Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6965|132 and Bush

Avoid the surcharge and see the film in proper 2-D with brighter color.
I've made it no secret that I am not a fan of 3d. Popcorn and licorice aren't going to interfere with your video receptors. I understand that some people enjoy 3d though. Personally, I'll take a higher quality image on the big screen over 3d any day. I'm interested in seeing the films shot in 4K. (inb4 you cant tell the difference) It's not just about resolution. Which means a better range and protection of color ..and it's been said that it looks better then it's 2k counterparts when it is down sampled.

Sniping at who?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Lucien
Fantasma Parastasie
+1,451|7018
how come 3d movies are always so dark anyway

is it that hard to make them a bit brighter?
https://i.imgur.com/HTmoH.jpg
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,818|6470|eXtreme to the maX
Kung Fu Panda 2 - 6/10
Some funny bits, otherwise the originality of the first one was gone.
Fuck Israel
Kampframmer
Esq.
+313|5207|Amsterdam
Hall pass
6/10
Funnier than i expected (ithought it would be a 3 or 4) but still, not that great.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6965|132 and Bush

Lucien wrote:

how come 3d movies are always so dark anyway

is it that hard to make them a bit brighter?

Walter Murch, respected film editor and sound designer in modern cinema. wrote:

The 3D image is dark, as you mentioned (about a camera stop darker) and small. Somehow the glasses "gather in" the image -- even on a huge Imax screen -- and make it seem half the scope of the same image when looked at without the glasses.

I edited one 3D film back in the 1980's -- "Captain Eo" -- and also noticed that horizontal movement will strobe much sooner in 3D than it does in 2D. This was true then, and it is still true now. It has something to do with the amount of brain power dedicated to studying the edges of things. The more conscious we are of edges, the earlier strobing kicks in.

The biggest problem with 3D, though, is the "convergence/focus" issue. A couple of the other issues -- darkness and "smallness" -- are at least theoretically solvable. But the deeper problem is that the audience must focus their eyes at the plane of the screen -- say it is 80 feet away. This is constant no matter what.

But their eyes must converge at perhaps 10 feet away, then 60 feet, then 120 feet, and so on, depending on what the illusion is. So 3D films require us to focus at one distance and converge at another. And 600 million years of evolution has never presented this problem before. All living things with eyes have always focussed and converged at the same point.
https://i.imgur.com/UvjZa.jpg
If we look at the salt shaker on the table, close to us, we focus at six feet and our eyeballs converge (tilt in) at six feet. Imagine the base of a triangle between your eyes and the apex of the triangle resting on the thing you are looking at. But then look out the window and you focus at sixty feet and converge also at sixty feet. That imaginary triangle has now "opened up" so that your lines of sight are almost -- almost -- parallel to each other.
We can do this. 3D films would not work if we couldn't. But it is like tapping your head and rubbing your stomach at the same time, difficult. So the "CPU" of our perceptual brain has to work extra hard, which is why after 20 minutes or so many people get headaches. They are doing something that 600 million years of evolution never prepared them for. This is a deep problem, which no amount of technical tweaking can fix. Nothing will fix it short of producing true "holographic" images.

Consequently, the editing of 3D films cannot be as rapid as for 2D films, because of this shifting of convergence: it takes a number of milliseconds for the brain/eye to "get" what the space of each shot is and adjust.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,818|6470|eXtreme to the maX
That and polarising loses some light.
Fuck Israel
Spidery_Yoda
Member
+399|6635

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Spidery_Yoda wrote:

Harry Potter 7 Pt. 2

Spoiler (highlight to read):
blah blah blah
I didn't really notice any of the stuff you've complained about there. I thought it did a remarkable job being faithful to the books. The entire series too, despite deviations here and there, particularly since it changed hands so many times. I actually liked the extended fight at the end of it. Would have been fairly anti-climactic if it merely stopped in the woods.

Still, what's your rating?
The reason I was disappointed by the ending sequence was because like you said, the rest of the book 7 films were remarkably close to the source material, and I enjoyed them a lot more than most other entries. I just felt that the climax was a let down because they let hollywood spectacle overwrite what was supposed to happen, leaving things make little sense. It was the stuff from Neville's speech onwards (inclusive).

Edit: Oh numerical rating. I don't like giving things numerical ratings they seem pretty meaningless. I still enjoyed the film and put it in the 'good' section. Unlike, say, 4 because I think it was pretty rubbish.

Last edited by Spidery_Yoda (2011-07-18 07:12:27)

11 Bravo
Banned
+965|5602|Cleveland, Ohio
harry potter  2/10

fell asleep twice.  meh.  dont get the hype tbh.
RTHKI
mmmf mmmf mmmf
+1,745|7102|Cinncinatti
i assume you didnt read the books
https://i.imgur.com/tMvdWFG.png
11 Bravo
Banned
+965|5602|Cleveland, Ohio
ofc not

and i will never agree with the concept of you have to read the book first.  ive seen a lot of movies and never read the book and thought they were just fine.

Last edited by 11 Bravo (2011-07-18 10:01:51)

Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6835
harry potter is probably definitely absolutely one of those films where you'd sound like a retarded, pretentious fucking dumbwit to say "you must read the books before seeing the film!!!" as if they have sooo much more depth and insight to shed into the world of fucking teenage wizardry.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
jord
Member
+2,382|7043|The North, beyond the wall.
lord of the rings is better
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6835
lord of the rings is actually good literature, though. harry potter is supermarket-stall puke. reading the HP books before seeing the movies will hardly enlighten you in a self-transcendental way, or let you into the immersive and incredibly complex world of j.k's creation. there's just a lot more material and oodles more back-story / digressive side bits that had to be cut for the sake of the film reel. hardly omfg so much more to appreciate!!!!
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
DrunkFace
Germans did 911
+427|7046|Disaster Free Zone
Couldn't read LOTR, too long, too long winded and too boring. Loved the movies though.

Spoiler (highlight to read):
The Hobbit was a good read though, far less tedious

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Which could either mean you're a die-hard fan of the books or don't like it altogether.
That's me alright, was such a huge fan of the first book I decided to not read any of the others because they could never live up to literacy genius of the philosophers stone.
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6835
yeah the literacy [sic] genius of the philosophers [sic] stone [stupid].
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
FatherTed
xD
+3,936|6865|so randum
i don't think i've ever finished the silmarillion cover to cover.
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
Winston_Churchill
Bazinga!
+521|7103|Toronto | Canada

Kmar wrote:

Avoid the surcharge and see the film in proper 2-D with brighter color.
I've made it no secret that I am not a fan of 3d. Popcorn and licorice aren't going to interfere with your video receptors. I understand that some people enjoy 3d though. Personally, I'll take a higher quality image on the big screen over 3d any day. I'm interested in seeing the films shot in 4K. (inb4 you cant tell the difference) It's not just about resolution. Which means a better range and protection of color ..and it's been said that it looks better then it's 2k counterparts when it is down sampled.

Sniping at who?
Almost every high resolution screen here is in 3D anyway.  IMAX is in 3D, UltraAVX is 3D...

I love 3D when its done right, but hate it when its done poorly - like Clash of the Titans.
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6835

FatherTed wrote:

i don't think i've ever finished the silmarillion cover to cover.
that one is pretty slow and uber-fantasy nerd, i have to admit. i would never have read it if not for my old/middle english half-module.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
FatherTed
xD
+3,936|6865|so randum
it seems pretty disjointed too, im not sure if thats more down to the content or tolkeins son trying to make sense of it. finishing it's on the to-do list though.
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
Winston_Churchill
Bazinga!
+521|7103|Toronto | Canada

whats that one about? ive never even bothered picking it up before
FatherTed
xD
+3,936|6865|so randum
general backstory of middle earth and events before the hobbit.
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|6364|...
Minority Report - 9/10

Tom Cruise is a great actor tbh.
inane little opines
Winston_Churchill
Bazinga!
+521|7103|Toronto | Canada

wow that does sound like it would be a bore.  are any of the known characters in it?
-CARNIFEX-[LOC]
Da Blooze
+111|7018
The Silmarillion is not really necessary to understanding or enjoying the series as a whole, but it adds several layers of depth to the world of Middle-Earth. 

You learn more of Sauron's origins, as well as many of the bloodlines that characters from LotR are descended from.  It's not until the final section of the book that the Rings of Power are described, and the events leading to LotR are outlined.

Even to people who really enjoy Tolkien, there are certainly "slow" sections in all of his works.  If someone is traveling, you feel like you are plodding along with them.  And there is a LOT of travelling on dirty little hobbit feet...



If you liked LotR but think that the Silmarillion is a little too slow-paced, The Children of Hurin stories from Unfinished Tales might be something to read.  They would also make for a great movie adaptation in capable hands.
https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/12516/Bitch%20Hunter%20Sig.jpg
Ilocano
buuuurrrrrrppppp.......
+341|7032

Sauron is but a thug in the grand scheme of the Silmarillion.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard