Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: NASCAR 3D (IMAX)

This is topic NASCAR 3D (IMAX) in forum Film Handlers' Movie Reviews 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=4;t=000742

Posted by Brian Michael Weidemann (Member # 2243) on 03-11-2004, 05:31 AM:

We ran NASCAR 3D through tonight to get ready for its opening on Friday. I've seen plenty of IMAX 3D features over the years (many of them hundreds of times) and this one is really actually good, as the 3D documentaries tend to be.

The film is 48 minutes long, including the IMAX brand they tagged onto the beginning. (For those who saw Matrix Revolutions: The IMAX Experience, it's the same branding: the small, black and white academy leader which flies forward, expands, and turns into countdown numbers that whiz by, with phrases like "12,000 WATTS OF DIGITAL SOUND" flying around, then a huge IMAX logo with glass rings encompassing it, ending with the fantastically campy "Think Big." slogan ... but this time in 3D!)

The film uses 3D very effectively. Movies in the past have used aerial shots and landscapes in 3D, but the effect is too subtle to be impressive when things are all far away. With cameras mounted on the cars, the perspectives are often very close to the ground, and the feeling of speed is evident. There were plenty of moving camera shots, following cars, and the tracking was quite good. I recall that there weren't any blatant "Hey, we're doing 3D, so let's have this cheesy shot of something coming at you" shots, except for one: an obviously CGI tire bouncing out of an actual crash that comes flying right over you. There were very few edits where the 3D perspective changes so rapidly that you can't focus. Some movies do this too much, and it leaves you with a headache.

Of course they had to lead into it somehow, but they wisely kept the "history of NASCAR" bits to a minimum. They didn't stop any of the visual action for interview clips; they were all just audio, so you could tune out what people were saying and just watch the cars. The soundtrack was nice and loud and rumbles the seats with the roar of the engines, just like it's supposed to do. There's a good rock soundtrack through a lot of it, including ZZ Top and Lynyrd Skynyrd. Kiefer Sutherland's narration was exactly what I expected: straightforward and sprinkled with "jokes" and including one blatant plug for AOL Broadband (gee, I wonder who sponsored the movie!).

There are bits showing cars being assembled to exacting standards. There are bits of 9000 RPM engines being tested. There's even a bit of girls in bikini tops, which always makes a 3D movie worth it.

I think it's worth repeated viewings, because there's no plot, just the experience of seeing cars driving really fast, right in front of you ... well, if you like that sort of thing. But then, ask me in a week, after I've seen it 30 times.

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 03-11-2004, 11:28 PM:

Brian,

There is a full page ad for the movie in this morning's USA Today with the list of theatres in the country and Canada playing the film. Sadly, Consolidated's Waikiki IMAX here in Hawaii is no longer listed because it shut down early last year. The film looks exciting and wish I had an opportunity to see it. Hawaii has another IMAX theatre on the North Shore at the Polynesian Cultural Centre but it is not a 3-D theatre and they have been showing the same old IMAX film, THE DEEP forever!

-Claude

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 03-11-2004, 11:44 PM:

I agree. This film is a great mix of fact and action that doesn't stand still for too long. Definitely one of my favorites now.

Posted by Joshua Burnham (Member # 1640) on 03-16-2004, 03:24 PM:

For an actual fan of NASCAR this is racing at its best, but to the average viewer who is just learning about the sport. I think it'll blow there minds especially in 3D. I left wanting more & I think people qho arent fans will still enjoy it.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 03-16-2004, 06:11 PM:

I'm wanting to check out this movie, but I'll have to drive 200 miles either to Tulsa or Dallas to see it.

quote:
I recall that there weren't any blatant "Hey, we're doing 3D, so let's have this cheesy shot of something coming at you" shots, except for one: an obviously CGI tire bouncing out of an actual crash that comes flying right over you.

I wouldn't be surprised if the fake looking CGI tire was rendered at a puny, de facto standard 2,000 lines. Even 4K would be inappropriate for IMAX. I laughed at the pixellated, jaggy end titles of "Fantasia 2000". "Oh, but it's digital so it's perfect," is what I'm sure any of those low rez fans would say, followed by "no one will notice." Well I did. I'm pleased others are calling attention to flaws coming from bad "it's good enough" standards.

Posted by Tal Marks (Member # 175) on 03-17-2004, 10:52 PM:

Regarding the CGI tire, here's a quote from a newspaper, taken from a message posted by Jim DiDio at the forums on 1570.com:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Director Simon Wincer worked behind the scenes while making the documentary NASCAR 3D: THE IMAX EXPERIENCE--way behind the scenes.

He wanted to capture images of stock cars blazing by at speeds of 185 mph, so the camera often was left unattended in the middle of the speedway while the crew ran for cover.

"We got through unscathed," Wincer told The Associated Press. But not all the equipment did.

"There was a crash and one of the last shots was of a tire coming off and bouncing right into the camera, which left the camera pointed at the sky. What you don't see is the 17 cars that wrecked behind it."

No one was hurt in the accident, he added.

Some of the footage is from practices staged for filming, but most of the scenes are authentic. For instance, that tumbling tire may look like a trick to take advantage of the gigantic screen 3-D imagery, but Wincer insists it was unplanned.

"That's just dumb luck," he said. "That's what you call it."

Posted by Kyle McEachern (Member # 2250) on 03-18-2004, 01:27 AM:

Between the smoke that comes off the car that loses the tire, the actual imagery of the tire coming off, and the way the tire comes at the camera, It would be difficult to convince me that it was real - in the ending credits they show a lot of shots of their 'unattended camera' setups, and the shots that come from those are both authentic and quite good, but the tire shot looked like painfully bad CGI...one of the 'Hey look, we can do 3D, let's make something scary come at the audience!' shots that most 3D films end up adding.

If it was real, then while it may have been dumb luck, it ends up being dumb BAD luck because of how bad the quality of the shot is...detracted from the experience of the race/crash scene, in my opinion.

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 03-18-2004, 01:30 AM:

Does it look as bad as the tire flying through the air in Driven?

Since I haven't seen the feature yet, I'll review the trailer:

The trailer was good.

Posted by Brian Michael Weidemann (Member # 2243) on 03-18-2004, 06:59 AM:

You know, it is quite possible that the shot was authentic. What led me to believe that it was CGI was the pure fact that it was perfectly cinematic. The crash occurs, the tire bounces out early, and it comes STRAIGHT for the camera, hurling precisely where any director/cinematographer would have wanted it to go, inches above the camera. It seemed too perfect to be happenstance, and thus it came across as a cheesy 3D gimmick.

The very first time I watched it, my initial gut reaction was, "Okay, they could have done without that. That looked too phony." So, every time I see it, it looks artificial. Now, have I actually analyzed the frames for motion blur and resolution? No. So I guess I shouldn't rush to judgment on such a thing.

I don't know. Pay the $11.50 and see for yourself. Make your own call. [Smile]

Posted by Mark Lensenmayer (Member # 134) on 03-24-2004, 02:54 PM:

Imax theatres should not have sticky floors. This is amateurish and shows disrespect to the customer. Please fix this, Marcus. (The entire row was sticky, not just a small area.) And its still too dark...my father (78 years old) had a TERRIBLE time seeing where he was going. (He really liked the movie, though!)

I really wanted to love this movie, but it fell a bit short in my opinion. Lots of good shots with interesting moments (I loved the Dr. Pepper hat.), but very little emotion and no story. The race shots were exciting, and there should have been more racing and less background. In my opinion, SUPER SPEEDWAY is a better movie.

There was a lot of ghosting, especially in the shot with Joe Gibb.

I think it should have been played a bit louder to add some impact. Everything seemed a bit subdued, and this should be an all-out exciting film.

The Imax branding trailer is terrific, and was the best part of my "Imax experience."

Goggles were a bit uncomfortable this time...did not work with the pair of glasses I currently have. Some eyestrain also that is not the norm.

If I see it again, I probably will sit a bit closer. I think this film needs to be seen from about the 6th row instead of the 10th.

As for the tire, it looked like computer to me, but it really was very difficult to tell. Something just didn't seem right about it, but, then, I don't often have tires coming at me at 200 mph.

[ 03-24-2004, 08:00 PM: Message edited by: Mark Lensenmayer ]

Posted by Brian Michael Weidemann (Member # 2243) on 03-24-2004, 11:15 PM:

I've seen this thing several dozen times now. And there is NO WAY that tire was real. It flies out from the right side of the car while the car is scraping, pressed up against the right side railing of the track. I don't think it was physically possible for it to squeeze out the way it did. And it seems to hit the camera DEAD ON while the image shakes only mildly. Its authenticitly is implausible.

We're having some ghosting issues, too. Not a problem with the film, just our polarizers.

We have our volume set so the loud parts are just barely piercing, so it's quite loud; yet the quiet parts seem too quiet for me at that volume setting. I guess the mixing just needed a little work.

As for the "story"? I tend to enjoy the IMAX films WITHOUT story a lot better than those WITH. IMAX and plot just never seemed to mix!

Posted by Richard Greco (Member # 2032) on 03-26-2004, 08:19 AM:

Saw this yesterday....

WOW

It was awesome. I never have seen a 3d movie before and this blew my mind. I agree the tire was fake, but I really don't care, It looked cool to me.

As Phil Says

I Liked It!

Posted by William Leland III (Member # 1400) on 03-29-2004, 12:33 PM:

this is one of the better IMAX films. i don't like 3D movies, i think its just a gimmick and i always see ghosting. when i screened "Nascar 3D" i played just right eye and i thought it was better in 2D than in 3D. i was worried that the sound was not accurate, but when i went to Darlington last week, IMAX has the sound down. very impressed.

as for Kiefer Sutherland's voice, he sucks. he's boring and monotone. why him? what does he have to do with racing? the story was ok. overall a good IMAX film, definitely go see it.