Titanic 3D

legendary.xix

Anyone here seen Titanic 3D? I didn't think the 3D affects were any good at all. Supposedly James Cameron spent millions upgrading the movie for 3D. If that's the end result, I don't think any movie can be upgraded for 3D viewing.

JoeA3

Yeah I saw it. It was my first cinema 3D experience and it didn't do much for me either. To be honest I found the glasses uncomfortable after a while and they made me feel cross-eyed! It made the screen seem smaller and everything had a green-ish tinge. I took the glasses off a few times and the screen looked a lot better without them :pac:

Most of the "3D" seemed to be on people's faces. I kinda expected more dramatic 3D shots of the ship itself, particularly the sinking sequence but apart from the odd splash of water, I didn't see a lot of difference.

Maybe I'm getting old, but I came out thinking this 3D stuff is a gimmick.

Myrddin

More bolt on afterwards tacky 3d. I've yet to see anything that came near Avatar for 3d.

MJ23

I dont know how anyone would waste their time and money on this. 3D put onto older films is shìte. Looks awful.

emeraldstar

JoeA3 wrote: »

Maybe I'm getting old, but I came out thinking this 3D stuff is a gimmick.

There's no doubt it is. It doesn't add anything to a movie and they have the pleasure of charging you more for it. I hope it's a phase that fizzles out.

Roar

emeraldstar wrote: »

There's no doubt it is. It doesn't add anything to a movie and they have the pleasure of charging you more for it. I hope it's a phase that fizzles out.

With the Phantom Menace 3d making $45m in its domestic US run and Titanic 3D making $146m internationally, I don't think it will, sadly

http://news.yahoo.com/international-box-office-titanic-3d-sails-past-titans-110337939.html

legendary.xix

EnterNow wrote: »

More bolt on afterwards tacky 3d. I've yet to see anything that came near Avatar for 3d.

Avatar was fantastic in 3D, real wow! When a movie has not been made in 3D initially it clearly cannot be upgraded to 3D afterwards, despite all the spin and claims of millions spent on CGI to make it possible.

Myrddin

legendary.xix wrote: »

Avatar was fantastic in 3D, real wow! When a movie has not been made in 3D initially it clearly cannot be upgraded to 3D afterwards, despite all the spin and claims of millions spent on CGI to make it possible.

I fully agree, the post 3d effect is largely rubbish

Turtyturd

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUwGWTjPDJ4

Duggy747

Guy:Incognito

Roar wrote: »

, I don't think it will, sadly

Why? Its hardly affecting you if your not going anyway.

jaykhunter

I'd never watch Titanic (2D or 3D) again but i can see why studios would re-do stuff, and add in 3D. Most teenagers probably haven't seen it in the first place, it's about 15 years old. From tweets I've read most people didn't know the Titanic actually existed! I wonder what the cost to profit ratio of slap-dashing 3D onto a 2D film is like.

Irish Aris

well, I saw it on Sunday - the 100 years anniversary (and as a friend said: are we celebrating that 1500 people died???).

I don't think that the 3D was really impressive, but I love the film generally and haven't seen in years, so I really enjoyed it.

Caprica

Thought the 3D was very disappointing. I'm never a huge fan of movies being upgraded from 2D anyway but I thought with Cameron involved it would be different. There was very little noticeable effects, it's still a great movie though, last time I seen it was Savoy 1 in 1998.

Apart from Avatar, which was brilliant, I have found the whole 3D experience underwhelming. I just think it's a reason to make more money without delivering much to the consumer.

Da Shins Kelly

It wasn't great, was it? I enjoyed seeing it in the cinema, cos I never had that experience, but the 3D seemed to be mainly the back of people's heads, or the shoulder of some person who was half out of shot. It could have been much better. The crash could have been amazing.

Nothing will come close to Piranhas in 3D for me!

Guy:Incognito

The 3d trailer for the Avengers looked awesome.

OldeCinemaSoz

i hear China has cut the infamous sex scene for the 3d reissue,
not for nudity, but because they were worried that the 3d efx were
so impressive, audience members would be reaching out for a grope of
the leading lady!



i kid you not!!!

TerrorFirmer

I thought it was reasonable. Not amazing, but it added noticeable depth - some scenes were far better than others, it was a little patchy admittedly. Was brilliant have the opportunity to see it on the big screen though, as when it first came out I was too young to go - and it's been just long enough since I'd seen it to make it perfect in the cinema this time around. Probably the best thing I've seen in the cinema in a very long time indeed.

candy-gal1

Tbh when i saw this was coming out in cinemas again the 3D part was just a bonus to me, i just wanted to see it again on the big screen :D
has been my definite favourite movie for a long time, but i did think the 3d was actually good.
It was focused mainly on the people, as in they were right in front of you, especially the scenes with the workers at the bottom of the ship, that looked really awesome imho, that made it come out at you to make you feel like your there, i definitly wasnt dissapointed with it anyway.

It's oddly a lot of fun in reverse

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-W2rTj1bsY

Max Power1

Caprica wrote: »

Thought the 3D was very disappointing. I'm never a huge fan of movies being upgraded from 2D anyway but I thought with Cameron involved it would be different. There was very little noticeable effects, it's still a great movie though, last time I seen it was Savoy 1 in 1998.

Apart from Avatar, which was brilliant, I have found the whole 3D experience underwhelming. I just think it's a reason to make more money without delivering much to the consumer.

+1
For the most part it wasnt even in 3d imo.

legendary.xix

Irish Aris wrote: »

well, I saw it on Sunday - the 100 years anniversary (and as a friend said: are we celebrating that 1500 people died???).

I don't think that the 3D was really impressive, but I love the film generally and haven't seen in years, so I really enjoyed it.

Though it tragically sank after midnight, I watched it on Saturday night thinking that it was more approriate 100 years on from the night it hit the iceberg. Definitely won't be rushing to watch upgraded 3D stuff again but as you say in terms of seeing the movie, it was good to see it again, as tragic and sad as it is.

Zubeneschamali

Never saw it in 2D, adding a post 3D conversion just makes me less likely to go.

Tipsy McSwagger

I went to it in the cinema Sunday because I never went to see it when it came out. The one thing I will say is that the first site of the wreck of the Titanic lying on the sea bed is more emotional than the rest of the film put together.

Phony Scott

Heard this mentioned by Mark Kermode on Friday. Funny stuff, though I still haven't gotten round to seeing the film in 3D.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJxj1mou03M

Anniebell

Saw this today & it definitely wasn't as much 3D in it as I thought there would be given the amount of money that James Cameron pumped into it.

I had my glasses off loads of times & you could see that one character was in 3d and the rest of the scene & other characters werent.

Still enjoyed seeing it on the big screen (again!) and cringed at the mega-cheesy moments I swooned at the first time around!!

filmbuffboy

For all the hype, it didnt turn out to be the 3d phenomenon Cameron claimed it was. sure, some scenes looked a bit 3d but overall its just the same old film.

probably has something to do with it not being shot with 3d cameras in the first place??

On the other hand, I am looking forward to seeing it in HD when its released on Blu ray at the end of the year

Anniebell

filmbuffboy wrote: »

For all the hype, it didnt turn out to be the 3d phenomenon Cameron claimed it was. sure, some scenes looked a bit 3d but overall its just the same old film.

probably has something to do with it not being shot with 3d cameras in the first place??

On the other hand, I am looking forward to seeing it in HD when its released on Blu ray at the end of the year

Will it get a DVD re-release as well do you know?

filmbuffboy

Anniebell wrote: »

Will it get a DVD re-release as well do you know?

Most likely the same time the remastered blu ray is released. Some time towards the end of the year in the States. Not sure if its the same time here, or mabye a few months afterwards - so early 2013 at the latest most likely.

Ant

Until I got to TerrorFirmer and candygal's posts, I thought I'd be the first person posting favourable comments on this 3-d re-release.

I'm usually wary of seeing films in 3-d as more often than not 3-d is simply a gimmick that adds little to the film. However, I'd read a good interview with James Cameron where he explained how and why they post-processed the film and I concluded it was worth taking a chance on.

Having not actually seen Titanic (I was going through an elitist phase when it first came out and I just don't watch enough TV to have come across it in the intervening years), I thought the film was excellent. Knowing that it was going to be 3 hours long, I was expecting there to be moments where it dragged but I was completely gripped for the full length of the movie and didn't notice the time going by.

The 3-d was quite subtle - from what I can gather it was meant to be - and I thought it added a suitable (non-distracting) depth to enhance the shots of the ship itself. If you live near a cinema still showing this, I'd recommend catching it on the big screen before it's gone.