Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: 3D Showtimes for Gravity

This is topic 3D Showtimes for Gravity in forum Ground Level 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=5;t=002715

Posted by Michael Kurtzke (Member # 7512) on 09-22-2013, 06:31 PM:

I just got this e-mail sent to me from my booker:

quote:
GRAVITY - WB 3D/2D Policy Guidelines:

If you are showing one print WB recommends 1 matinee or twilight show in 2D and the rest in 3D

Where you have two prints WB recommends 1 matinee or twilight show and 1 evening show in 2D

Where an exhibitor has 3 prints WB recommends all but 1 evening show on one print to play in 2D with the other 2 prints playing exclusively in 3D.

I feel like the only way I could do a full run in 2D is if I got a 35mm print!

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 09-22-2013, 06:43 PM:

Based on the 3-D trailer I had seen many times in RealD and IMAX, 3-D is the only way I intend to see this movie. GRAVITY was shot in native 3-D and not post converted like almost all the recent films have been.

-Claude

Posted by Michael Kurtzke (Member # 7512) on 09-22-2013, 08:05 PM:

It's nice to hear that it was actually shot in 3D! It's a nice change of pace from a lot of the other '3D' movies that came out this past year.

I just feel like limiting your 2D showtimes to one or two [We are getting two prints] is odd. Especially since it's only 90 mins, we could easily do six shows a day per print. That would round out to be 10 3D showtimes and two 2D showtimes.

The major problem I have with 3D is that I have Sony Projectors *Shudders*. Their 3D lenses are HORRIBLE! I've got a Sony R-515 on a 35ft silver screen and two Sony R-320's on 42ft silver screens. With the maximum light output of the 515 [w/3D lens] of 1350 watts on a 35ft 3D screen, It's amazingly dim. Also 2.1kW on 42 ft screens isn't much better.

Posted by Justin Hamaker (Member # 2165) on 09-22-2013, 09:29 PM:

From the reviews I've heard so far, it seems like Gravity is a movie where 3D really enhances the movie. I'll reserve judgment until I've seen it, but this does happen on occasion.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 09-23-2013, 12:35 AM:

Michael, the key word is recommends.

Posted by Shawn M. Martin (Member # 6762) on 09-23-2013, 10:30 AM:

This actually was post converted.

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 09-23-2013, 10:54 AM:

I stand corrected on GRAVITY being shot in native 3-D. Based on how fantastic the 3-D looked in the film's trailer, I just assumed it was shot in the native process. After checking my source, I learned GRAVITY was indeed post converted. Despite the fact that the movie will be in post converted 3-D, that is the way I intend to see it.

-Claude

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 09-23-2013, 11:27 AM:

This movie is probably going to be in that category where the 3D really adds to the experience. I hope it's a big hit. Recommendations or not though I think we'll probably just stick to the same 3D/2D schedule we have been, now that people are used to it.

Posted by Marcel Birgelen (Member # 6801) on 09-24-2013, 03:40 AM:

With all the CGI in the average movie nowadays and especially in Sci-Fi movies, does it really matter if it was "filmed in 3D" or post-converted?

Look at Avatar for example, anyone boasting that this flick was shot in 3D and therefore looks superior is obviously joking or doesn't have a clue, about 95% of that movie comes right off a huge 3D render-street.

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 10-06-2013, 05:48 PM:

Also, TITANIC's 3Difying proves that if it's done well it can be awesome.

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 10-06-2013, 07:07 PM:

The 3-D post production of JURASSIC PARK was also fantastic especially in IMAX.

-Claude

Posted by Andrew Thomas (Member # 7000) on 10-07-2013, 10:49 AM:

The vast majority of Gravity is CG. Pretty much the only thing not CG were the actors faces. To refer to it as "post converted" 3D is pretty silly.

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 10-07-2013, 11:10 AM:

I'm pretty 'neutral' when it comes to 3D.
But I saw this flick back in August, and it's one of the few films
I've actually recommending my friends see in 3D & not 2D.
(Friends tell me the IMAX version is good too)

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 10-07-2013, 02:03 PM:

I watched Gravity in 2D on a really large screen (one of Harkins Theaters' "Cine Capris" screens), but with Dolby Atmos sound. 3D and Atmos would have been a great combination, but no theater in Oklahoma offers that. Atmos blows away what IMAX can do with its goofy "laser aligned" sound systems. The Gravity mix in Atmos is one of the best surround mixes I've ever heard. I think it tops any list for aggressive use of dialog in the surround field.

I'd like to see Gravity again. If I watch it again in a theater I might see it in 3D.

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 10-07-2013, 05:21 PM:

Both of Honolulu's large screen theatres , Regal's Dole Cannery with their IMAX and Consolidated's Ward 16 with Tittan XC and Dolby Atmos has scheduled all of their shows in 3-D. Hooray! On top of that they have two separate smaller theatres showing the movie on a continuous basis in both 3-D and 2-D

I am planning to see the movie tomorrow at the Dole Cannery in IMAX 3-D because all of the favorable revues have praised the format's presentation. unlike Bobby, I like IMAX sound. and although Dolby Atmos might have a better mix, I do not like the Ward' with their stupid reserve seating where they tell you where to sit. They did this the last time when they made me sit directly next to a couple in seats off to the side when they were plenty of great vacant seats in the auditorium .The Ward's 3-D is Dolby and I personally prefer RealD and IMAX 3-D.

-Claude