Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: HARRY POTTER 7.2 3D Trailers.

This is topic HARRY POTTER 7.2 3D Trailers. in forum Digital Cinema Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=16;t=000808

Posted by David Stone (Member # 4846) on 05-23-2011, 01:23 AM:

Hi Everyone,

Has anyone seen or run a 3D HP7.2 trailer, all I get get Downunder are 2D versions. I have 3D trailers for everything imaginable but HP7.2. Wouldn't WB want a 3D trailer playing with titles such as POC4 and KFP2 ?

Are we heading for a repeat of last year ?

Cheers,

David.

Posted by Dave Macaulay (Member # 813) on 05-23-2011, 08:14 AM:

7.2??

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 05-23-2011, 09:21 AM:

Were there 3D trailers for 7.1?

Hopefully they will ditch the 3D on 7.2 also. They blew it by not filming it in 3D so no sense in making it worse by faking it. I thought they figured that out when they dropped it with 7.1.

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 05-23-2011, 12:59 PM:

quote: Mark J. Marshall was the last to post
7.2??

Deathly Hallows was the 7th book. This is the 2nd part of the movie adaptation...

Posted by Mark Strube (Member # 4190) on 05-23-2011, 02:21 PM:

I recommend changing the subject to "7 part 2" ... writing 7.2 makes people think sound, and it's just confusing.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 05-23-2011, 03:37 PM:

I thought everyone in the movie business knew that HP7 was in two parts, so using 7.1 and 7.2 makes perfect sense and has been in use since before the first part even came out.

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 05-23-2011, 06:50 PM:

quote: Mark Strube
writing 7.2 makes people think sound

What sound system are you using that has 7.2 sound?

Posted by Mark Strube (Member # 4190) on 05-23-2011, 07:02 PM:

There are plenty of home processors that are advertised as 7.2. (Two sub pre-outs) [Smile]

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 05-23-2011, 07:02 PM:

Certainly here they've always been referred to in the industry as 7.1 and 7.2.

David, have Roadshow said anything to you about it?

Posted by Mike Frese (Member # 4361) on 05-23-2011, 10:30 PM:

quote: Mike Blakesley
I thought everyone in the movie business knew that HP7 was in two parts, so using 7.1 and 7.2 makes perfect sense and has been in use since before the first part even came out

I agree.

Posted by David Stone (Member # 4846) on 05-23-2011, 11:16 PM:

Hi Everyone,

Sorry, our local distributor Roadshow Films refers to Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows part 2 as HP7.2. Again sorry for the confusion.

It just seems odd that you cannot get a 3D trailer yet, only 2D, and further more the 2D trailer says on the end...in 3D and also in selected 2D theaters. Why have a 2D trailer advertising a 3D film ?

Cheers,

David.

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 05-24-2011, 12:24 AM:

You can play a 2D trailer with any feature, but a 3D trailer is only good with a 3D feature.

Posted by Chris Slycord (Member # 4239) on 05-24-2011, 01:17 AM:

quote: David Stone
Why have a 2D trailer advertising a 3D film ?

Because more possible placement of your ad on movies is better than less?

Posted by David E. Nedrow (Member # 4981) on 05-25-2011, 01:03 PM:

quote: MJM
Hopefully they will ditch the 3D on 7.2 also. They blew it by not filming it in 3D so no sense in making it worse by faking it. I thought they figured that out when they dropped it with 7.1.

While I agree with your hope that HP7b (how Warner refers to it internally) is not released in 3D, I do need to correct part of your statement.

Warner did NOT drop 3D from HP7a because of quality issues. It was all about time. The decided on a 3D conversion way to late in production to be able to get it done in time, though everyone tried. I think that studio execs sometimes don't realize that just throwing more money at something doesn't mean it can happen.

Studio Honcho: Here's another 20 zillion dollars. We want to make this 3D.

FX Guy: You want to do a conversion? By when?

Honcho: The release date is in 90 days.

Guy: Can't do it. we need at least 120 days. Much of the work is linear and can't be paralleled.

Honcho: But I just said I would give you another 20 zillion dollars.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 05-25-2011, 09:33 PM:

There are two 3-D movies coming up that I would rather play in 2-D for different reasons:

Cars 2 - because a lot of the patrons will be kids, who will not wear the glasses, leading the parents to think they wasted money (even though the kids will still be just as entertained with or without the glasses)

Harry Potter 7b.2 or whatever - because it's such a dark film to start with, I feel like a lot of the detail will be lost with 3D.

Posted by Frank Cox (Member # 6258) on 05-25-2011, 09:45 PM:

The 3D thing is still pretty new here so I haven't had a lot of experience with it but when I played Rio there weren't any problems with kids not wearing the glasses. At least, none that I noticed.

Are the Dolby glasses heavier or somehow less comfortable than the Real D glasses?

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 05-25-2011, 10:14 PM:

I don't know about comfort but they are a bit heavier, due to having glass lenses. The newest Dolby glasses have lighter, plastic lenses. I think it's kind of hard for little kids to keep them on. We attached some "tie straps" to a few of our glasses for the little kids -- some like that, some don't.

RealD has a kid-size glasses already, and Dolby is supposed to be bringing out a kid-size glasses by the time Cars 2 comes out.

Really little kids just don't care though. I remember when we had Tron 2, this one guy came in with 4 little kids. They sat in the front row. When I did an aisle walk during the show, I noticed the guy was wearing his glasses but none of the kids had theirs on.

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 05-25-2011, 11:26 PM:

quote: David E. Nedrow
Warner did NOT drop 3D from HP7a because of quality issues. It was all about time. The decided on a 3D conversion way to late in production to be able to get it done in time, though everyone tried.

That was the line, but I find it extraordinarily hard to believe that was the case. Warner was just recovering from getting their ass chewed out for screwing up the 3D on Clash of the Titans so badly. Not long after that debacle they decided they didn't have time to complete HP.

If the decision to do HP 7 in 3D was done late in the game, then that doesn't make much sense either since the previous TWO HP films had sections converted to 3D. It's not like 3D was something new that sprung up just before this movie's production started.

There was also plenty of time to "finish" the 3D before the Blu-Ray came out... and that didn't happen either.

I may be wrong, but I'm convinced someone there came to their senses. Even if it was only for a moment, and they're now back on track to screw it up. Either way, if the IMAX presentation will be in 3D, I will avoid it. If it's in 2D I will drive a few hours to see it. And I know several car fulls of people who feel the same way.

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 05-25-2011, 11:52 PM:

quote: Mike
There are two 3-D movies coming up that I would rather play in 2-D for different reasons:

Surely you can just book a 2D version...or both?

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 05-26-2011, 11:23 AM:

We can't book both, because we're a single screen and the film companies stupidly won't allow us to offer people a choice. We could run some shows in 2D -- our equipment will do that -- but we would be in contract violation, so that's a no-go because we'd be unable to advertise it.

And, I've heard that some studios are forcing 3-D by saying "if you have one digital screen with 3-D capability then you must play our film in 3-D or else you can't get a digital print." But I'm not sure if this is true or not.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 05-26-2011, 11:35 AM:

But Mike, your 3D system broke next week. [Razz]

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 05-26-2011, 06:34 PM:

Yep, Brad is right. I've actually shut down a couple of 3-Dee equipments and left them 2 Dee cause 3-Dee causes so much booking grief!

Mark

Posted by David E. Nedrow (Member # 4981) on 06-02-2011, 02:14 PM:

quote: MJM
That was the line, but I find it extraordinarily hard to believe that was the case. Warner was just recovering from getting their ass chewed out for screwing up the 3D on Clash of the Titans so badly.

I agree with a couple of your other points, but I believe much of the angst over COTT 3D was caused more by the fact that it came out while, I believe, AVATAR was still in theatres. And Cameron had spent the past 6 months saying the all conversions suck. So, we start with a remake of a film that had already had already left a bad taste in peoples mouths decades before, and then add "fake" 3D.

We then present this to audiences who have been listening to KAJC, the "all James Cameron, all the time" new network for months. I had no problem with the conversion, but it was easy to see before the release that the well had already been poisoned. Yes, sections of Potter and Superman Returns had been 3-D'ified, but a reel of conversion is a very different monster than 6-8 reels.

I'm not defending conversions or WB, but there was no way COTT 3-D could "win" in that environment.

-David