The Amazing Spider-Man I don't want the new Spider-Man film to be in 3D

[dark_b]

if the 3D is used like avatar then bring it on, if its used like gimmick then forget it

i think there is a bgi chance that it will be used like in Avatar.

with Tron,ALice,Harry Potter and Clash of the Titans you need to understand that all of those movies were already filmed before Avatar was out. so all the shots were composed how they wanted.

spiderman will start months after Avatar. so i am positive that they will try to use it the same.

 

[Crook]

Tron was shot with the same 3D cameras that Avatar used.

 

[spider-neil]

Tron was shot with the same 3D cameras that Avatar used.

are you sure? the fusion camera is proprietary to james cameron.

 

[redfirebird2008]

I will never get the b***hing against 3D so as long as a 2D print exists, and the extra money spent on it isn't from your pocket.

Honestly, what is the big deal here? I want to understand.

I posted this in the the other thread when someone brought up the "go see it in 2D" argument.

I have 2 theaters near me. Neither one of them showed Avatar in 2D. Both of them had it playing on multiple screens and every one of the screens was 3D. It's been that way throughout its entire release. I think this is Hollywood's ultimate goal with 3D. Convert all the 2D screens to 3D and then be able to charge 30-40% higher ticket prices. People were willing to pay those higher prices for Avatar. Who knows whether it will succeed with other movies, but I think that is Hollywood's plan.

 

[Crook]

are you sure? the fusion camera is proprietary to james cameron.

http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1630055/story.jhtml

MTV: How immersive is the 3-D? Is it start to finish, or does it pop up in key sequences?
Kosinski: Our approach is not like "Avatar," which I think is 3-D from the first shot to the last. Ours is sort of a "Wizard of Oz" approach. Ninety-eight percent of the 3-D is in the world of "Tron." The 3-D really starts once we get into the Tron world.
MTV: Is the technology you're using similar to what James Cameron used or what Robert Zemeckis has used?
Kosinski: It's a combination of technologies that Zemeckis has been using in terms of the completely digital motion-capture of a character and for the live-action camera system. We used a camera developed by James Cameron's company. We used a newer generation of camera than the one used on "Avatar." They built it specifically for us.

 

[Kahoot]

I posted this in the the other thread when someone brought up the "go see it in 2D" argument.

I have 2 theaters near me. Neither one of them showed Avatar in 2D. Both of them had it playing on multiple screens and every one of the screens was 3D. It's been that way throughout its entire release. I think this is Hollywood's ultimate goal with 3D. Convert all the 2D screens to 3D and then be able to charge 30-40% higher ticket prices. People were willing to pay those higher prices for Avatar. Who knows whether it will succeed with other movies, but I think that is Hollywood's plan.

All three cinemas I looked at had Avatar in 3D and 2D here. Like you say people were okay for paying for the 3D prices to see Avatar but they won't for lesser movies. In future 3D movies that fail will really fail when compaired to movies that fail now in 2D.

 

[Batman137]

I agree. NO 3D!!

I don't see whats so special about it.

 

[Jennifer Walters]

I agree. NO 3D!!

I don't see whats so special about it.

If done right like Avatar, there's certainly a ring of specialness to it, problem is Avatar's the only film so far that really worked with the 3-D and made it special/necessary.

 

[dark_b]

Tron was shot with the same 3D cameras that Avatar used.

i meant how to use teh camera and what kind of shots will they have.
i meant what kind of action shots the movie will have. for example web flying in to the camera.

you know what i mean? for example Clash of titans will have some gimmick shots because it was filmed before Avatr.

 

[dark_b]

are you sure? the fusion camera is proprietary to james cameron.

why are some allways writing like the cameras are from Cameron? Cameron helped to make the cameras.

Vince Pace and hes team has the cameras and is ranting them all around the world. the fusion cameras were already used on some basketball games and to film the U2 and Cyrus concert.

they didnt build the cameras. they used sony's cameras. Vince Pace and hes team builded a camera rig with all the settings to control the 3D stereo space.way to many people ignore Vince Pace.

http://www.pacehd.com/

 

[JP]

So, don't see the movie in 3d. That simple.

 

[dark_b]

So, don't see the movie in 3d. That simple.

some people have negative experience. they couldnt watch the 2D version of Avatar because the theater only had the 3D version. some are scared that they will not be able to watch spiderman in 2D

 

[Agent 194]

They've already said it's going to have more teen angst. That already sounds shallow to me.

 

[JP]

Woe is them.

 

[Tony Stark]

Seriously this is Hollywood copy-cat'ism at it's worst. This is just like delaying Clash of the Titans to remake it in 3D, just because Avatar was a success. This is like George Lucas saying he want's to make a 3D Star Wars after seeing Avatar.

I don't really care if it's in 3D or not, but I want a good movie first and foremost. Because even though Avatar was a visually breathtaking movie, the story was immature and not very original.

The story has to be before everything else.

 

[chaseter]

The only thing I fear about this being in 3D just because 3D movies are doing good is the fact that they will probably do stupid stuff like having more explosions for things that shoot out of the screen. There is good 3D and then there is cheap thrills 3D. Alice in Wonderland looks like cheap thrills 3D.

 

[weezerspider]

you have the right not to like the 3D. but proven wrong? how can anyone prove your opinion wrong? billion of people liked the 3D in Avatar so studios will use it.

it makes the movie to a lot of people better like color,stero sound,3D sound does.

I can be proven wrong. If you actually read what I said I thinks its a waste of time and money to make it in 3D if it doesn't enhance the movie. If the 3D enhances the movie, then I'm proven wrong. If its like every other 3D movie ever made(including Avatar), then it won't enhance the movie. I'll approve of 3D when I see a movie where 3D ACTUALLY makes the movie better.

 

[Matt.S99]

The 3D in Avatar was great. It wasnt just random scenes that were in 3D, it was the whole movie. Spider-Man should be like that. It all blends well. It's cool and it pops out, but it doesnt take away from the over all movie.

 

[Matt.S99]

The 3D in Avatar was great. It wasnt just random scenes that were in 3D, it was the whole movie. Spider-Man should be like that. It all blends well. It's cool and it pops out, but it doesnt take away from the over all movie.

 

[terry78]

Seriously, everything doesn't have to be in 3D.

Granted, there will still be the 2D print (which I'll see) and granted seeing Spidey swing into the audience in 3D could be cool, but it's unnecessary.

And I know all the pro-3D people will be on me about it, but pretty much for every pro-3D there's at least one anti-3D.

So, who's with me?

Well, Spider-Man doesn't want YOU to be in 3D!

 

[Dugath]

Well, Spider-Man doesn't want YOU to be in 3D!

LOL


I think people are focusing too much on "gimmick" 3D. When used properly by adding Depth it makes a movie look so much better. I think people just have to get used to it. I really think eventually all movies will be going the 3D way, again not for gimmicks but for the added ..immersion.

Some day someone will make a break through when it comes to the way we watch tv/movies..Holographics perhaps? SM 20.. in a Holographic Theater near you!

No SM in Holographic.. who's with me!?

(No SM with Smellivision either!)

 

[gdw]

Wasn't 3D the reason they did NOT go with Raimi? HE wanted 3D, and the studio did not, or did I read that wrong?

 

[Doc Ock]

I don't want the film in 3D either, I will just simply go see it in 2D, its that simple.

 

[Dugath]

Wasn't 3D the reason they did NOT go with Raimi? HE wanted 3D, and the studio did not, or did I read that wrong?

From what I remember he had a slight conflict of schedules.. and he wanted to cast one person while Sony wanted to cast someone different or something like that.

 

[©KAW]

There's no way this film is 80M bucks now that they've include 3D.