|
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Monsters v Aliens - 3D
|
Monte L Fullmer
Film God
Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004
|
posted 04-01-2009 10:43 PM
Took the wife and we went to our local REG EDW 14 and watched this movie.. in Real D.
We both loved it - great animation, interesting yet obvious story with their subplots in place along with the side characters that has the possibility in stealing the show from the main "Susan/Ginormica" character. Definitely, once again, another big CGI hit for Dreamworks.
I've seen some of the 2D, film based version at some other theatres, yet, seeing it in 3D was the way to go with this kind of movie.
The Real D presentation was very good no 'hot spots' due to the usage of the silver screen-(even though I could tell of the obvious contrast due to this kind of screen usage), great sound balance - just an overall decent performance.
But, with this presentation, that NEC 2500 could have used a 6k bulb in there to help compensate the slight reflective reduction in using glasses whereas they were using a 4.2K LTI Helios bulb...which was running 113% over the maximum rate. One takes the glasses off, and you definitely got a nice bright picture with that size of bulb.
Wonder how the Dolby 3D/Image Master 3D would look compared to Real D?
Oh, we kept our glasses for the heck of it .. as souvenirs..
3.5/5 for me. Good kid show material towards the end of summer.
thx-Monte
| IP: Logged
|
|
Julio Roberto
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 938
From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2008
|
posted 04-02-2009 02:02 PM
I saw it last week (2D) and I must say I liked it. Technically it was very good. The story and script was OK. Don't know, like "Monster House" level, I guess, with better animation.
I think Dreamworks knows their market and has the tools and the talent. This movie would've done just as well in 2D as in 3D.
Of course, if you spend 20 Zillion dollars promoting it in 3D (Superbowl, etc) and even get Bank of America to finance part of the 3D viewing, then it's gonna do even better in 3D. But I guess a good chunk of those extra profits are gonna to to the marketing that put the spin to begin with plus the extra $15m in tools and rendering time it took to make the movie 3D instead of 2D.
But, overall, a good play on Dreamworks which should (barely) work for them. I say barely because the costs of this movie was high, so total payoff is still some way away.
These movies produce profits, no doubt, but it's also a big gamble with such high costs involved. Even if this movie grosses $100m (about $65m so far) and does fairly well in the video aftermarket, it's still not all-up-there profit-wise when we compare it to a stupid (R-rated) $15m movie like Valentine 3D that pocketed $50m at the BO.
Also, this movie was lucky it had really very little worth-it competition at the BO and with Spring Break etc it was very good timing. It would've been different if Pixar or Disney opened at the same time ![[Cool]](cool.gif)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Julio Roberto
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 938
From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2008
|
posted 04-03-2009 02:44 PM
quote: Jack Ondracek
Can someone explain this to me? The stereotypical "paddleball" effect was my first indication that nothing seems to come 'out' of the screen. It's got very good depth, but the screen surface seems to be an invisible 'glass wall', and everything seemed to be behind it. Compared to a show like "a bug's life" at Disney, where they put critters right in your face, this was a noticeable curiosity.
I haven't watched it in 3D (2D only), so I can't comment for sure. But whether to get stuff to come out of the screen or remain mostly behind it is a filmaker's choice (within certain small restrictions).
But the perceived depth is relative to your seating position and the screen size. If, i.e., an object is placed half-way between you and the screen, it would be way out in the middle of the theater (say 100' out) if you are sitting in the back row (say 200' away).
But if you are seating in the front row, say only 20' from the screen, then the object will be half way between you and the screen, that is, 10' out from the screen.
To make 3D most confortable, it would be recommended to calculate it for the average size screen and the average (middle of the auditorium) seating possition.
I assume that's what was done and they made a VOLUNTARY decission not to stick stuff out the screen too much so they wouldn't be labelled as a "annoying, distracting gimmick" 3D movie.
Then again, you can't win. If you use 3D subtly to not bother people with it, then those that want (and paid for) the "3D" are dissapointed. If you throw stuff out of the screen every 15 minutes, those that went to watch a "normal" movie feel bothered by so much distracting stuff.
Just ranting.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Julio Roberto
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 938
From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2008
|
posted 04-03-2009 06:29 PM
Well, that would depend on what tools you are using. Nowadays, the main choices are CGI for animated features and dual-camera rigs for life action.
With CGI animation, like the Monsters vs Alien movie, the "scene" is already in 3D inside the computer, so you pre-visualize it in steroscopic (two views, one per eye) 3D whenever you want on a 3D computer monitor (either passive or active) or a 3D projection setup (usually, a two-projector rig).
You can see some of that in this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XqYSv8ZpfU&fmt=18
[link is to a youtube video with one of the Monsters vs Aliens featurettes]
You can freely adjust where in the space your subjects are by adjusting the virtual position of the subjets and the virtual cameras (=the spectator's eyes). If you have some restriction or want to play with depth, you can adjust the distance between the (virtual) cameras (interaxial distance) or their convergence (how much they are towed-in with respect to one another, like when you cross your eyes towards your nose to look at something that is only a few centimeters in front of your face).
To shoot life action, you do the same thing, except with a pair of real cameras. You can monitor the scene in 3D with a compatible monitor and 3D glasses or by looking through two eyepieces in a dual viewfinder sort of like this:
http://red.cachefly.net/14/epic2.jpg
[link is two a view of a dual RED Scarlet camera 3D rig fitted with dual viewfinders. Brad, should I upload this image to the server and link from there? I don't own the copyright etc, but I guess it could be fine]
But most of the time, seeing real 3D in life action is not needed. From the two views, and a stereo calculator if you need it, you can guess how it's gonna look like from just the two flat 2D views. So often time, many non-specialty scenes in 3D films are just treated and monitored like a normal scene in 2D.
During the 80's, i.e., when most 3D shooting was done with a single 35mm camera with a 3D lens, there was virtually no 3D monitoring being done. Just like with film before video taps, it was shot "blind" just from experience and calculations (i.e. focus, exposure, temperature, etc) until the film was developed, a daily struck and viewed through a projector.
I know the DP of a 3D film shot in Spain, Comin' at Ya, (Fernando Arribas) who shot for a good couple weeks until it was realized that the 3D lens system being used wasn't working right and the film had to be re-financed and re-shot.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
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.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic