You mean like (before mass internet and large DVD releases) they brought out a Special edition :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: of 'Close Encounters Of The Third Kind' which ruined all imagination by going into the spaceship at the end and for years it replaced all original versions in all outlets?
Fortunately Spielberg (Who was forced into doing that scene against his will in exchange for the money to add bits he did want to do) managed to reverse it and now all places sell the original and the special edition is rare and hopefully forgotten forever. The directors cut have no trace of that last scene.
All these inexcusable interfering with original films is just to cash in on something with very little outlay. Far cheaper than doing a new movie. That is the only reason for doing it and not to improve or add anything to the original.
The latest 3D fad needs feeding more and more and so when faced with the option of doing a new 3D film or ruining an old one for a fraction of the price, they will always go with the latter.
Cheapskates cashing in on the kiddies and ruining old classics that don't need changing to do it!
Much of this true but movies are a business and if there's money to be made someone will do it.
How is making a new version of anything ruining the original? Unless someone goes to the effort of actually supressing it, the original movie will still be around.
A good point but there aren't that many people in his position of power. Stanley Kubrick also had "A Clockwork Orange" removed from distribution in the UK but by then he too was in a fairly unusual position of having total control over his movies
Most movie producers would rather have their product out earning than sitting on a shelf.
One movie which would lend itself perfectly to 3D conversion would be Daniel Haller's "Die Monster, Die!" which loooks like it was designed for the process but not actually shot in it. So many things are placed between the camera and the actors that the job is almost half done.:)
Like colourising, it's easy to cancel out a 3D conversion and see it normally with only the flick of a switch. It's nothing like a special edition of the likes Lucas does. He changes the actual movie. So there's no need to worry about the original disappearing.
Curiously enough I'm thinking that perhaps this particular film may lend itself well for 3D?
There are scenes in there where I can imagine them looking good in 3D.
I'm not necessarily saying that they should or shouldn't, but for people who would like to go and see it then why not?
If you're not keen on the idea you don't have to watch it.
But one good thing to potentially come of it is that it would introduce a whole new generation of youngsters to classic films all over again. Which is not necessarily a bad thing at all.
The same could be said for when the film changes from black and white to colour when Dorothy enters the fantasy world.
This scene in particular may be enhanced with the 3D effect.
Flat black and white to 3D colour is possibly more dramatic than the transition from just black and white to colour alone.
The same could be said for when the film changes from black and white to colour when Dorothy enters the fantasy world.
This scene in particular may be enhanced with the 3D effect.
Flat black and white to 3D colour is possibly more dramatic than the transition from just black and white to colour alone.
So basically you're saying that perfect scene that's been loved by many for so many years needs enhancing, and crap, distracting, dark 3D is the way to achieve that :rolleyes:
So basically you're saying that perfect scene that's been loved by many for so many years needs enhancing, and crap, distracting, dark 3D is the way to achieve that :rolleyes:
I don't know about the current crop of 3D movies in the cinema but on 3D tv they're anything but dark, to point of garishness in some cases.
Personally I love 3d especially when done well. James Cameron's Avatar, Titanic and Sanctum are all examples of it done really well. As for colour loss then that's due to the cinema not compensating the settings for 3d. At home the tv is set on higher settings to ensure no loss off colour or brightness.
All 3d releases are also 2d so you have a choice especially the home entertainment market.
Doing some conversions on older films is always going to happen whatever the new format. This does not damage or destroy the original but gives younger generations the opportunity to experience it in a new dimension.
Jeez if George Lucas didn't repackage and format Star Wars so many times he would have faded into obscurity. Yes some argue its just about cashing in but in an industry that's driven by cash at a time when piracy is a button push on a computer the film industry needs to continue to evolve. Look at the CD album market because record companies did not invest and move quickly enough.
Not every film will suddenly be converted to 3d due to cost alone.
It's called choice in life my choice us i enjoy 3d and want to see films in 3d. No one I'd defacing or ruining anything all it is is a change in format no difference from VHS to DVD Blu-Ray to VOD.
Personally I love 3d especially when done well. James Cameron's Avatar, Titanic and Sanctum are all examples of it done really well. As for colour loss then that's due to the cinema not compensating the settings for 3d. At home the tv is set on higher settings to ensure no loss off colour or brightness.
All 3d releases are also 2d so you have a choice especially the home entertainment market.
Doing some conversions on older films is always going to happen whatever the new format. This does not damage or destroy the original but gives younger generations the opportunity to experience it in a new dimension.
Jeez if George Lucas didn't repackage and format Star Wars so many times he would have faded into obscurity. Yes some argue its just about cashing in but in an industry that's driven by cash at a time when piracy is a button push on a computer the film industry needs to continue to evolve. Look at the CD album market because record companies did not invest and move quickly enough.
Not every film will suddenly be converted to 3d due to cost alone.
It's called choice in life my choice us i enjoy 3d and want to see films in 3d. No one I'd defacing or ruining anything all it is is a change in format no difference from VHS to DVD Blu-Ray to VOD.
It's not the cinema settings at all. Darkness is a problem the world over with 3D films. Have all those cinemas got their settings wrong?
Comments
Much of this true but movies are a business and if there's money to be made someone will do it.
How is making a new version of anything ruining the original? Unless someone goes to the effort of actually supressing it, the original movie will still be around.
...and it would add NOTHING.
I'd watch that too!:D
You mean like George Lucas?
A good point but there aren't that many people in his position of power. Stanley Kubrick also had "A Clockwork Orange" removed from distribution in the UK but by then he too was in a fairly unusual position of having total control over his movies
Most movie producers would rather have their product out earning than sitting on a shelf.
One movie which would lend itself perfectly to 3D conversion would be Daniel Haller's "Die Monster, Die!" which loooks like it was designed for the process but not actually shot in it. So many things are placed between the camera and the actors that the job is almost half done.:)
There are scenes in there where I can imagine them looking good in 3D.
I'm not necessarily saying that they should or shouldn't, but for people who would like to go and see it then why not?
If you're not keen on the idea you don't have to watch it.
But one good thing to potentially come of it is that it would introduce a whole new generation of youngsters to classic films all over again. Which is not necessarily a bad thing at all.
For you perhaps, but not necessarily for others.
The same could be said for when the film changes from black and white to colour when Dorothy enters the fantasy world.
This scene in particular may be enhanced with the 3D effect.
Flat black and white to 3D colour is possibly more dramatic than the transition from just black and white to colour alone.
So basically you're saying that perfect scene that's been loved by many for so many years needs enhancing, and crap, distracting, dark 3D is the way to achieve that :rolleyes:
I don't know about the current crop of 3D movies in the cinema but on 3D tv they're anything but dark, to point of garishness in some cases.
All 3d releases are also 2d so you have a choice especially the home entertainment market.
Doing some conversions on older films is always going to happen whatever the new format. This does not damage or destroy the original but gives younger generations the opportunity to experience it in a new dimension.
Jeez if George Lucas didn't repackage and format Star Wars so many times he would have faded into obscurity. Yes some argue its just about cashing in but in an industry that's driven by cash at a time when piracy is a button push on a computer the film industry needs to continue to evolve. Look at the CD album market because record companies did not invest and move quickly enough.
Not every film will suddenly be converted to 3d due to cost alone.
It's called choice in life my choice us i enjoy 3d and want to see films in 3d. No one I'd defacing or ruining anything all it is is a change in format no difference from VHS to DVD Blu-Ray to VOD.
It's not the cinema settings at all. Darkness is a problem the world over with 3D films. Have all those cinemas got their settings wrong?