Discuss: 'Spidey 4' and Other Upcoming Films That Should Be in 3-D
Filed under: Exhibition, Movie Marketing
Like an out-of-control freight train barreling down a hill, more 3-D movies are coming, whether we want them or not. Hollywood studios have placed their bets, theater owners are feeling the pressure to upgrade, and moviegoers are being pummeled with the idea that 3-D is the greatest thing since, well, the last time the studios tried to shove 3-D down our throats, in the long ago, musty, medieval decade known as "the 80s."
That being the case, perhaps we should bow to the inevitable and consider which upcoming movies should be in 3-D, and which ones would be a total wash with an extra-dimensional viewing experience. Amy Pascal of Sony Pictures Entertainment told Forbes Magazine that Spider-Man 4 "could be" shot in 3-D. She and fellow exec Michael Lynton think most animated movies will be in 3-D, and believe James Cameron's Avatar "could change the world," in Pascal's words. (Which we've heard before.) She continued, "I don't know that it will ever be the way you see dramas, but I can't say anymore that it won't be."
Announced 3-D releases for 2010 include: Beauty and the Beast, Alice in Wonderland, Piranha 3D, Toy Story 3, Step Up 3D, and Rapunzel. To allow for development and pre-production time, let's put our thinking caps and consider the future. For example, Spider-Man 4 is slated for release in May 2011. What other live-action pictures planned for 2011 would benefit from 3-D? How about Thor? What if he could hurl his hammer at you in 3-D? Or The First Avenger: Captain America? How about making Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollows: Part II extra special -- in 3-D? Why not The Hobbit? Maybe some flicks scheduled for late 2010 could make the switch. Green Lantern in 3-D, anyone?
Which ones should be in 3-D?
'Ridgemont High' Inspirations Are Now Protective Parents
You Say 'Twilight,' Taylor Swift Says 'Firelight'
Robert Pattinson Talks 'Breaking Dawn' & 'Unbound Captives'
Gwyneth Paltrow Joins Nicole Kidman in 'The Danish Girl'
Discuss: The Movies That Haunt You
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
4-24-2009 @ 9:14PM
Sam F said...
3-D, in my oh so humble opinion, is kind of cheesy. Sure, they're okay, but lets be honest, not all its cracked up to be. Pop-out books are awesome, because they are meant to jump out at you, that is the point. Movies are there to tell a story, and things popping out of the screen doesn't really add much to that dimension of cinema. Hell, choose your own adventure cinema sounds more interesting to me. At least you advance the plot while interacting. 3-D pops out and... well, shit, that's all it can do. But what do I know.
Reply
4-24-2009 @ 9:29PM
Matthew Mac said...
If an advancement for a medium is only useful for some movies, then it obviously does nothing to enhance the story telling and is very much a gimmick. And if I'm told (as so many internet peoples tend to do) that the only to get the full experience of a movie is to watch it in 3D, which I see as a cheesy gimmick, then the movie has already failed on so many levels it's laughable. I will continue to never watch the 3D versions of movies, and if that ever makes a movie unwatchable, I have o problems skipping it altogether. But that's just me. =)
Reply
4-24-2009 @ 9:56PM
Cyhort said...
I hate this 3D craze that's going around. I go to movies to watch them, enjoy the story and relax. It takes me out of the story when I have to be looking out for a little icon so I can put my stupid glasses on and see something that sort of looks like it's coming out of the screen. There's a reason this gimmick never really caught on in the 80's.
Reply
4-25-2009 @ 7:53AM
MCW said...
That's not what you do kid. I saw MBB3D... no icons... even the menu titles and credits were in 3D.
The only people here talking about their feelings on 3D haven't even SEEN a modern 3D movie. Pointless to talk about something you know nothing about.
4-24-2009 @ 10:00PM
MCW said...
I can't get you guys to answer emails (As usual)... comment reply email notification is STILL broken. There's no excuse for that.
Reply
4-25-2009 @ 1:13AM
shadowracer said...
None.
Modern Digital Cinemas have such deep colors and high resolution that the image has plenty of real depth to begin with, 3D just tweaks it and distracts the viewer.
Reply
4-25-2009 @ 12:20PM
Mr.R said...
Buddy Holly, bicolor glasses = fail
Reply
4-25-2009 @ 2:13PM
jon said...
i agree the blue and red color 3d glasses are the worst. not worth watching. but for those that dont know, all the modern theatres use new clear glasses now, that look alot better than the old shool 80's 3d glasses.
i saw a deep sea 3d imax movie on a giant size imax screen. it was nothing short of amazing. what 3d should have been all along. sad thing is the 3d dvd and bluray movies that are released still use the old schoool 80's 3d technology with the red and blue glasses sucks. its nothing like the imax 3d.
4-25-2009 @ 1:40PM
vegimorph said...
I'd say none. 3-D is ok and fun once in a while, especially in an amusement park but it feels like a strain or more effort is being put on a person with 3-D. I saw Monsters vs. Aliens in 3-D and they only did the pop out stuff in the beginning. I'm not sure if it was the 3-D or not but there were some great scenes that tried to make the scope gigantic. I wouldn't have minded seeing the movie in 2-D at all. Plus, couldn't that epic scope thing be accomplished in 2-D anyway?
Reply
4-25-2009 @ 4:08PM
Riley Freeman said...
if venom and carnage are not in spiderman 4. i dont care if they put me in the movie myself im not interested. they ruined the spidey films with the last crap. and venom and carnage are the only interesting characters to reboot this series
Reply
4-27-2009 @ 1:51PM
hayson said...
Re-release YELLOW SUBMARINE in 3-D! Booyah!
Reply