Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Next Star Trek film: May 17, 2013, and in 3-D

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Community » Film-Yak » Next Star Trek film: May 17, 2013, and in 3-D (Page 2)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Author

Topic: Next Star Trek film: May 17, 2013, and in 3-D

Tony Bandiera Jr
Film God

Posts: 3067
From: Moreland Idaho
Registered: Apr 2004

posted 01-02-2012 09:12 PM

One good thing about a 3D Trek (for me anyways) would be seeing Chris Pine's nads in 3D. [Big Grin]

he was packing in the scene where he was screwing Uhura's roommate in the first one.

As our late friend Phil would say, Hubba Hubba. [Big Grin]

| IP: Logged

Claude S. Ayakawa
Film God

Posts: 2738
From: Waipahu, Hawaii, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 01-02-2012 09:55 PM

Becasuse it's a James Cameron's movie, the TITANIC trailer looks fantastic in 3-D as expected. Yes, I will make an effort to see it when it opens.

-Claude

| IP: Logged

John Wilson
Film God

Posts: 5438
From: Sydney, Australia.
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 01-02-2012 10:15 PM

quote: Brad Miller
Hey, it worked for Lion King.

I was referring to the 3D. We have decided not to go to 7.1.

quote: Ian Parfrey
I doubt that Titanic in 3 dimensions will do stellar box office - maybe 3 weeks or so.

Of course it's hard to tell, but take a look at the comments on a youtube TITANIC 3D trailer. There are a few million people who love the film and have never seen it on the big screen who plan on rectifying that. It could actually do extremely well. It IS Titanic after all.

| IP: Logged

Tom Petrov
Five Guys Lover

Posts: 1121
From: El Paso, TX
Registered: Jan 2003

posted 01-02-2012 11:06 PM

quote:
I was referring to the 3D. We have decided not to go to 7.1.

quote: Ian Parfrey I doubt that Titanic in 3 dimensions will do stellar box office - maybe 3 weeks or so.

Of course it's hard to tell, but take a look at the comments on a youtube TITANIC 3D trailer. There are a few million people who love the film and have never seen it on the big screen who plan on rectifying that. It could actually do extremely well. It IS Titanic after all.

quote: Claude S. Ayakawa
Becasuse it's a James Cameron's movie, the TITANIC trailer looks fantastic in 3-D as expected. Yes, I will make an effort to see it when it opens

quote: Joe Redifer
Not sure why Titanic needs to be 3D. Can't fathom what it would gain as an "experience".

I don't think Star Trek "2" will fail. Maybe it will fail in 3D, but seriously, who cares? But as a movie I hope it will be good and succeed. Once 3D gets around that whole needing glasses to see it thing, then I think it will be time to become a permanent addition. What's next, requiring customers to put on a special jacket with motors in it to "feel" the bass?

I am not wrong all that often. Titanic in 3D is going to be HUGE....I can't wait to see it in the IMAX 3D Experience.

I will add, Titanic really does not need 3D to be huge again. Cameron is on recored for saying that the new prints and even the 2D experience will be superior to whatever was shown for the first release.

I so want to watch my THX DD laserdisc, but I think I am going to wait till April.

I expect about $200 million for the re-release.

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 01-02-2012 11:12 PM

quote: John Wilson
There are a few million people who love the film and have never seen it on the big screen who plan on rectifying that.

Maybe it's just me, but watching a movie that I have already seen at home on "the big screen" kind of loses its appeal, especially if it's a movie I own. It doesn't give me any more emotional impact or anything due to "the big screen" once I've already seen it. I don't like paying to see a movie I already have (unless I am buying the Blu-ray version which is cheaper than a god damn movie ticket). Plus, no theater in the world is comfortable. My legs are way too cramped because of the narrow space between rows. I have to turn sideways in order to straighten my legs. I don't want to sit in the front row. "The big screen" often just isn't worth it. Just look at people watching movies on their damn cell phones now.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 01-02-2012 11:18 PM

quote: Tom Petrov
Cameron is on recored for saying that the new prints and even the 2D experience will be superior to whatever was shown for the first release.

Tom, I guess you don't care to balance truth against filmmaker puffery and movie studio marketing hyperbole?

The original 1997 release had a few 70mm DTS prints in circulation. I saw one of those projected at the 1000+ seat GCC Northpark #1 in Dallas. Even with the newfangled faux 3D of this new release, I don't think there's any way it could outdo the presentation of Titanic I watched.

BTW, wasn't this really a thread about the upcoming Star Trek sequel of the reboot, with the original being an adaptation from a TV show?
[Confused]

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 01-02-2012 11:22 PM

Oh, and yes, Bobby, I believe they'll do the lens flares in post. That way they can control their depth more. And they will be distorted as if they were shot with an anamorphic lens.

Hopefully they shoot the movie on one of those 3D cameras I saw on sale at Best Buy.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 01-02-2012 11:33 PM

It might look totally bitchin' shot on a 1/6" single chip CCD with 30X digital zoom.

| IP: Logged

Victor Liorentas
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 800
From: london ontario canada
Registered: May 2009

posted 01-03-2012 12:31 AM

After seeing what Cameron did with the Aliens Bluray,cleaning it up and still managing to make it sharper and better looking than should be possible!
Not like other botched restorations such as Patton on Bluray which looks like synthetic crap done for newbie HDTV owners who don't understand what film grain is and want it removed even though the process removes detail.

I now believe Cameron is pushing the boundaries of what you can do to a film negative to clean up and enhance it effectively improving on the original look using new photochemical and digital tools.
Perhaps the 70mm version is still better in some ways but based on what I have seen and what he has said about it, this should be amazing!
If he makes Imax 15/70 prints I will make a 2 hour trip to see it. I plan to see it in every format in fact,it will be an interesting experiment comparing all formats.

The film is 14 years old now and nostalgia is there for many such as I to drown in!
Many young fans have never seen it on a theater screen so this could be huge and yes the 3dee is also a draw since it's a conversion done by Cameron with 18 million spent!

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 01-03-2012 10:49 AM

quote: Joe Redifer
watching a movie that I have already seen at home on "the big screen" kind of loses its appeal, especially if it's a movie I own.

It's too bad more effort isn't put into promoting theatre sound, as opposed to the big screen. Half the fun of watching a movie on the big screen is the big sound, which really can't be replicated in a typical living room. (Of course I realize some people have better sound at home than some theatres do, but it's relatively rare.)

| IP: Logged

Richard Hamilton
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1341
From: Evansville, Indiana
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 01-03-2012 12:47 PM

Mike, If you're ever in the southern IN area give me a call. When I show a movie at home, (small room, 10x12 Blu-Ray) people just say "oh Shit". I have jumped at explosions and gun shots from behind me and the sound has knocked shit off shelves from the subs. Right equipment set up right kicks ass [thumbsup]

. It's cool when you can go outside and feel the sub "rumbling".

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 01-03-2012 12:49 PM

The trick is finding a theater whose sound system was properly designed and working in top condition/adjustment. The GCC Northpark #1 in Dallas had a reputation for delivering top notch audio quality along with startling dynamics. Customers cannot find this just anywhere.

Joe talked about how bad the situation is in the Denver area. I doubt if there's a theater in all of Colorado with good sound. Every location I visited in the Colorado Springs area had very weak, very low sound. It had all the personality of watching a movie on TV with just the TV speakers. I observed this at the Carmike and Cinemark locations there. Very disappointing stuff. My guess is the management has 2 reasons for doing this. 1: making people who like movies with very low volume and no dynamics happy, 2: cutting costs (lower risk of damaging speaker drivers and amps when they're not run at "reference" levels).

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 01-03-2012 12:57 PM

We could probably have a whole other discussion about what's too loud. Personally I think "7" is too loud. I like my sound to be nice and loud, and I think our system is balanced properly (blame Mark G. if it isn't! [Smile]

) but I still think it sounds best at about 6.3 or so. I thought the sound at CinemaCon -- amazing as it was -- was too loud. I was in the Dolby Screening Room last summer, which probably had the best sound system I've ever heard, and I thought that was too loud at times, too.

It all just comes down to personal taste I guess. I would probably think Richard's system is too loud too. I love my music good and loud, and I love great explosions, battle scenes etc. but dialog doesn't need to blast out of the speakers.

| IP: Logged

Martin McCaffery
Film God

Posts: 2481
From: Montgomery, AL
Registered: Jun 99

posted 01-03-2012 01:22 PM

quote: Joe Redifer
I have to turn sideways in order to straighten my legs. I don't want to sit in the front row.

The wheelchair row, Joe, the wheelchair row. In many theatres they are the best seats in the house. Lots of space in front and back AND the sides. Go to an uncrowded show to increase your odds of getting them. And, of course, give them up should someone with a wheelchair arrive [Wink]

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 01-03-2012 01:28 PM

Lots of movie mixes are different. Some movie mixes are made too hot in the upper frequency bands, making sounds from gun fire and explosions painful or making dialog sound shrill. Other dialog driven movies might seem too quiet if the sound system is geared for dynamics of a movie like U-571.

I watched plenty of action/epic style movies at the Northpark theater, but also watched more "grown up" dramas like The Bridges of Madison County there too (I was on a date). They all sounded excellent, but I think the staff often re-tuned the sound system for the given movie that was playing. Very few theaters do this.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.