Bond Blu-Ray 3D set: when?
#1
Posted 19 February 2012 - 07:08 PM
Any idea when are they gonna release a Bond Blu-Ray 3D set? That's the next step, am I right? hehehe
Thanks in advance!
#2
Posted 19 February 2012 - 07:14 PM
#3
Posted 19 February 2012 - 08:15 PM
#4
Posted 19 February 2012 - 08:57 PM
#5
Posted 19 February 2012 - 09:35 PM
#6
Posted 19 February 2012 - 09:55 PM
#7
Posted 19 February 2012 - 10:40 PM
(I hope not anyway...'Die Another Day's gunbarrel bullet is the only thing in the 22 current movies that would work in 3-D!)
#8
Posted 19 February 2012 - 10:47 PM
#9
Posted 19 February 2012 - 10:57 PM
#10
Posted 20 February 2012 - 04:29 AM
The quality issue and prohibitive cost are two perfectly good reasons why I don't see the Bond movies getting converted anytime soon.
As soon as those two factors become a non-issue, however, I think there's somewhat of a chance that it might happen... especially if the popularity of the Bond series wavers and the popularity of 3D content grows.
#11
Posted 20 February 2012 - 04:50 AM
I've only seen Avatar, Clash Of The Titans, Resident Evil: Afterlife, Saw 3D, Captain America, and Conan The Barbarian in 3D.
Avatar, Resident Evil: Afterlife, and Saw 3D were all great in 3D. I look forward to seeing The Amazing Spider-Man and Resident Evil: Retribution in 3D and then call it quits. 3D gives me headaches and my vision gets blurry. Not everyone can handle it, in facts it's getting to the point where everything is being done in 3D and its becoming pathetic.
A Bond film in 3D would take away those certain aspects that make a Bond film, lavish, extraordinary, entertaining, etc and pretty much a film using 3D for the money and to become an over-the-top film with the technology IMO.
Of course there's the arguement that you can just see it in 2D, but it doesn't change a thing. It's still the same film with the glasses off, just not being blurry or giving the viewer a headache. That's just my view on it.
I'd rather see Bond 24 shot in IMAX, then the dreadful 3D.
#12
Posted 20 February 2012 - 02:20 PM
But still - I don´t need 3D. I don´t want it. And I would love for James Cameron to stop pushing this on us. I get it, he wants attention as being A TRUE REVOLUTIONARY. But he would really only surprise me if he were to make a really good picture without any effects, just a great story, with layered characters and terrific dialogue.
#13
Posted 20 February 2012 - 11:53 PM
Never saw Tintin or Hugo. Will probably rent Tintin, Hugo on the other hand didn't really seem to interest even though it's a film by Scorsese.
#14
Posted 21 February 2012 - 02:33 AM
I smell this happening in the future, Terminator 2: Judgment Day being in 3D and it might or might not be the curent 3D technology being used. IF NOT it will be the next stage in 3D technology that will be use for the movie.
I would think IF John Woo made Hard Target, Broken Arrow or Face/Off today he would still not want to use the 3D technology for the movies. Also If he was still working in Hollywood and made one his major action movies with lots of blood, shoot out and bullets, he still would not use 3D.
Edited by Syndicate, 21 February 2012 - 04:16 AM.
#15
Posted 21 February 2012 - 03:21 AM
#16
Posted 21 February 2012 - 03:36 AM
Starting with Men In Black 3D, all Sony 3D films are not only charging you for the ticket, 3D showing, but for the glasses. Where I'm at a 3D matinee is 8 bucks, glasses included, now they're gonna start charging for the glasses.
IMAX is the way to go, Personally I am excited to see Nolan's Dark Knight Rises in IMAX, and I strongly urge the producers to release Bond 24 or a future Bond film in IMAX. Although Quantum Of Solace isn't my favorite Bond Film, It sure would look amazing in IMAX, Casino Royale too. IMAX truely is the next big step, lately I'm seeing more and more films being shot or partially shot in the format, why cant Bond be in IMAX?
Edited by x007AceOfSpades, 21 February 2012 - 05:44 AM.
#17
Posted 21 February 2012 - 04:11 AM
Edited by Syndicate, 21 February 2012 - 05:41 PM.
#18
Posted 22 February 2012 - 04:09 PM
Everything else is just popcorn entertainment with loud bangs, flashy effects and obviously shot 3D scenes for gimmicky effect. I know some come by that do work, but not many, and the fact now it's being used for everything is already cheapening the thrill of a decent 3D film.
#19
Posted 22 February 2012 - 06:33 PM
#20
Posted 22 February 2012 - 11:00 PM
Casino Royale would look incredible if they converted it to IMAX. That film is shot in such a way that it deserves to be viewed on the largest screen possible.
I'm sure CR would be great on a big screen, but converting 35mm films to IMAX still leaves quite a bit to be desired... the much larger film size of IMAX really makes a difference! Do most IMAX theaters even use film that much anymore?
The fact, imo, remains that IMAX would be much better than 3D for the majority of the Bond films.
#21
Posted 23 February 2012 - 12:36 AM
Casino Royale would look incredible if they converted it to IMAX. That film is shot in such a way that it deserves to be viewed on the largest screen possible.
I remember seeing it opening night and the experience was great. Watching it years later on DVD and I could only imagine what the chase scene in Madagascar would be like in IMAX.
There's many great franchies that have all been on the IMAX screen, except for Bond.
#22
Posted 23 February 2012 - 01:09 AM
#23
Posted 23 February 2012 - 03:22 AM
It seems like there's some special that Mendes has brought to the table for Skyfall. We'll find out sooner than later.
#24
Posted 23 February 2012 - 03:51 AM
#25
Posted 23 February 2012 - 06:51 PM
#26
Posted 24 February 2012 - 09:05 PM
#27
Posted 28 February 2012 - 12:07 AM
Much of this is true relative to IMAX as well: you have to have ultra high-resolution negatives (or, given the move to digital, files) as a base or you're just taking a standard film and enlarging way past the level it was meant to tolerate.
*Done correctly, CGI sequences represent a monumental 3D challenge, not simply doubling the computing time (which can be overnight for a few frames) but requiring considerable work to layer elements and separate components like smoke, fire, etc.
#28
Posted 28 February 2012 - 02:50 AM
#29
Posted 28 February 2012 - 08:07 AM
I'd suggest tracking down the LALD and MR viewmasters instead.
No idea if you're serious but that's a great response either way ...
#30
Posted 28 February 2012 - 06:04 PM
I doubt there's enough material available to convert anything prior to GE (certainly nothing prior to DAF, what with EON maintaining that all outtakes, etc. up to that point were destroyed)
Good to know!