PDA

View Full Version : Star Wars 3D



Debbie_D
2012-02-14, 12:06 PM
The first of the re-release of Star Wars in 3D is now out, and I have a technical question. How exactly do you make a film into 3D when it wasnt originally filmed in 3D? Dont you have to make something 3D right from the start. I know they didnt go back and re-shoot the whole thing (actors age for one), so how can they do it? Forgive me if this is an easy answer, but it doesnt make a whole lot of sense to me.

Eakin
2012-02-14, 12:17 PM
Wikipedia knows all. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2D_to_3D_Conversion)

Basically, you can use a variety of tricks to add 3D in post production without reshooting anything

nyarlathotep
2012-02-14, 02:34 PM
Such tricks almost always also make the 3D look terrible.

TheCountAlucard
2012-02-14, 02:41 PM
Such tricks almost always also make the 3D look terrible.More like, "even the most sophisticated, expensive attempts only look passable, compared to a movie that was shot in 3D from the start."

I find GL's recent quote about 3D movies to be laughable in that regard, by the way. :smalltongue:

KingofMadCows
2012-02-14, 04:46 PM
You're all just racist towards the third dimension. Lucas couldn't even find a distributor because itís an all-3D movie. Thereís no major 2D roles in it at all. Itís one of the first all-3D action pictures ever made.

Lucas is taking a big chance here. He's putting the 3D film community at risk. If TPM 3D doesn't work, there's a good chance 3D cinema stay where it is for quite a while. It'll be harder for them to break out of that mold. But if Lucas can break through with this movie, then hopefully there will be someone else out there saying let's make a prequel and sequel, and soon we'll have more James Camerons out there.

NinjaStylerobot
2012-02-14, 04:49 PM
You're all just racist towards the third dimension. Lucas couldn't even find a distributor because itís an all-3D movie. Thereís no major 2D roles in it at all. Itís one of the first all-3D action pictures ever made.

Lucas is taking a big chance here. He's putting the 3D film community at risk. If TPM 3D doesn't work, there's a good chance 3D cinema stay where it is for quite a while. It'll be harder for them to break out of that mold. But if Lucas can break through with this movie, then hopefully there will be someone else out there saying let's make a prequel and sequel, and soon we'll have more James Camerons out there.

I see what you did there :smallwink: .

Still at this rate he will never beat avatar.

Axolotl
2012-02-14, 04:58 PM
You know at this point I wish they'd just bote the bullet and make Episodes VII, VIII, IX. Give us something new to watch instead of just reshowing dissapointments of the past.

hamishspence
2012-02-14, 05:15 PM
You know at this point I wish they'd just bote the bullet and make Episodes VII, VIII, IX. Give us something new to watch instead of just reshowing dissapointments of the past.

I doubt it- given that Lucas has stated (seen here)

http://www.reghardware.com/2012/01/18/george_lucas_calls_quits_on_blockbuster_career/

that Red Tails will be his last movie.

NinjaStylerobot
2012-02-14, 05:17 PM
You know at this point I wish they'd just bote the bullet and make Episodes VII, VIII, IX. Give us something new to watch instead of just reshowing dissapointments of the past.

1: The stuff that happens cronologicaly is cannonicaly disapointing.
2: If you over-write it fans will go berserk.

SowZ
2012-02-14, 05:44 PM
I doubt it- given that Lucas has stated (seen here)

http://www.reghardware.com/2012/01/18/george_lucas_calls_quits_on_blockbuster_career/

that Red Tails will be his last movie.

But Lucas does have a history of erratic behavior, changing his mind, or just blatantly acting as if he never said or did certain things. At this point, I don't trust anything he says. I think he has become a bit unstable and the most recent debacle where George has convinced himself that Greedo always shot first is the real kicker.

TheCountAlucard
2012-02-14, 05:57 PM
Here's some quotes of his; let's see if you can spot the hypocrisy. :smalltongue:

"People who alter or destroy works of art and our cultural heritage for profit or as an exercise of power are barbarians."

"Special effects are just a tool, a means of telling a story. People have a tendency to confuse them as an end to themselves. A special effect without a story is a pretty boring thing."

"Our cultural history must not be allowed to be rewritten."

"The public's interest is ultimately dominant over all other interests. And the proof of that is that even a copyright law only permits the creators and their estate a limited amount of time to enjoy the economic fruits of that work."

"I can sort of see the future, and I want to protect films as they are and as they should be. I don't want to see them colorized, I don't want to see their formats changed, I don't want to see them re-edited, and I don't want to see what I'm able to do now, which is add more characters and do all kinds of things that nobody even contemplated before."

"Would color distract from their comedy and make it not as funny anymore? Maybe just the fact that they're in black and white makes it funny, because their humor is dated. By putting it in black and white, it puts it in a context where you can appreciate it for what it was. But you try to make it in full, living color and try to compare it to a Jim Carrey movie, then it's hard for young people to understand."

"Moving from 2D to 3D is like the difference between watching a film in black and white and watching a film in color. It works in black and white, but it works better in color."

NinjaStylerobot
2012-02-14, 06:14 PM
Hes going loco

Dr.Epic
2012-02-14, 06:27 PM
Dude, man, bro, guys - this movie is so wizard! :smallwink:

The Glyphstone
2012-02-14, 06:43 PM
A well-timed relevant article. (http://www.cracked.com/blog/4-things-star-wars-fans-need-to-accept-about-george-lucas/)

Trazoi
2012-02-14, 07:01 PM
A well-timed relevant article. (http://www.cracked.com/blog/4-things-star-wars-fans-need-to-accept-about-george-lucas/)
I take issue with #4 (Because they're his damn movies). Okay, yes, George Lucas technically and legally owns the rights to do whatever he likes with the movies. But the original movies have a great cultural significance which should be respected. I also don't like the implication that Lucas is the sole creative force behind the films and everyone else involved was merely there to do the heavy lifting.

But I do agree with #1 (It's just the Phantom Menace). Lucas can do what he wants to that film - it can't hurt.

Axolotl
2012-02-15, 03:39 AM
I doubt it- given that Lucas has stated (seen here)

http://www.reghardware.com/2012/01/18/george_lucas_calls_quits_on_blockbuster_career/

that Red Tails will be his last movie.And? He didn't direct V and VI. Star Trek got on just fine after Gene Roddenberry stopped working on it. I said I wanted 3 more films, I don't really care if Lucas has no involvement, in fact that might be for the best. They're going to make more Star Wars films and if Lucas doesn't want them to be made then that just means they'll be made after he dies.


1: The stuff that happens cronologicaly is cannonicaly disapointing.
2: If you over-write it fans will go berserk.1. Just means there's less expectations for future films to live up to.
2. And? They've shown that they really don't care what fans think so I don't see why that would stop them.

Sunken Valley
2012-02-15, 03:55 AM
You really do not want star wars sequels (http://www.cracked.com/article/167_5-reasons-star-wars-sequels-would-be-worse-than-prequels/?wa_user1=4&wa_user2=Movies+%26+TV&wa_user3=article&wa_user4=recommended)

Axolotl
2012-02-15, 01:35 PM
You really do not want star wars sequels (http://www.cracked.com/article/167_5-reasons-star-wars-sequels-would-be-worse-than-prequels/?wa_user1=4&wa_user2=Movies+%26+TV&wa_user3=article&wa_user4=recommended)The best arguement that article puts forward is that they'd be the same as the originals, which you know is pretty much what I want. Also it assumes that they'd follow EU canon which I doubt they'd do and even if they did, I haven't read the EU but didn't it end up having an alien race of ultraviolent SnM villans from outside the galaxy show up to be evil? Because I'd love to see that as a Star Wars film.

Starscream
2012-02-15, 02:09 PM
Wake me when we invent technology that can add a second dimension to TPM's characters.

Lord Seth
2012-02-16, 09:52 AM
Here's some quotes of his; let's see if you can spot the hypocrisy. :smalltongue:How long ago were these quotes given? If they were from a while ago, that's not hypocrisy, just someone changing their mind.

Weezer
2012-02-16, 11:23 AM
The best arguement that article puts forward is that they'd be the same as the originals, which you know is pretty much what I want. Also it assumes that they'd follow EU canon which I doubt they'd do and even if they did, I haven't read the EU but didn't it end up having an alien race of ultraviolent SnM villans from outside the galaxy show up to be evil? Because I'd love to see that as a Star Wars film.

Yeah that happened, but it happened long after the sequels would be set, unless there was a massive time jump, which would simply be confusing.

Wookieetank
2012-02-16, 01:46 PM
Yeah that happened, but it happened long after the sequels would be set, unless there was a massive time jump, which would simply be confusing.

That and it wasn't near as well written as much of the earlier EU before the Jedi took over all the main characters. If they do end up doing VII, VIII and IX it wouldn't hurt for them to at least take notes from the Thrawn trilogy. Out of all the EU books I've read (which is most of them) the Thrawn trilogy to me seemed to capture the feel of the original trilogy best, and in literary format no less! Most of the characters fell into the Badass normal category, and even Luke, Mara, and the crazy Jedi dude had limits to their abilities. But thats just my take on it.

hamishspence
2012-02-16, 02:21 PM
Yeah that happened, but it happened long after the sequels would be set, unless there was a massive time jump, which would simply be confusing.

If the sequels were live action, they'd need a massive time jump, given how long it's been since the last movie.

A live action Thrawn trilogy, while potentially extremely awesome, might suffer a bit, if Luke, Leia, Han and so on all look ancient when it's supposed to be only 5 years later.

Animation, a la Beowulf, might solve this though.

The Glyphstone
2012-02-16, 04:11 PM
If the sequels were live action, they'd need a massive time jump, given how long it's been since the last movie.

A live action Thrawn trilogy, while potentially extremely awesome, might suffer a bit, if Luke, Leia, Han and so on all look ancient when it's supposed to be only 5 years later.

Animation, a la Beowulf, might solve this though.

Or just re-cast the parts.

hamishspence
2012-02-16, 04:24 PM
True. Still, might be a bit disappointing to some, if "five years older Han" is not Harrison Ford, for example.

Axolotl
2012-02-16, 04:34 PM
If the sequels were live action, they'd need a massive time jump, given how long it's been since the last movie.

A live action Thrawn trilogy, while potentially extremely awesome, might suffer a bit, if Luke, Leia, Han and so on all look ancient when it's supposed to be only 5 years later.Couldn't they just say it happened 30 years after instead of five?


Animation, a la Beowulf, might solve this though.Please, the last thing Star Wars needs is more CGI.

hamishspence
2012-02-16, 04:38 PM
Couldn't they just say it happened 30 years after instead of five?

Isn't that the "massive time jump that would be a bit confusing"?

Axolotl
2012-02-16, 04:51 PM
Isn't that the "massive time jump that would be a bit confusing"?Why would it be confusing? I mean It's Star Wars people would be annoyed if it didn't dump a load of exposition in a text-crawl at the start.

Besides which isn't confusion part of Star Wars' selling point? The original film pretty much just dumped you into a strange universe with little more than "empire bad, rebellion good" and just let it progress from there.

Mando Knight
2012-02-16, 06:25 PM
Or just re-cast the parts.
For Leia? I'd be more disappointed if they didn't. The past 30-some years have not been kind to Carrie Fisher.

The Glyphstone
2012-02-16, 09:22 PM
True. Still, might be a bit disappointing to some, if "five years older Han" is not Harrison Ford, for example.


For Leia? I'd be more disappointed if they didn't. The past 30-some years have not been kind to Carrie Fisher.

I'm with Mando. Not having Harrison Ford will be many times over made up for by not having Carrie Fisher.

Gnoman
2012-02-16, 11:32 PM
In any case, for most of the actors, it wouldn't be as bad a fit as you might thing. 30 years of soft living isn't that much more wearing than 5 years of constant warfare. If you look at people in positions of great responsibility, you can see this.

Weezer
2012-02-16, 11:54 PM
In any case, for most of the actors, it wouldn't be as bad a fit as you might thing. 30 years of soft living isn't that much more wearing than 5 years of constant warfare. If you look at people in positions of great responsibility, you can see this.

At this point Hamil and Fisher are essentially unrecognizable, when compared to their looks on debut. Yeah, they're obviously the same people, but I don't think it would be much less jarring than switching actors. The only one of the three who has maintained similarities of looks is Ford. Pulled some pictures from IMDB to demonstrate my point.


Mark Hamil

Now:
http://www.imdb.com/media/rm578600704/nm0000434

Then:
http://www.imdb.com/media/rm288471808/nm0000434

Carrie Fisher

Now:
http://www.imdb.com/media/rm2695993344/nm0000402

Then:
http://www.imdb.com/media/rm1311149824/nm0000402


The thing is that a hard/stressful life will prematurely age you in far different ways than a soft life will. Stress/war keeps you thin, adds worry lines, brings early greying of hair/receding hairline, soft living gets you a bit plump, a bit saggy. They're simply result in far different appearances.

Dumbledore lives
2012-02-17, 06:03 AM
Well I went and saw it with a group of friends, and have to say I enjoyed myself. The 3-D was nowhere near as terrible I was expecting, and the film was exactly what I was expecting, full of plot holes, bad characterization, and Jar Jar, but damn it it was fun.

Killer Angel
2012-02-17, 06:05 AM
How exactly do you make a film into 3D when it wasnt originally filmed in 3D? Dont you have to make something 3D right from the start. I know they didnt go back and re-shoot the whole thing (actors age for one), so how can they do it?

I don't exactly know. But it can be done (http://darthsanddroids.net/episodes_3d/0001_3d.html). :smallbiggrin:

Weezer
2012-02-17, 08:36 AM
I don't exactly know. But it can be done (http://darthsanddroids.net/episodes_3d/0001_3d.html). :smallbiggrin:

They don't call it Industrial Light and Magic for nothing.