Slashdot Mirror
Star Wars Films In 3D Due In 2012
bowman9991 writes "Star Wars creator George Lucas is converting all six films from his iconic science fiction saga into 3D and will re-release them in theatres in 2012. 'Episode I: The Phantom Menace' will be released first."
It seems to me if somethign wasn't shot in 3D, the conversion is going to be very bad. To the extent 3D works for movies at all, it is in situations like Avatar where it was shot entirely for 3D and more or less the move just has depth. It kinda looks like there's a hole in the wall of the theater, rather than a screen. Ok, fine. However if the movie wasn't shot in 3D, you can't do that. You can't capture that depth data you don't already have. So what does that mean? It means cheesy effects. Means most of the movie will be 2D with some really noticeable, and annoying, moments when somethign pops out of the screen at you.
While I'm not a fan of this 3D trend overall and I think it'll be a passing fad, I'm ok with movies properly shot for 3D. At least then it can gain something, it isn't a gimmick, just a way to try and make things more interesting. However I really don't like 3D when it is stupid and gimmicky, the "Hey look! This is in 3D! Are you not amazed?" No, I'm not, knock it off.
Unfortunately I have to imagine that is what this will be since I can't see any way of making it anything else. The original films were shot with only one camera, there just isn't the stereoscopic data there.
By the way, if you haven't seen the Red Letter Media Star Wars reviews yet, shame on you. At the least, set aside an hour and watch the Phantom Menace review. He goes above and beyond a normal video review (Menace is an hour, Clones is almost 90 minutes) explaining exactly why the movies fail so horribly.
The Star Trek movie reviews are also fantastic -- even better than the Star Wars ones, I think. Funny as hell, dead on the mark, and well worth the time to watch them.
"What do you despise? By this are you truly known." --Princess Irulan, Manual of Muad'Dib
/)
how the hell do you turn a fully 2d primary source into 3d? and 3d that doesn't make you want to scream 'FAKE!'...
if anyone can post a link in reply to my post showing that from a single 2d image source a 3d image can be created that doesn't look a bit wonky i'll stfu. sure, piece of cake converting all that 3d graphics to stereoscopic, but, and maybe i am not understanding the filming process with that expensive 70mm cinema type film, but there is definitely only one 'good' copy of all the shots in 2d, there isn't inadvertently gonna suddenly be a second one... i mean, i would guess you could work on something if there was a second cam recording at the same time at a slightly different but convergent view, but really, you'd have to have one on each side, that could give you a volume model that could let you do the 3d but even still... i call bullshit on converting star wars to 3d. i don't see how it could be done. i'd love to know how such a thing could be done. 3d won't work if you can't flesh out the occluded parts that you see to the left and right of the 2d original.
Not jealous, this is why copyrights should be limited to 7-14yrs Lucas would have to create something new instead of rerelease
Your'e all thinking it, I just said it for you