nytimes.com — Last week the next phase in the theatrical viewing experience took a significant leap forward, as Steven Spielberg and Peter Jackson signed on to direct and produce for Paramount’s DreamWorks Studios a trilogy of 3-D movies.
May 22, 2007 View in Crawl 4
jdheidenMay 22, 2007
If you say it enough times, it becomes true.
spyrochaeteMay 22, 2007
IMHO this prediction is way off. The future of entertainment is interactivity, not a new way to passively consume a static product. That's why video games are so popular.Futurama's representation of this in All My Circuits: The Movie is similar to what I personally have in mind.
nanostuffMay 22, 2007
"Glasses are the final boundary for 3D"'Glasses' are the inevitable outcome of immersive 3D. You're not going to get to-scale perspective and periphery out of a large display, or 360 head tracking for games. The result of all this will be 'glasses' without external displays, devices such as HMDs. 'Glasses' with external displays are just an intermediate solution.
leachMay 22, 2007
Who needs plot or character development? ITS 3D ZOMG!!! This is nothing but a cheap gimmick from a bunch of producers who neither regard their customers as having any intelligence at all or care about film as an art form.
bi0nikrMay 22, 2007
@IckyChris:Then you should be thrilled to know that the last 2 superbowls, 2006 world series and the 2007 NBA allstar game have all been shot in 3D.3D is coming so get used to it. Our kids will laugh at us for watching and hell even still prefering watching everything flat -- much like two generations ago still preferred good old black and white.
ethergnatMay 22, 2007
I try my hardest NOT to think about Ron Jeremy. ;)
mavereMay 23, 2007
"f**k this idea, and I hope it fails."I hope it succeed if it's used right because... well there is no reason, but if it has merit, it should succeed, no?We haven't seen how this technology will be implemented yet, so there's no need for knee-jerk negative reactions to change.
seansshackMay 23, 2007
are these directors using cgi well? Hit and miss really.
beckspaceMay 23, 2007
@smillspolarized 3D is the term, there are only two solutions for 3D (for now): polarized: the glasses is just a piece of polarized photographic filters in opposite directions for each eye; two different projections for each filter at a 'silver screen' to keep the light polarized. pros: Is the most 'natural' feel, cons: you cannot move your head too much from the projection axis. and a silver screen is expensive for most theatersandstrobe: the most used because it can be used at any digital projector that can display 120 frames per second, 60 for each eye (a james cameron standard projector they call) pros: any place with digital hollywood specs can make 3D - cons: the glasses are expensive and fragile; if you are sensible to the refresh rate of 60hz of your monitor, you will have a headachethere is a way to get rid of the glasses, yes, but is too expensive for the moment, unless they are holding some information... the keyword is Holoprojection
gyrfalconJun 19, 2007
@dinostabOMGStop pretending to be a geek and go back to burger flipping...