Episode 131 - Comin' At Ya in 3-D

[kingstownted]

MP3 Direct Download

Height and width are the dimensions we know when images are projected onto that big flat screen in front of us but what happens when you throw depth into the mix? 3-D baby.

This week we take a look at the (long) history of 3-D in cinema and where things may be heading. Admittedly, it's an episode burdened with tech talk but the processes to achieve that "cool factor" are far more complicated than we first thought. The four main methods to convey 3-D are reviewed (check out this easy to follow diagram), each of the eras of 3-D films are visited (of which we are in the third?), the new ability to convert standard to 3-D is questioned and the modern saturation of 3-D content raises questions about it's sustainability. And where does Imax fit into all this? More general subject talk than film discussions this week, hope you enjoy.

The contest giveaways come to an end. Thanks again to Rebellion Press and 2000 AD for the great giveaway packages. Things wrap up with some quick hits on Zombieland (again) andTranssiberian (2008), does evil truly exist?, industry suing downloaders (again), LOST and more. Oh, and Evil Dead in 60 seconds in Claymation.

We always welcome your comments: [e-mail]

[mundays]

Thanks. Really interesting episode.

By the way for those who don't know - Tony mentioned Amityville 3D wasn't widely available on DVD. It is in the UK and presumably can be bought through amazon, complete with two pairs of glasses. Got a copy myself. It's crap.

Piranha 3D is going to be my must see 3d movie of the year. I'm so excited about it. If I could travel back in time and tell the young me that a new installment of the Piranha franchise would eventually be released... and it'll be big budget... and it'll be an all star cast... and it'll be on the big screen... and in 3d... I'd blow my acne ridden former selfs mind, I really would.

[deckard]

I'm of the opinion that 3D is nothing more than a gimmick, even, as in the case of a film like Avatar (which is the only exception to this argument I can think of), a very expensive gimmick. Eventually, once we're through another phase of over-usage like during the 80's, and any problems with the new techniques are ironed out, we'll probably get some films that actually benfit from it and use it effectively, like when films are made in monchrome today - but I feel that they're a few years off.
My main problem with 3D is when added as an afterthought, in which case it is purely a gimmick, and has no creative merit. I believe Alice In Wonderland was 3D-ed in this manner. These are the films more often than not that are made to have things pop out of the screen rather than draw you in, which is how the tool should be used.

N.B. I apologise in advance if any of these points are covered in the episode; I haven't yet listened to it.

[hammermancunian]

Yeah im slightly peed that the makers of Clash Of The Titans have added 3D as an afterthought.
An extra £2 in their pockets there from everyone who falls for the "IN 3D" gimmick.Mind you there are many out there who saw Avatar in 2D or on pirate copy.Not everyone has grasped the concept.

[randombullseye]

Not listened to the episode yet, but,

Bloody Valentine 3D was one of the best horror movies to see at the movies ever. I saw it with a packed audience, sat up front, and laughed throughout the film. Yes, it brought nothing new to the table at all, besides 3D breasts, but did everything right. Even character stupidity and an eye poked out were done!

Also, Freddys Dead's 3D makes me sad.

Everything else I've seen in 3D was terrible! Terrible! Up wasn't the least bit in 3D when I saw it. I can't even recall anything else I saw in 3D, that's how much I dislike new 3D.

[hammermancunian]

Very informative and the info will come in handy.
It appears everyone has an opinion on 3D at the moment...its nice to have the facts.

[ieatflesh]

Great episode guys.

I enjoyed Avatar, My Bloody Valentine, and Journey to the Center of the Earth.
I did UP in 2-D because I read the 3-D lowered the color quality.

I am really looking forward to Piranha 3-D. Not because of the 3-D, but because it is directed by Alex Aja, has killer fish (a favorite sub-genre of mine) and will be a massive gore fest.

I got a 3-D movie in the mail the other day. It's called SCAR 3-D. The copy I have is an Asian import. No release in the U.S. yet and it's a few years old.

It stars Angela Bettis and looks pretty gory. I just popped it in to check it and the 3-D was pretty good but the color was not the greatest. I will watch it soon.

[Scary Gary]

Very informative show. I like the occasional "behind the scene" style shows that tell us how the magic works. With that said, I've never felt the allure of movies in 3D. Admittedly, my point of view is skewed as I have not viewed many movies in 3D, and the ones I did were not well done. What would really get my attention would be video games in 3D. Or better yet, fully immersible video games. Of particular interest would be horror or RPG style games (but I guess if if you were immersed in the game it would automatically be a roll playing game by default). I could envision a game where you are walking through a creepy old house, hear a noise from behind, really turn your head and BOO!!! Yeah, I could dig that.

[lordbloodrah]

Great show, but...
I hate to point out any errors, but you mentioned William Castle's "House on Haunted Hill" and "13 Ghosts" were presented in 3D. To my knowledge William Castle's "House on Haunted Hill" was never released to theaters in 3D. The "process" for House was called "Emergo", a new theatrical marvel that Castle said was better than 3D. The new, revolutionary process? At a crucial point in the film, where a skeleton rises from a pool of acid...a plastic skeleton was flown over the audience on a wire. No 3D process, only a showman's carnival trick. But Castle was rightly loved for it, and his other gimmicks.
Also, it was mentioned that "13 Ghosts" was a 3D film. I think this too is in error. The gimmick here was the "Ghost Viewer". The Ghost Viewer used the familiar Red/Blue split in a different way. Instead of glasses with one red and one blue lens, the Ghost Viewer had one strip of red above a strip of blue. The audience was told that, if they wanted to see the proof of the existence of ghosts, to look though the red viewer. If not, look through the blue. Sure enough, the ghosts were visible through the red slot, slightly less so through the blue. The process was similar, but did not produce a stereoscopic effect.
This ends our presentation of Geek Know-It-All Theater. Thank you, please tip your waitress...

[jmodlinc]

Solid show as usual gentlemeners, but a couple corrections to point out...

-- The sequel to last year's "Friday the 13th" revamp is NOT coming out this August as it is still being developed and I don't believe a final draft of a screenplay has been written or agreed upon by all the players involved.

-- "Transsiberian" DID have a limited theatrical release here in the States (not sure about Canada) back in the summer of 2008.

Also, although you two (and potentially a certain Doug-shaped creature) will undoubtedly pick this back up on a forthcoming eppy, I wanted to quickly state my view on the issue of "evil": to me, true evil would be a person who is of complete sane/sound mind and (unlike Tony's apparent opinion on the matter)is not incapable of feeling empathy or compassion or morals (i.e. a sociopath/psychopath) but just purposely (or somewhere innate in their psyche, but again, not due to any dysfunction or illness) loves or enjoys the suffering and misfortune, deliberate or otherwise, of others.

To me, “evil” gets tossed around way too much on individuals with mental illness or have only done something out of revenge, jealousy, defense of some sort etc.. There is a difference between someone who has perpetrated evil acts and someone who is actually full-blown evil.

Needless to say though, if “evil” is only a matter of perception or opinion than it does indeed only exist within the mind’s eye and is entirely dependent on the person’s particular views on the subject. Outside of that, there is then no such thing. I don’t, however, believe that someone who is evil personally has to believe that what they are doing is the right thing — in fact, to me a truly evil person would totally believe what they are doing is wrong, corrupt or hurting others and is all the more joyful and upbeat because of it.

Side Note: It’s funny to me how when someone is viewed as “evil” or has done something particularly cruel or savage that the general public pronounces them and/or their acts as “inhumane.” In my little ol’ opinion, if the entire recorded history of our species has taught us anything is that violence and other kinds of physical or mental abuse is an all-too-human trait or thing to do.

Perhaps we just need a better phrase for that or need to get over ourselves in thinking that “humane” should mean all that is positive or nurturing about us. That’s a very one-sided and black and white viewpoint.

[kingstownted]

ok, ok. corrections. corrections.
The release of F13th 2 to spring 2011 was news to me - thanks for the disappointment (but it is still scheduled to be in 3D)

...and I would be remiss not to correct back by reiterating that I never said Transsiberian was direct to DVD, but that it struck me as direct to DVD quality.

Hate having to clarify but with the nature inherent of internet forums...hope you take the playful nature of my reply.

[jmodlinc]

Apr 7, 2010 16:54:21 GMT -5 kingstownted said:

ok, ok. corrections. corrections.
The release of F13th 2 to spring 2011 was news to me - thanks for the disappointment (but it is still scheduled to be in 3D)

...and I would be remiss not to correct back by reiterating that I never said Transsiberian was direct to DVD, but that it struck me as direct to DVD quality.

Hate having to clarify but with the nature inherent of internet forums...hope you take the playful nature of my reply.

Of course -- no worries, K-Ted!

[codzine]

I'm listening to things out of order and trying to catch up, so I just listened to this today. It was interesting to learn how the different types work, but overall, I just am not into the 3d thing. I can't manage to get excited about it. (I do have a copy of Robot Monster in 3d on VHS somewhere, but I've lost my red and blue glasses.) I did agree about the idea that 3d stuff should be an event, not done excessively for every single film out there. I hate wearing the glasses and they give me a headache, usually. I'm pretty ok with 2d films, though...

[deuce]

Great episode. As of this moment, I have never seen a movie in 3-d, and personally, I don't see any movies on the horizon that may change that.

[jonnyt]

hey guys,
fantastic show again,great technical info!
I do like 3D myself but i'm with tony on the fact that the whole 3D experience should be exactly that,an experience.
The whole hollywood money train is really pissing me off with the afterthought of re-doing the 3D,whats the point!!
In the uk there were huge ad's for "Alice in wonderland"saying come and see in glorious 3d,it wasn't!!!!!
I feel that if anything with this overkill this will kill they joy that can be gotten from going to the cinema and seeing good 3Dfilms such as avatar an my bloody valentine.
Also the point of poor parents feeling that if there is a 2D/3D option that they have to take the kids to see 3D thus costing more and boosting hollywood profits even more,
ho hum!
Kepp up the good work chaps!! ;D