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."

Comments

4th post

[Anonymous Coward]

The first 3 sucked

Oh, no!

[scotts13]

As if the prequel films didn't ALREADY cause massive headaches...

Its a TRAP!

[nweaver]

Its A Trap!
-Ackbar

All you haters ...

[l0ungeb0y]

All you haters are just jealous that you don't have your own multi-billion dollar franchise to rape over and over and over and over and over and over again

Ya

[Sycraft-fu]

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.

Re:Ya

[daveime]

It will never be a "passing fad" when the cinemas can charge DOUBLE for the privilege of watching it in 3D, and there are morons willing to pay it.

Reminds me of post on Failbook a while back ...

Person 1: I've just seen Avatar in 3D, it was awesome. I wish the whole world was 3D.
Person 2: It is.

Re:Ya

[SteeldrivingJon]

In theory, the CGI content of the prequels could be re-rendered for genuine 3D, with the two camera viewpoints. Scenes that are entirely CGI ought to look great.

Then the 2D elements like the actors, and the 1D elements, like Hayden Christensen, could be composited in and, if necessary, plumped up with faux-3D.

Which might have a somewhat better result than if the completed, final frames of the films are used as input to the simulated 3D process. Which is pretty much what I think will have to be done with the original three films.

Re:Ya

[txoof]

Movies that properly use the 3D format to enhance the experience, rather than simply chuck crap out of the screen are stunning. Avatar was filmed in 3D, properly, but really was just a gimmick to draw in crowds and immerse them in a spectacular alien world without much substance. The film adaptation of Neil Gaiman's Coraline, on the other hand, was astounding. There were only a few instances of stuff jumping out of the screen and it never felt forced. Instead, the film allowed you to more naturally live the in the world of Coraline. For much of the movie, the 3D takes a back seat to the actual story. It only becomes apparent in some truly stunning moments. In one incredible shot, the camera follows a circus mouse on a ball down a ramp. The shot is filmed entirely through the perspective of the mouse. The subtle beauty, craftsmanship and incredible detail of that scene was definitely enhanced by the use of 3D.

I'd like to see more moving making where 3D enhances the film rather than depends on it. I can't see how the original Star Wars movies will be enhanced, other than more crap flying out of the screen. I can already see the Death Star lazer beam shot at Alderan: Interrior of death star with hokey enhanced laser beam and artificially (poorly) deepened beam chamber; cut to exterior and newly rendered death star (poorly mapped onto a sphere); cut to shot looking right into dish-of-death as the beam flies out into the audience.

Vomit.

Though, Luke's bombing run might not completely suck if they go back and re-render the whole thing so it is actually in 3D rather than 3D-ifeyed.

Re:Oh no. Not again.

[nmb3000]

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.

Re:Oh no. Not again.

[BonquiquiShiquavius]

Seriously...is there any other film franchise out there that blatantly squeezes more money out of its fans? I myself am not a real Star Wars fan, but even I'm disgusted at the constant re-releases / special editions / extra special editions with 23 extra seconds of never before seen footage. The VHS/DVD/BluRay upgrade cycle for the exact same movie is bad enough. I mean, I know the fans who keep buying into this shit are the ultimate ones to blame...but who do you hate more...the crackhead or the asshole dealer that will do anything to enable and string out the addict until there's nothing left?

We can dream.

[mark72005]

Maybe the new editions of episodes 1-3 won't suck?

Re:We can dream.

[Z34107]

Maybe the new editions of episodes 1-3 won't suck?

I heard the 3D release will give Jar-Jar's tired character more depth.

Obligatory...

[SuluSulu]

Noooooooooooooooo!!!

So... What?

[Shadow Wrought]

Greedo now shoots YOU first?

Re:Oh no. Not again.

[Amarantine]

but who do you hate more...the crackhead or the asshole dealer that will do anything to enable and string out the addict until there's nothing left?

I think the correct SW line would be: who's more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows him?