a believer. (But…that was years ago. Sigh.) So I would love to see Avatar II in 3D as well, whatever its prospects are.

Alien Arrival. Not sure I understood the politics or the message of the film (plot). Nonetheless, a fairly decent (low budget) science fiction.

Sea of Trees. I watched this when I had the free trial of Amazon Prime. I thought it was quite nice and easily worth a watch. McConaughey has only gotten better. Reminiscent of his tour de force performance in Interstellar. And the other players are excellent as well, such as Ken Watanabe. I think it's a lovely film.
richy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2017, 05:58 PM   #12
jax_rox
IndieTalk Moderator
 
jax_rox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 2,825
3D in home video will make a resurgence but not until you can view it sans glasses. I think 3D will remain very much a 'cinema-only' for now. Which actually provides certain value for movie-goers as it's an experience that's much harder to get at home now.

TV manufacturers are always looking for something to try and push TV sales - what's the thing that would get someone with a perfectly fine TV want to go out and purchase a new one.

At the moment it's 4K and HDR, and it's starting to become OLED panels.

They'll always find something to sell you. Personally I think OLED, HDR and even 4K to be a genuine step up in quality and a reason to buy, whilst 3D was mostly gimmicky.

That said, HDR is still in its teething stages so I wouldn't be rushing out to buy just yet.
jax_rox is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2017, 02:55 AM   #13
Feutus Lapdance
Basic Member
 
Feutus Lapdance's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Nederland
Posts: 375
I dont think so.... becouse (in my opinion) Ang Lee his life of Pi is not a good movie. The acting was comparable to that of warhorse. Will this movie be still relevant in 10 years like Jurassic park, alien or star wars? I don't think so. The acting in the never ending story was bad to... but at least it did some things in its story telling, ideas and set design that still holds up and inspire til this day.
Feutus Lapdance is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2017, 10:53 AM   #14
Cracker Funk
Basic Member
 
Cracker Funk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 9,570
Quote:
Originally Posted by richy View Post
Hi, Cracker.

It's interesting that you said back then you thought 3D TV is dead. At some point since then I was at Best Buy and I asked a clerk about it. He more-or-less said yeah; everything has gone to 4K. I understand that's hardly authoritative evidence. But…if there are few 3D TVs on the market, then I have to think it is pretty much dead.

So then isn't the question: if 3D TV is dead, what kind of life is 3D likely to have at all?

This might sound silly, but I've been buying 3D + Blu-ray + Whatever Versions of home videos I like in anticipation of someday getting a 3D system. But now that seems likely pointless. I'm thinking of buying the 4K versions instead from here on out.
Lol, I can't believe this conversation resurfaced. My prediction was correct -- 3D TV is lifeless. In order to watch it, EVERYONE has to have the glasses on. That's just unreasonable. 4K is becoming more standard. And it always makes me laugh when I'm in a theater and they brag about being 4K. That's considerably lower resolution than film, so what the F are y'all bragging about?!

3D is cool in theaters. If it's done right, it can be a really fun experience. But in your home? Nah.
Cracker Funk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2017, 01:34 PM   #15
Scarecrow
Basic Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 23
I've seen 3D and I prefer film. Nothing needed to change; What came before still amazes me. I have seen great depth from a strip of celluloid projected on the screen, creating the magical appearance of 3D. Does anybody miss film?
Scarecrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 -5. The time now is 06:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.


©IndieTalk