3D films

[Sundae]

Couldn't tell you chick, never seen it. Sounds likely.

There were many built in the 60's/ 70's, on the understanding that it helped combine the needs of motorists and pedestrians *

Didn't work of course - motorists can only drive where roads are, pedestrians resent being funneled into tunnels and will simply cross through dangerous traffic insread. So the needs diverge even before you start making a "feature" of underground locations.


* Aylesbury - of Sundae fame - was used as a location for A Clockwork Orange. It being a location equally futuristic and grim. And pants. I understand Kubrick asked for the film not to be shown in his lifetime. Because of the Aylesbury shots. That's true that is.

[BigV]

not 3d, but totally worth seeing.

excerpt with underpass: SPOILER ALERT!!!!



trailers:

[Flint]

Originally Posted by infinite monkey

What I would've said if I were more eloquent. That's it exactly, flint.

Thanks, I do my best. I hope I come off that way at least some of the time.

[Happy Monkey]

Just saw the trailer for Doctor Strange in 3D.

This may be the first film that I would categorize as MUST SEE IN 3D.

[Razzmatazz13]

I can't watch 3D movies as they tend to trigger motion sickness with the glasses on and headaches with them off, soooo not for me! On the upside, if you've got a partner that loves 3d and you can't do it, they've invented 2d glasses to convert your movies back to normal! It's magical. https://store.dftba.com/products/2d-glasses

[Happy Monkey]

Simple but clever idea. Just the same lens in each eye

[Beest]

3D is a gimmick, a crutch. A well shot movie has enough information to be immersive and fool the mind that it is a real 3D enviroment, of course that is an art that takes skill.

We went to see The Force Awakens in 3D Imax, mostly because you could book specific seats, I think it was worth it, but we only go out to the movies once or twice a year, so when we do I want a good experience.

we went to see Ghostbusters the other day, not 3D or Imax, and I liked the sharpness, clarity and definition of digital projection

[Happy Monkey]

That's what's different about Doctor Strange - from the preview, it looks like they are doing something with the 3D that they could ONLY do with 3D.

I'm sure it will still look gorgeous in 2D, but I think you will be missing out on part of the experience with Doctor Strange in a way that you wouldn't with most movies.

[Beest]

I think you're probably right, to get the full effect you might need to see it in 3D. I'm guessing that because effects are digital now, you can't 'shoot' it in the same way.

[footfootfoot]

Originally Posted by Beest

3D is a gimmick, a crutch. A well shot movie has enough information to be immersive and fool the mind that it is a real 3D enviroment, of course that is an art that takes skill.

We went to see The Force Awakens in 3D Imax, mostly because you could book specific seats, I think it was worth it, but we only go out to the movies once or twice a year, so when we do I want a good experience.

we went to see Ghostbusters the other day, not 3D or Imax, and I liked the sharpness, clarity and definition of digital projection

I agree with one notable exception, Werner Herzog's documentary, Cave of Forgotten Dreams.
Tihs is a stupendous movie. I watched the trailers in 2D and the film fell, um, flat.

[The movie] is about the Chauvet Cave in southern France, which contains the oldest human-painted images yet discovered. Some of them were crafted around 32,000 years ago...

Before production of Cave of Forgotten Dreams, Herzog was skeptical of the artistic value of 3-D filmmaking, and had only seen one 3-D film (James Cameron's Avatar). Herzog still believes that 3-D is not suited for general use in cinema, but used it in Cave to help "capture the intentions of the painters", who incorporated the wall's subtle bulges and contours into their art.[6] The idea to use a 3-D camera for the film was first suggested by Zeitlinger, who had imagined before ever entering the cave that 3-D might be appropriate to capture the contours of the walls. Herzog dismissed the idea, believing 3-D to be (in Zeitlinger's words) "a gimmick of the commercial cinema". After visiting the cave, however, Herzog immediately decided that the film must be shot in 3-D.[8] After the production, Herzog stated that he had no plans to use 3-D again

[Beest]

Exception that proves the rule

Probably restricted on what lighting could be used in that environment.

[footfootfoot]

Having the depth perception made the movie. To be able to see how the drawings flowed across the rocks and followed the curved surfaces increased the feeling of awe by a factor of holy shit. Give or take a Dammmmn!

[Clodfobble]

Holy shit, it's Razz. Hey there, girl. How you been?