What is Digg?59 Comments
- evilcaptain, on 10/02/2008, -0/+28You've got to give people something they can't get at home.
I just hope it isn't *****. - inactive, on 10/02/2008, -0/+21They are supposed to be releasing the original Star Wars trilogy in 3-D.
Definitely worth watching on a big screen. - mrgodai, on 10/04/2008, -0/+15hmm.. 3D gigantic boobs right in my face
- MacBookForMe, on 10/02/2008, -2/+10We've got only one such 3D cinema in London:)
- EtherGnat, on 10/04/2008, -0/+7NSFW: http://www.mature-dvds.com/product_info.php?produc ...
- HookmasterCH47, on 10/04/2008, -1/+8The English Patient in 3D FTW!!!
- frieddonuts, on 10/04/2008, -0/+7The other day I saw a rare showing of Hondo, one of my fave John Wayne movies, in 3D and it was amazing. Less about the gimmicky fly-in-your-face BS and more about increased perspective and depth of field. I loved the effect (though it was slightly disorienting) and hope more movies bring it back. This Dolby 3d stuff is great- so much better than the normal red/blue nonsense.
- DeFex, on 10/04/2008, -1/+6The movie will still be made in hollywood..90% chance of being ***** (being generous)
95% chance of being Cell phone talkers, screaming brats, chair kickers, clappers and cheerers
100% chance of being carged $$.$$ for 4 cents worth of corn and not allowed to bring in your own food.
yep its the perfect sollution - timothycrash01, on 10/04/2008, -1/+6Just to clarify for a few people above. This isn't the 3D from the old days. This is the new Sony Fusion 3D camera technology. It does not require glasses and doesn't move things toward you - it in fact just deepens the perspective of the image - like pulling a person out of their background so the image seems more lifelike.
Here's a short video on it:
http://video.thedvshow.com/video/NAB-2007-Sony-Fus ... - jgopp, on 10/02/2008, -2/+63D movies would get me to go to the movie theater. After having HD and on-demand at home I never go to the theater anymore, it's just not worth it.
- spectecjr, on 10/04/2008, -1/+5Ugh... 3D is pretty lame in general in movies. If we could encode everything in the entire scene like a hologram, that'd be awesome. The problem is.. we can't. (Yet).
Which means that when watching the movie, you've got to point your eyes right at the center of the movie screen at all times. Don't move them around, or you'll lose the effect (or in some cases, get nauseous. At the very least you'll be irritated).
Some directors get this, and keep the camera moves to a minimum, and don't go too extreme with the 3D effect. (In fact, if you filmed the whole thing such that the movie screen was like a window, and nothing protruded from it, ever, it'd actually work so much better... but unfortunately, that never looks 3D enough to make it the requisite spectacle).
Never mind the fact that my left eye is pretty weak, and my right eye very dominant. So the effect breaks up much more easily for me than it would for anyone else.
*sigh* Technology... sometimes it's not quite there yet. - cadmiumpaint, on 10/04/2008, -0/+3Bring some high quality special FX movies and it could be really good. They gotta do better than Journey to the center of the earth...i almost saw it because it was 3d, but it looked so awful and prices were so high that i passed.
- inactive, on 10/04/2008, -0/+3Since birth I my left eye does not see much. I can see colors/shapes only, everything is in blur. My right eye is 20/20 (perfect). I went once to watch 3D movie and my experienced sucked big time, I saw everything in red colors (since they use 3D glasses with different colors of lenses)... It sucks so much
- GCarden, on 10/04/2008, -0/+3I personally will always see a movie in 3D if I can.
Seeing Monster House in 3D made it 3 times better. It was a so much more enjoyable experience than watching it on DVD. As far as Hollywood's concerned, if this puts butts in seats and makes them stop whining about how DVDs are killing cinema, then great. - ZoomBoy, on 10/04/2008, -0/+3London.
- Dalhectar, on 10/03/2008, -1/+4The best feature about this isn't necessarily 3D movies like Beowulf, but the ability for more people to watch movies like Ironman and Dark Knight on digital screens that look better than the non-digital ones.
- Koushiro, on 10/04/2008, -0/+3How about instead of wasting a billion dollars, they spend that money making movies that don't suck! :P
- petethepanda, on 10/04/2008, -0/+3Not sure how I feel about upcoming Pixar films being released in 3-D... if they're made as standard films and additionally released in 3-D, then fine, but if they're actually MADE for 3D and additionally released on traditional screens... not so cool.
Harry Potter 5 is a good example. The last 20 minutes were awesome-looking in 3D, because they were intentionally filmed with three dimensions in mind, but on a traditional screen, it looked... off, flat.
I enjoy 3-D as a gimmicky thing. Journey to the Center of the Earth was great fun and had spectacular 3-D, and I'd like to see more movies like it, but I hardly want it to be the standard. Think long cutscenes in Metal Gear games - great for MGS, but not necessarily great for other games. - paulvq, on 10/04/2008, -0/+3"Better" is a matter of opinion when it comes to digital.
- RoboDonut, on 10/04/2008, -0/+3How is that possible?
Was it originally shot in stereoscopic 3D?
Is it going to be crappy fake stereoscopy? - Nath5000, on 10/04/2008, -0/+3Who knows what we'll have in our homes in the next 10 years.
http://digg.com/tech_news/Philips_3D_HDTV_Might_De ...
Maybe this type of 3D 56-inch flat screen with 3840x2160 resolution (and no glasses required) will make it into our living rooms by then. When that happens theaters will decline just like they already are now. This screen is going to be $25,000 dollars though and there isn't any content anyway. If advertisers start to use these screens I'm sure more people will be looking for this type of display elsewhere.
Maybe the generation of video game consoles after the next will support stereoscopic 3D. Once 3D catches on in theaters there will actually be content in development more and more and it would give home electronics hardware developers a reason to develop 3D for the living room. I think this is the biggest benefit of theaters going 3D. If we don't have any 3D content being developed, 3D hardware will never be seriously developed for the living room. - operasara, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2The new 3D is awesome. So much better than the red/blue 3D of the past. I saw Fly Me To the Moon with my daughter and the 3D was fantastic (while the movie was boring). If you've been to disneyworld you've seen the new 3D.
This is something that will work in cartoons and action movies, not in much else.
The theaters around here charge an extra two dollars for these films. - threemagic, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2movies aren't primarily 3D now and they are making record amounts.....
- RobotBuddha, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2There is one good thing about the 3d to 2d conversion. The little pauses as the actors wait for the audience to be super impressed by what, in 2d, is 100% unremarkable. OMG, that dude just used a yo-yo!
- Asvetic, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2Instead of ***** gimmicks; how bout they stop the remake/sequel factors and start producing some original movies for us to enjoy?
- aresef, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2Porn has always been penetrating the cutting edge of technology. This will be no exception.
- MrObjectional, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2Episode IV had the ending battle redone in 3D as a tech demo, and from all accounts it was awesome. They just painstakingly separate the layers from the (now digitally remastered) source.
- Nero555, on 10/04/2008, -0/+13d screens/projectors are common here in Australia, in fact the cinema in which i work we have 3.
- smallcreep, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1I thought the BetaMax killed Hollywood? How do they come up with the money for 3D when Bittorrent is killing them now?
- palehorse864, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1This is going to be awesome, especially once the new gimmick phase wears off and they film for 3d without specifically overdoing it by pointing things straight at the camera every now and then. Let things jump out from the screen, but don't break the fourth wall by it being obvious you are playing with 3d.
Still, there are times when it should be ok. The arrows in Beowulf were cool without being Gimmicky. I also would have loved seeing the chase from Get Smart in 3d. Specifically, the swordfish pointing straight at the audience would have made that scene twice as funny as it would put us in the character's shoes. - frankybme, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1I have always loved 3d movies all my life. I remember the excitement I would feel as a kid seeing one. Now as a adult. it makes me go back in time every time to the days as a kid and 3d movies.
- Shadoglare, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1Yeah, according the article dugg above, it does:
"The technology uses a filter in front of a digital projector to polarize separate images for the left and right eyes, which viewers use polarized lenses to see." - brewyet, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1Sadly Final Destination 4 is going to be one of those first movies to come out on RealD
- spectecjr, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1Actually it does require glasses - just not anaglyphic glasses (red/blue or red/green).
http://www.3dcameracompany.com/pdf/Yahoo%20Finance ... for more info on the system and its presentation.
So two choices for the glasses - either polarized, or LCD shutter. My money's on polarized. - djphatjive, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1I read an article where Lucas said he has abandoned that because the company they were going to use to do it couldn't produce good enough conversion to 3d. They are currently looking for a new company to do it if any. So who knows if it is going to happen.
- sibos, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1I saw Beowulf in IMAX 3-D and the technique they used sucked. The whole time I could see part of the picture in 3D, and other parts were double vision, so I'm doubtful that this is really a good idea unless they really update the technology.
- Morose7, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1Really, whereabouts ?
- westyvw, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1Wow you said it, so many digital movies hurt my eyes in theatres, when are they going to get a decent refresh rate?
- djphatjive, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1I love 3D movies as long as they don't put in Stupid 3D ***** where they try and make things look totally 3D.
- frieddonuts, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1Fight on!
- westyvw, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1I am just the opposite. I cant see the point of going to a theatre. I would rather be at home, my screen is bigger and clearer. Its not like when I was younger and the theatre showed one movie on a screen probably 6 times as big as one now days. Damn that theatre was a huge.... Anyways it was a cheap date. In the last 9 years I have been to the theatre 4 times. 2 were 3d and 2 were not. One of the 3d was an Imax movie. It added something to the movie that I couldnt get at home, and made it interesting, and with the new technology, the imax movie was very impressive, and very immersive. The other just made a half rate kids movie worth while.
Oh yeah, Get off my Lawn! - brownsound00, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1The first film is a Jonas Brothers concert? Are you kidding me? How the hell does that take priority over things that would make 3-D amazing... like the new james bond... or the next dark knight etc.
- MorphicMusic, on 10/02/2008, -4/+4Dugg... 1989!!!
- Shadowfox99, on 10/04/2008, -3/+3Time to bust out the old red and blue goggles
- inactive, on 10/04/2008, -2/+2Waste of time and money.
- stripwire, on 10/06/2008, -0/+0still no wizard of oz in 3D, man when she steps into color and steps into 3D that would be awesome
- threemagic, on 10/04/2008, -1/+13D movies were made in 1950? It was a good idea of the past... just technology has made it worthwhile instead of just a headache
- UselessTrivia, on 10/04/2008, -0/+0I'm waiting to see James Cameron's Avatar project before I make up my mind about 3d film. Seems like a gimmick, but maybe in the hands of a great filmmaker it could be awesome
- PissPaws, on 10/04/2008, -0/+0...and if it fails, the tax payers will bail 'em out.
-
Show 51 - 59 of 59 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is