nightstalkerpoet said:

I would say that this conversion was nearly on par with Hugo. I also loved Hugo :)

There's no way I can believe that this conversion was anything close to the 3D in Hugo.

Even if the conversion itself is competently done, Hugo was filmed by a talented crew that had an eye for 3D. Scorsese knew how to film to make proper use of the 3D technique. TPM was not intended to be shown in 3D so even if the conversion is descent, it wasn't shot with 3D in mind like Hugo, so most scenes will just appear flat and dull. In Hugo, every scene was framed with the thought that it would be shown in 3D, and it shows.

SilverWook, you nailed it when you mentioned the 50's 3D films. I am a fan of 3D when done well, and I own a 3D tv. I have been saying this since the start of this current 3D craze - there are tons of old 50's and 80's 3D films that should be out on 3D Blu-Ray by now. In fact, there are many foreign 3D films as well from the 80's - including quite a few from Russia. I saw a 3D Russian film a while ago and the use of 3D was just awesome, though the film was rather strange in general. Most of those old films were shot in true stereoscopic 3D and displayed in the theatre as polarized 3D, much like realD now. Many of the 50's films in particular would look fantastic on Blu-Ray, though of course most are black and white.

The studios need to get on the ball. There's money to make off these old 3D films.