logo Sign In

3D STAR WARS for the masses...has ARRIVED! — Page 7

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I saw this announcement on ABC's World News Now last night.

Attack Of The Clones and Jedi Rocks in 3D........wow. I'm getting in line right now.
;-P

Author
Time

haraldo23 said:

TV's Frink said:

haraldo23 said:

I didn't see OT in theatres, because I was very, very... semen at that time.

Thanks for sharing!

:p

You sound kind of irritated, is that because of the word semen or because I didn't see Star Wars on the big screen? Cause if that's because of the last one then - what can I possibly do? I wasn't as lucky as you guys...

Perhaps if you'd said you weren't yet "an itch in your daddy's pants", that would be more... less icky :)

 

CO said:

Wow, I can honestly say that this will be another SW release by Lucas that I won't be apart of.  If you would have told me this about 10-15 years ago that I wouldn't give a shit about anything SW-related, I would have said you're crazy.

 

Same. Any new Star Wars-related stuff is just a turn-off now.

Author
Time

Bingowings said:

I'd watch PT+SE3D out of interest but not until George restores the OUT2D.

I'm really trying not to dwell on the fact that the cost of converting 3 FUCKING MINUTES of Episode I would cover a great blu-ray of Star Wars '77.

Author
Time

This new 3d is nothing new. "Dimensionalizing" older films is just as bad a colorization.

He said he wanted to make art films-guess that's out the window.

A grand re release of the films would make tons of money. No need for anything else. 1997 proved that.

VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader

Author
Time

As far as George is concerned all that 1997 proved is that to re-release the films he has to have a gimmick.

Author
Time

Releasing anything in 3D just makes me avoid watching the movie entirely. It shows how much attention has been put into the effects over the story. Avatar was basically a poorly told whacking contest to see who could throw the most shit into the audience as possible. It is a dated and tasteless form of technology. Since we basically see 3D in regular films with a special little thing called our minds, we don't need extra help. All I ever thought when I saw a 3D movie was, "Ow my eyes are giving me a headache."

Keep it in amusement parks, but keep it out of the theater and give films with a good story a chance again. 

"The other versions will disappear. Even the 35 million tapes of Star Wars out there won’t last more than 30 or 40 years. A hundred years from now, the only version of the movie that anyone will remember will be the DVD version [of the Special Edition], and you’ll be able to project it on a 20’ by 40’ screen with perfect quality. I think it’s the director’s prerogative, not the studio’s to go back and reinvent a movie." - George Lucas

<span> </span>

Author
Time

I always get a kick out of hearing complaints about 3D. It reminds me of the newspaper articles from when sound and then colour was invented. Literally, its almost verbatim the same sort of phrasing. Of course, a lot of early sound films had terrible, tinny audio, and some early colour films had poor, gimmicky colour effects. Done right, and done enough times, and you don't think about it as a gimmick because you aren't paying attention to it anymore. As far as 3D goes, most films try to draw attention to the effect, because that is why you are paying the premium price to see it. A lot of early sound and colour films had similar marketing philosophy. Then after a while, everyone was doing it, audiences got used to it, and then peope stopped trying to outdo each other in gimmicks and audiences simultaneously stopped paying conscious attention to it.

Ironically, the situation is now reversed--because people are used to colour and sound, if you do part of movie silent or in black and white, it is seen as being self-consciously stylistic, or maybe even gimmicky or pretentious. I have this sneaking suspicion that this will apply to 2D films ("flat pictures"?) at some point in the distant but not too distant future.

Author
Time

I guess I'm gonna stick to flat pictures then.

"The other versions will disappear. Even the 35 million tapes of Star Wars out there won’t last more than 30 or 40 years. A hundred years from now, the only version of the movie that anyone will remember will be the DVD version [of the Special Edition], and you’ll be able to project it on a 20’ by 40’ screen with perfect quality. I think it’s the director’s prerogative, not the studio’s to go back and reinvent a movie." - George Lucas

<span> </span>

Author
Time
 (Edited)

When was the last time you saw a movie in 3D? The new tech is nothing like what was inflicted on moviegoers in the 80's. I suffer from migraines, and not one digital 3D film I've seen this decade has caused me any problems. The stuff I saw in the 80's did though.

I do agree that processing something shot flat into 3D is a something of a ripoff. I wish the studios would dust off some of the 50's 3D films, and show people how it was done old school.

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

Mielr said:

I saw this announcement on ABC's World News Now last night.

Attack Of The Clones and Jedi Rocks in 3D........wow. I'm getting on line right now.
;-P

Sy Snoodles's lips right in your face!  That other singing Yuzzem with phlegm flying everywhere!

*sigh*

I don't know if I trust George enough not to add further shots just dangle things in front of the audience.

Author
Time

Yeah, but on the plus side, Leia in the metal bikini, and Oola's little wardrobe malfunction. ;P

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

zombie84 said:

I always get a kick out of hearing complaints about 3D. It reminds me of the newspaper articles from when sound and then colour was invented. Literally, its almost verbatim the same sort of phrasing. Of course, a lot of early sound films had terrible, tinny audio, and some early colour films had poor, gimmicky colour effects. Done right, and done enough times, and you don't think about it as a gimmick because you aren't paying attention to it anymore. As far as 3D goes, most films try to draw attention to the effect, because that is why you are paying the premium price to see it. A lot of early sound and colour films had similar marketing philosophy. Then after a while, everyone was doing it, audiences got used to it, and then peope stopped trying to outdo each other in gimmicks and audiences simultaneously stopped paying conscious attention to it.

Ironically, the situation is now reversed--because people are used to colour and sound, if you do part of movie silent or in black and white, it is seen as being self-consciously stylistic, or maybe even gimmicky or pretentious. I have this sneaking suspicion that this will apply to 2D films ("flat pictures"?) at some point in the distant but not too distant future.

You're probably right, but I can't stand to watch a colorized film, and to me, converting something shot in 2D into 3D is the same thing.  I refuse to see it.

This doesn't just go for Star Wars.  This goes for Clash of the Titans, Harry Potter 7/8, and Toy Story 1/2, as well.  I refuse to watch any black-and-white film that's been colorized, and I'll refuse to watch any 2D film that's been "converted" to 3D, as well.

Author
Time

Toy Story 1 and 2 is kind of a gray area though, because they can go back to the original animation files to get the 3D. Pixar has been doing true 3D still images for Viewmaster reels for a while now...

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

SilverWook said:

Toy Story 1 and 2 is kind of a gray area though, because they can go back to the original animation files to get the 3D. Pixar has been doing true 3D still images for Viewmaster reels for a while now...

Yeah, the sky's the limit for pixar films.

"The other versions will disappear. Even the 35 million tapes of Star Wars out there won’t last more than 30 or 40 years. A hundred years from now, the only version of the movie that anyone will remember will be the DVD version [of the Special Edition], and you’ll be able to project it on a 20’ by 40’ screen with perfect quality. I think it’s the director’s prerogative, not the studio’s to go back and reinvent a movie." - George Lucas

<span> </span>

Author
Time

Also, Pixar's version of 3D is very tasteful and restrained, limited solely to presenting a wider and more immersive environment.  There is absolutely no gimmicky throwing things in your face or anything of that nature, and you hardly notice the effect at all after a while, it just becomes a natural part of the image.

The same can't be said about many other 3D movies, unfortunately, which is why I usually avoid them.  That, and having to wear those goramn glasses over my real glasses is uncomfortable, so I only go to 3D for movies I'm really interested in.  The prequels and special editions don't even remotely qualify for that, although I'll admit to having a little bit of morbid curiosity.  But I'd still rather watch the GOUT with all its flaws than give in to any of the revisionist rubbish, no matter how shiny the presentation.

Author
Time

zombie84 said:

I always get a kick out of hearing complaints about 3D. It reminds me of the newspaper articles from when sound and then colour was invented. Literally, its almost verbatim the same sort of phrasing. Of course, a lot of early sound films had terrible, tinny audio, and some early colour films had poor, gimmicky colour effects. Done right, and done enough times, and you don't think about it as a gimmick because you aren't paying attention to it anymore. As far as 3D goes, most films try to draw attention to the effect, because that is why you are paying the premium price to see it. A lot of early sound and colour films had similar marketing philosophy. Then after a while, everyone was doing it, audiences got used to it, and then peope stopped trying to outdo each other in gimmicks and audiences simultaneously stopped paying conscious attention to it.

Ironically, the situation is now reversed--because people are used to colour and sound, if you do part of movie silent or in black and white, it is seen as being self-consciously stylistic, or maybe even gimmicky or pretentious. I have this sneaking suspicion that this will apply to 2D films ("flat pictures"?) at some point in the distant but not too distant future.

 

Sound and colour do not require wearing glasses with polarised lenses. Once that can be overcome, I basically agree that 3D has a chance to become de facto rather than de jour.

Author
Time

I have to wear glasses and false teeth to experience the real world in 4D.

Author
Time

EyeShotFirst said:

SilverWook said:

Toy Story 1 and 2 is kind of a gray area though, because they can go back to the original animation files to get the 3D. Pixar has been doing true 3D still images for Viewmaster reels for a while now...

Yeah, the sky's the limit for pixar films.

 i thought they already went there and beyond!?

John Williams score to Return of the Jedi Remastered/Remixed:

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/JOHN-WILLIAMS-Star-Wars-Episode-VI-Return-of-the-Jedi-Remastered-Edition/topic/14606/page/1/

Author
Time

Yeah, I'm not really interested in these.  I've not seen a modern 3D movie in theaters or at home, though, so maybe that's why I don't give a shit.

Author
Time

Just had a thought.

Will Lucas take this opportunity to finally unveil the new CGI Yoda, or will he do that with the blu-rays?

Author
Time

I imagine it will be the one that comes first (presumably the blu-ray).

New Yoda....gasp! (same crap movie) New Yoda in 3D....gasp! (say didn't I just buy this crap movie...again?).

Author
Time

Baronlando said:

Bingowings said:

I'd watch PT+SE3D out of interest but not until George restores the OUT2D.

I'm really trying not to dwell on the fact that the cost of converting 3 FUCKING MINUTES of Episode I would cover a great blu-ray of Star Wars '77.

 

That's what I was thinking. So much for his integrity about his "vision." Fuck this shit. If you want more money George, then just release what everyone wants. There is one and only one Star Wars product I will ever spend another fucking penny on.

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death

Author
Time

SFW said:

He [John Knoll] also said they would ensure that the 3D conversion delivers results as good as a movie shot and authored in 3D

Darth Vader said:

The Emperor does not share your optimistic appraisal of the situation.

Every 27th customer will get a ball-peen hammer, free!