CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › Beauty & the Beast 3D Re-release Discussion
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Beauty & the Beast 3D Re-release Discussion

post #1 of 13
1/10/12 at 7:46am
Thread Starter 

slice_beauty_beast_disney_01.jpg

 

Had the privilege of seeing this on a big screen over the weekend and it's every bit as incredible as when I first saw it. 3D conversion, when not hastily rushed through post-production deadlines, can actually look great.

 

This is, by far, the best animated 3D offering I've seen. And that's coming from someone who isn't the biggest fan of the medium (I tested out my new 2D conversion glasses I bought from Amazon during the Tangled Ever After short film that ran before the screening). But it has me thinking, I wouldn't mind seeing older releases like this converted over to 3D, as a gimmick to revisit some old standards. The thought of seeing the initial Xanadu reveal in Citizen Kane is actually pretty god damn enticing. But I'm still apathetic towards studios pushing it as a predominant medium. 

 

Anyways, if you're a  fan of Disney's bronze age of feature length animation (late 80s/early 90s): highly recommend seeking this out when it's released this weekend.

Reply
post #2 of 13
1/10/12 at 7:47am

I really don't see a point to turning 2D images into a "post converted" 3D diorama. The ballroom sequence was created in 3D, but everything else is 2D cel animation. Just doesn't make sense to me

Reply
post #3 of 13
1/10/12 at 8:02am
Thread Starter 

That's an opinion, but I'm not surprised you don't understand. You've already claimed in the past that you only go to theaters for Daniel Craig movies. There's great merit in the communal experience that seeing something like Beauty & the Beast provides, seeing a musical film on a big screen amongst peers. And if the 3D can be handled with love and care over a long stretch of time, then I say why not? It's an additional benefit and when not rushed it can actually look terrific.

Reply
post #4 of 13
1/10/12 at 8:04am
Thread Starter 

And if I'm paying a premium on 3D ticket prices I would rather it be to see something that I trust from a storytelling standpoint. I can't see myself paying $16 on blind faith for something like Transformers: Dark of the Moon anymore.

Reply
post #5 of 13
1/10/12 at 8:11am
Quote:
Originally Posted by roboTimKelly View Post

That's an opinion, but I'm not surprised you don't understand. You've already claimed in the past that you only go to theaters for Daniel Craig movies. There's great merit in the communal experience that seeing something like Beauty & the Beast provides, seeing a musical film on a big screen amongst peers. And if the 3D can be handled with love and care over a long stretch of time, then I say why not? It's an additional benefit and when not rushed it can actually look terrific.



I've never claimed any such thing, Tim. I've stated that I won't go to the movies unless I'm going to catch a 3D experience I couldn't later view on my own at home, or, I'm going to support the career of someone that I love (such as but not limited to Daniel Craig)
 

 

My point is that you cannot "post convert" a 2D image into a 3D one. You can create a pop up book out of a 2D image, but you cannot go back and recapture data from multiple angles, as is the case in true 3D. With a 2D animated film, this is also an impossibility unless you go back and hang animate the entire film over again from a slightly different perspective. Outside BATB's ballroom sequence, which could be rerendered in a computer for 3D with no artistic compromise, it's impossible to turn the movie into a 3D film

Reply
post #6 of 13
1/10/12 at 8:21am
Thread Starter 

Ugh, I'm not debating whether the 3D film I just watched was the best post conversion 3D I've seen with a person who hasn't seen it. If you want that to be your argument, see the film first. 

 

Reply
post #7 of 13
1/10/12 at 8:23am

I've made a resolution not to do 3D anymore, and would be willing to bend it only for films that were planned and shot with 3D in mind (like The Hobbit).  I wouldn't be opposed to seeing Beauty and the Beast in the theater -- I never saw it theatrically the first time around -- but I'm not going to pay a 3D premium to do so.

 

Of course, hypocrite that I am, I'm considering seeing Titanic in 3D, partly because I trust Cameron to do a better job on post conversion but mostly because 3D KATE WINSLET BOOBS.

Reply
post #8 of 13
1/10/12 at 8:27am
Great to hear that this is awesome. My wife was kinda wanting to see this (she loves the film but never saw it theatrically) and I was planning on treating her to it.
Reply
post #9 of 13
1/10/12 at 8:30am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Dickson View Post

I've made a resolution not to do 3D anymore, and would be willing to bend it only for films that were planned and shot with 3D in mind (like The Hobbit).  



The funny thing is that this is a philosophy I typically share as well. Hence me buying the 2D conversion glasses for screenings. I'm not a big supporter of the argument that 3D somehow makes a film more immersive. Immersion comes from great screenwriting, cinematography, the performances ect. But this really was something else, I can't pretend like I wasn't impressed. The 3D was only a part of it though, and the great draw for me is seeing something like this on a big screen again. 

Reply
post #10 of 13
1/10/12 at 8:31am

The most immersive 3D experience I had was Avatar, and that was more a result of the IMAX screen than the 3D.  With the other 3D films I've seen, the darker image and the constant awareness of the effect further distanced me from the film than a 2D viewing would have.

Reply
post #11 of 13
1/10/12 at 8:35am
Thread Starter 

Wholeheartedly agree with that assessment. The arguments studios make towards 3D would be much better suited towards IMAX (3D or not). IMAX films, especially the ones shot in part on 70mm, are something I have no trepidation paying a premium for.

Reply
post #12 of 13
1/10/12 at 8:37am

I doubt I will catch this for several reasons.  One, I have two boys who may not appreciate the film for the artful experience because of the subject matter.  Two, I'm not too keen on revisiting it at 3D prices.  And finally, when I saw the preview for it in front of Hugo my lady friend in attendance audibly scoffed at it and when I asked her why she barked in my ear, "Stockholm Syndrome!"  I laughed and she just shook her head at Disney Princesses.

Reply
post #13 of 13
1/10/12 at 9:08am

This is my wife's favorite, and I wouldn't mind seeing it post-converted.  But I'd see it 2D if I had to.  I'm looking forward to some of my favorites in 3D.

 

I think Nemo later in the year will look awesome in 3D, and The Little Mermaid (my fave) next year.

 

I think roboTim makes a great point.  You know the film, and you trust the value.  Makes the decision easier.

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Focused Film Discussion
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › Beauty & the Beast 3D Re-release Discussion