0
The big announcement today is that "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" is coming to BluRay on April 5th. This has been one of the worst kept secrets in Hollywood the past few weeks, but I suppose it's nice to have it official. Disappointingly there will be NO BluRay 3D release on the 5th, but the press release has made mention that a 3D version is coming out later this year. It doesn't specify whether that will be on disk or via a streaming site like Vudu, but it's nice to know we're at least getting something later on. I will share my thoughts on why the release may be a good thing in the long run if Disney is doing what I think they will be doing, but for now you can read the press release here. I personally won't be buying the movie until a 3D release is announced myself, but I know a lot of you won't be able to help yourselves, so be prepared to be double dipped on this one.
"Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Announced for BluRay (Will We Get it in 3D?)
0
There have been questions coming in about whether or not "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" will be coming out on BluRay 3D. The worry about its status is certainly understandable. Retailers and CE are slowly giving up on the format. Many TV manufacturers aren't including 3D features in their newest models (minus the high end models of course). Disney is the company who made this and their commitment to 3D has been more than shaky these days (though kudos to them for releasing "The Good Dinosaur" on BluRay 3D this week). Of course, the biggest point of worry is that a BluRay 3D hasn't been announced and to my knowledge there isn't on up for pre-order (and before I get any e-mails: I don't shop at Amazon.com, so I am completely in the dark on what they have up for pre-order these days).
These are all good points and valid concerns. In this case though, I'm cautiously optimistic that we'll get a BluRay 3D release at some point. First of all, this is one of the movies that made almost half of it's $2 billion dollars thanks to 3D tickets. Second, while Disney themselves have backed off BluRay 3D, their subcompanies (AKA: Marvel, Pixar, Touchstone, etc...) seem to still be releasing movies in 3D, so there's a chance Lucasfilm falls under this category as well. Third (and this is the big one) if there is any movie that will sell on BluRay 3D, it's "Star Wars: The Force Awakens." Look deep inside your hearts, you all know this to be true. So for the time being we'll be keeping this one off our MIA list. We're not discounting the idea that we won't be getting this, but at the moment we'd be surprised if we didn't. So as Yoda taught Luke, patience will be the emotion we must learn. Until next time, may the force be with you!
Where's the News for "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" BluRay 3D Release?
These are all good points and valid concerns. In this case though, I'm cautiously optimistic that we'll get a BluRay 3D release at some point. First of all, this is one of the movies that made almost half of it's $2 billion dollars thanks to 3D tickets. Second, while Disney themselves have backed off BluRay 3D, their subcompanies (AKA: Marvel, Pixar, Touchstone, etc...) seem to still be releasing movies in 3D, so there's a chance Lucasfilm falls under this category as well. Third (and this is the big one) if there is any movie that will sell on BluRay 3D, it's "Star Wars: The Force Awakens." Look deep inside your hearts, you all know this to be true. So for the time being we'll be keeping this one off our MIA list. We're not discounting the idea that we won't be getting this, but at the moment we'd be surprised if we didn't. So as Yoda taught Luke, patience will be the emotion we must learn. Until next time, may the force be with you!
0
Chances are many of you have heard of "Creed." The seventh installment in the 'Rocky' series was released late last year to big box office returns and overwhelmingly positive reviews. Critics and audiences alike loved the film Ryan Coogler brought to the house, and Sylvester Stallone is looking to walk away with his first Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor for his portrayal as the aging Rocky Balboa. By now most of you reading this have already seen the movie. If you haven't it will be on BluRay in a few weeks. However, did you know that two weeks ago MGM re-released the film in theaters? Not only that, but they re-released it in a brand new 3D version. Seriously, check out my ticket stub.
So how IS the 3D version?!
As mentioned before, it is a monstrosity. It is an un-Godly sin upon the art of film making. I've seen terrible 3D presentations before. When people think of how bad the format can be they normally think of "The Last Airbender" and "Clash of the Titans" as their prime examples. Those were certainly bad conversions and some of the worst examples of 3D you could find, but now that I've seen "Creed" I can honestly say I've found a new "winner" in the war for worst 3D upconversion. First of all, this is "3D" in the most basic of ways. While great 3D pops out at the audience, most of this movie pops in. That means the image always seems to be several inches inside the screen rather than seven inches out of it. This doesn't give us a sense of being immersed in the film; it gives us a sense the film is farther away from us than it should be. This was probably done so that the characters could always be popping out of us.
The problem with that is that characters themselves might be popping out of the image, but that is all they are doing. They hover in front of the backgrounds but they never seem to actually be there. They look flat and unconvincing. If you need a good visualizer, the best I can say is to remember those old pop up books you liked to read as a child. The pictures pop out but the images are still flat. That is how the effects work in "Creed." There is a slight upside to the 3D when we get to the training montages and the final fight scene, as those have obviously been given more time and attention to. Those are the only scenes that could have benefited from this conversion in the first place. Somehow they still don't give off the fully three dimensional feeling that is required to make it worth spending the extra $3 on (or even wearing those silly glasses for that matter). In short, "Creed 3D" is a total bust as a movie going experience.
The only question now is why did MGM bother with it in the first place? There was no demand for this even when the movie first opened, so why now? It is strange, especially when you consider it was dumped into theaters without so much of a peep from the studios. Well, one of the things that could have prompted this is that MGM decided that with the Oscar nomination for Sylvester Stallone, it would raise interest in the movie, so having a 3D re-release would insure that any slow pokes who were late to the party would be forced to pay an inflated price for the ticket. It's totally possible. Another reason could be that this was made for China, who embraces 3D almost to a fault. In fact, most of the time China will get a 3D version of a film when America doesn't get it (see "Furious 7" and "The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 2"). The movie hasn't opened in China yet, so there is a chance this was made primarily for the Chinese market.
If that was the case though, again, why did they bother to release it in America? The final reason could be that it was being made for a BluRay 3D release... on the other hand, scratch that, we aren't getting it on disk. The disk comes out in a few weeks, unless there is some last minute printing I'm pretty positive we won't be getting it. So what is the reason? Well... I don't know. I'm sorry guys, I just don't. I tried figuring it out on my own, I can't think of a justifiable reason for it. I have reached out to MGM for comment and I will let you know what they say after I hear back from them. Until then you can see "Creed" in 3D in about 1,000 or so theaters. I can't really recommend it unless you missed the boat the first time around, in which case a bad 3D upconversion is still worth putting up with to see it on the big screen.
Did You Know MGM Re-released "Creed" in 3D?
Chances are many of you have heard of "Creed." The seventh installment in the 'Rocky' series was released late last year to big box office returns and overwhelmingly positive reviews. Critics and audiences alike loved the film Ryan Coogler brought to the house, and Sylvester Stallone is looking to walk away with his first Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor for his portrayal as the aging Rocky Balboa. By now most of you reading this have already seen the movie. If you haven't it will be on BluRay in a few weeks. However, did you know that two weeks ago MGM re-released the film in theaters? Not only that, but they re-released it in a brand new 3D version. Seriously, check out my ticket stub.
That's right, while most cheap theaters have the movie as originally released, regular movies theaters have gotten this unconverted monstrosity to show. I'm sorry, did I say monstrosity? Well, so much for reviewing the 3D version properly. I guess there was no beating around the bush with this one though. If a 3D version had been planned all along we would have gotten it on opening weekend. Instead the movie was hastily converted to 3D within a couple months and released into theaters without so much a penny spent on advertising.So how IS the 3D version?!
As mentioned before, it is a monstrosity. It is an un-Godly sin upon the art of film making. I've seen terrible 3D presentations before. When people think of how bad the format can be they normally think of "The Last Airbender" and "Clash of the Titans" as their prime examples. Those were certainly bad conversions and some of the worst examples of 3D you could find, but now that I've seen "Creed" I can honestly say I've found a new "winner" in the war for worst 3D upconversion. First of all, this is "3D" in the most basic of ways. While great 3D pops out at the audience, most of this movie pops in. That means the image always seems to be several inches inside the screen rather than seven inches out of it. This doesn't give us a sense of being immersed in the film; it gives us a sense the film is farther away from us than it should be. This was probably done so that the characters could always be popping out of us.
The problem with that is that characters themselves might be popping out of the image, but that is all they are doing. They hover in front of the backgrounds but they never seem to actually be there. They look flat and unconvincing. If you need a good visualizer, the best I can say is to remember those old pop up books you liked to read as a child. The pictures pop out but the images are still flat. That is how the effects work in "Creed." There is a slight upside to the 3D when we get to the training montages and the final fight scene, as those have obviously been given more time and attention to. Those are the only scenes that could have benefited from this conversion in the first place. Somehow they still don't give off the fully three dimensional feeling that is required to make it worth spending the extra $3 on (or even wearing those silly glasses for that matter). In short, "Creed 3D" is a total bust as a movie going experience.
The only question now is why did MGM bother with it in the first place? There was no demand for this even when the movie first opened, so why now? It is strange, especially when you consider it was dumped into theaters without so much of a peep from the studios. Well, one of the things that could have prompted this is that MGM decided that with the Oscar nomination for Sylvester Stallone, it would raise interest in the movie, so having a 3D re-release would insure that any slow pokes who were late to the party would be forced to pay an inflated price for the ticket. It's totally possible. Another reason could be that this was made for China, who embraces 3D almost to a fault. In fact, most of the time China will get a 3D version of a film when America doesn't get it (see "Furious 7" and "The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 2"). The movie hasn't opened in China yet, so there is a chance this was made primarily for the Chinese market.
If that was the case though, again, why did they bother to release it in America? The final reason could be that it was being made for a BluRay 3D release... on the other hand, scratch that, we aren't getting it on disk. The disk comes out in a few weeks, unless there is some last minute printing I'm pretty positive we won't be getting it. So what is the reason? Well... I don't know. I'm sorry guys, I just don't. I tried figuring it out on my own, I can't think of a justifiable reason for it. I have reached out to MGM for comment and I will let you know what they say after I hear back from them. Until then you can see "Creed" in 3D in about 1,000 or so theaters. I can't really recommend it unless you missed the boat the first time around, in which case a bad 3D upconversion is still worth putting up with to see it on the big screen.
0
This post is at least a few months late in coming, but considering what this blog is supposed to be about (and what I want it to be in the future) I can't have it without discussing the release of this particular film and its American release. The movie in question is an animated Mexican family adventure called "Un gallo con muchos Huevos." If you want more information about the film and it's interesting release in America, I've written a review of it on my main website. To give you the abridged version though, someone decided to release this computer animated, Spanish film in American cinemas almost randomly one weekend. The film is rated PG-13 (for which animation is the one type of movie that DOESN'T benefit from this rating), is released without much publicity, and... yeah, this has failure written all over it. Amazingly the movie cracks the box office top ten that weekend, reviews are largely positive, and an English dub is planned for eventual expansion.
For some reason the English dub didn't materialize in theaters, but the film was still a surprise hit in America. You'd think that with this potential the home media release would be treated at least a little better than the shotgun release approach used for the theatrical release. You'd be wrong in that thinking. Yes, we did get the movie in disk format, but we got probably the most butchered, pathetic attempt to release the movie I've seen in a long time. Granted, this wasn't a HUGE hit by any means, but you'd think a surprise hit would be treated a little better! First of all, I am going to mention that, yes, this movie WAS made with 3D in mind when it was released in Mexico! I suspected this was the case when I saw the movie in theaters and wasn't surprised to find this was the case. I know why the 3D version was passed up in theaters, but I held out a little hope that maybe with the unexpected success, the format would be given a second look when it came time to make the BluRay.
Well, to state the obvious we did not get a 3D release of the movie (and it is not in 3D on Vudu this time either). To a certain extent I knew this could be a possibility, but what I didn't expect was for the BluRay to be passed up altogether. Almost half a year after I saw the film in theaters, I noticed that it was going to be released on DVD soon as "Huevos: Little Rooster's Egg-Cellent Adventure"...
...but when I saw this listing in the Best Buy ad, I found it odd that there was no BluRay release. For that matter, when I visited the listing page on Amazon I noticed that the rating of the film was PG. As you can also see from the cover above, the dub did finally materialize (with such big stars as Jon Hedar and Jason Mews). But there was no BluRay release. None. Any digital copy you could buy online only came in standard definition. There was no HD release at all. When I did get my hands on a copy of the DVD my fears were confirmed that the dub was edited to receive the PG rating. Granted, this IS a kids movie and the original PG-13 seemed a bit even for what was in it, but I dislike censorship regardless. The only good thing to come from this release is that the DVD DOES contain the unedited, PG-13 subtitled version on the disk (and is advertised on the back of the box, so parents are aware of it).
Unlike most DVD's the PG-13 version is buried on the disk, and it takes a little bit of detective work to find it. This is likely because the distributors are courting families and they don't want the kids to easily find the "naughty" version of the movie, but the extent they hid it just seems a little silly. Oh, and that Ultraviolet code... yep, you only get the edited PG dub. This whole release is just... I don't know what to say. Yes, I did write in my original review that considering what this movie was and where it came from, I was happy to have gotten it at all. At the same time I think all movies deserve to be seen in their original intended format and in the best way possible. So this isn't a big enough movie to get 3D? Fine, I'll reluctantly accept that (though it still would have been on this sites MIA list). But to not even release the thing on BluRay and then go out of your way to hide the original version of the film?
That is something I can not get behind. Not even a little. Of course "Huevos: Little Rooster's Egg-Cellent Adventure" isn't a great movie by any means. In fact, I haven't really thought much about it since I've seen it. I bought the DVD so that I could confirm some suspicions I had about the product, but I haven't re-watched. I sampled the dub - which was ok - and put the disk on the shelf. I'm honestly surprised that of all the movies I saw last year, this is one of only a dozen movies I've come back to to write about once again. Just goes to show you never know what life will give you. At the end of the day if you have a chance to see the subtitled version of ""Huevos: Little Rooster's Egg-Cellent Adventure" I think you will be reasonably entertained. But I can not recommend this pathetic DVD in any way. In this case, for the few fans there are of the movie, they got screwed at least three times over with this release.
"Huevos: Little Rooster's Egg-Cellent Adventure" Gets Doubly Screwed in America
For some reason the English dub didn't materialize in theaters, but the film was still a surprise hit in America. You'd think that with this potential the home media release would be treated at least a little better than the shotgun release approach used for the theatrical release. You'd be wrong in that thinking. Yes, we did get the movie in disk format, but we got probably the most butchered, pathetic attempt to release the movie I've seen in a long time. Granted, this wasn't a HUGE hit by any means, but you'd think a surprise hit would be treated a little better! First of all, I am going to mention that, yes, this movie WAS made with 3D in mind when it was released in Mexico! I suspected this was the case when I saw the movie in theaters and wasn't surprised to find this was the case. I know why the 3D version was passed up in theaters, but I held out a little hope that maybe with the unexpected success, the format would be given a second look when it came time to make the BluRay.
Well, to state the obvious we did not get a 3D release of the movie (and it is not in 3D on Vudu this time either). To a certain extent I knew this could be a possibility, but what I didn't expect was for the BluRay to be passed up altogether. Almost half a year after I saw the film in theaters, I noticed that it was going to be released on DVD soon as "Huevos: Little Rooster's Egg-Cellent Adventure"...
Unlike most DVD's the PG-13 version is buried on the disk, and it takes a little bit of detective work to find it. This is likely because the distributors are courting families and they don't want the kids to easily find the "naughty" version of the movie, but the extent they hid it just seems a little silly. Oh, and that Ultraviolet code... yep, you only get the edited PG dub. This whole release is just... I don't know what to say. Yes, I did write in my original review that considering what this movie was and where it came from, I was happy to have gotten it at all. At the same time I think all movies deserve to be seen in their original intended format and in the best way possible. So this isn't a big enough movie to get 3D? Fine, I'll reluctantly accept that (though it still would have been on this sites MIA list). But to not even release the thing on BluRay and then go out of your way to hide the original version of the film?
That is something I can not get behind. Not even a little. Of course "Huevos: Little Rooster's Egg-Cellent Adventure" isn't a great movie by any means. In fact, I haven't really thought much about it since I've seen it. I bought the DVD so that I could confirm some suspicions I had about the product, but I haven't re-watched. I sampled the dub - which was ok - and put the disk on the shelf. I'm honestly surprised that of all the movies I saw last year, this is one of only a dozen movies I've come back to to write about once again. Just goes to show you never know what life will give you. At the end of the day if you have a chance to see the subtitled version of ""Huevos: Little Rooster's Egg-Cellent Adventure" I think you will be reasonably entertained. But I can not recommend this pathetic DVD in any way. In this case, for the few fans there are of the movie, they got screwed at least three times over with this release.
0
This post will be short and brief. I have a couple longer posts in the works, but this is a little quick to let you know that we will be reporting on the weekly BluRay 3D releases once again. The big (and really only) new release this week is "Goosebumps," starring Jack Black. I gave the movie a mild recommendation on my main site, and this is a pretty nice 3D presentation. Its by not means a make-or-break use of the format, but there are a couple of scares that were obviously made with the third dimension in mind. After "Pixels" and "Hotel Transylvania 2" were released, it's nice to see Sony finally releasing two BluRay 3D's that are worth adding to your 3D collection (the other was Robert Zemeckis's "The Walk"). That's it. That's all we have for tonight. Tune in Monday for a much longer post... and then we'll return to a schedule where we discuss the announcements of upcoming releases (and I do have some thoughts on the new 4K BluRay players as well). See you soon!
Back to Weekly Updates: This Week "Goosebumps" Scares in 3D
This post will be short and brief. I have a couple longer posts in the works, but this is a little quick to let you know that we will be reporting on the weekly BluRay 3D releases once again. The big (and really only) new release this week is "Goosebumps," starring Jack Black. I gave the movie a mild recommendation on my main site, and this is a pretty nice 3D presentation. Its by not means a make-or-break use of the format, but there are a couple of scares that were obviously made with the third dimension in mind. After "Pixels" and "Hotel Transylvania 2" were released, it's nice to see Sony finally releasing two BluRay 3D's that are worth adding to your 3D collection (the other was Robert Zemeckis's "The Walk"). That's it. That's all we have for tonight. Tune in Monday for a much longer post... and then we'll return to a schedule where we discuss the announcements of upcoming releases (and I do have some thoughts on the new 4K BluRay players as well). See you soon!
0
How many of you out there are looking forward to seeing "The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 2" this November?! Why? Didn't you hear, the last movie sucked (alright, that's not fair; it might be good). Now then, who here has been looking forward to seeing it in RealD 3D or IMAX 3D? Well, if you were, you are just plain out of luck, because the 3D release has been canceled. Why? Um... honestly, I don't know. This is a very strange case. The movie was announced early on as being in 3D, the 3D was completed, according to the director it looked pretty good, and the rest of the world (including the very lucrative Chinese market) will be getting it. Heck, many of the posters you see in movie theaters still proudly proclaim that it will be released in 3D. So, seriously, what the heck happened?
According to director Francis Laurence in an interview with Forbes Magazine; “I love the 3D format and I know that Mockingjay part 2 will play perfectly in 3D and 2D internationally – but I’m pleased that we’re maintaining the 2D only (and IMAX) formats domestically. It is the best of all worlds!” *sigh* Again, what the heck happened?! The 3D is finished. The director likes it. Yet it won't be coming to America? Some might expect that this is the result of 3D not being the big deal in America it once was. Yes, chances are we are never going to see the format account for more than 80% of the box office like it did with "Avatar" in 2010. I know that. The format experienced a rebirth of sorts with that movie, and we're unlikely to repeat that in the anytime in the near future. There was even a period where 3D was making up less than 50% of the box office results.
Times have changed though, with many major films getting a significant boost in box office because of the 3D surcharge. For "Gravity," "Life of Pi," and "Frozen," over 70% of the box office was accounted for through 3D screenings. This year "Avengers: Age of Ultron," "Jurassic World," and "Inside Out" have all opened with 3D screenings accounting for at least half of the tickets sold (and maybe more by the time they run their course). If those movies did not have 3D as part of the release, their opening numbers would have been much, much lower. And yet... we see more studios cutting back on 3D. Even when the movie has been edited and finished. What gives? This isn't like "Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows - Part I," where the 3D was so terrible Warner Bros. felt like they had no choice but to cancel the release because it would damage the perception of 3D films greatly.
I own those movies on BluRay 3D and... yeah, they weren't lying; the 3D in those movies are terrible. However, those movies came out a few years ago when up-conversion was still new. The process has gotten much better now, to the point where "The Amazing Spider-Man 2's" up-conversion looks compatible to "The Amazing Spider-Man's" natural 3D look. And, again, according to the director, the 3D for 'Mockingjay - Part 2' looked fine. I also take offense to his 'best of all worlds' comment, as the best of all worlds would be to offer the film in both formats, and let the consumers choose which version they want to see. This isn't like other movies that have had international 3D releases that were forced on the movie due to popular demand: This was a movie shot with the 3D in mind from the get go.
I'm still going to see "The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 2." Chances are you will as well. I mean, if everyone went to see the pointless 'Part 1' despite poor reception, they are going to see this one as well, 3D or not. Its just frustrating that the studio is nixing a (reportedly) perfectly acceptable 3D release of their biggest franchise, all while being vague about why the decision was made in the first place. Lionsgate, you have some explaining to do.
Lionsgate to Americans: No 3D Version of 'Mockingjay' For You
Labels:
harry potter,
Hunger games,
life of pi,
mia
How many of you out there are looking forward to seeing "The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 2" this November?! Why? Didn't you hear, the last movie sucked (alright, that's not fair; it might be good). Now then, who here has been looking forward to seeing it in RealD 3D or IMAX 3D? Well, if you were, you are just plain out of luck, because the 3D release has been canceled. Why? Um... honestly, I don't know. This is a very strange case. The movie was announced early on as being in 3D, the 3D was completed, according to the director it looked pretty good, and the rest of the world (including the very lucrative Chinese market) will be getting it. Heck, many of the posters you see in movie theaters still proudly proclaim that it will be released in 3D. So, seriously, what the heck happened?
According to director Francis Laurence in an interview with Forbes Magazine; “I love the 3D format and I know that Mockingjay part 2 will play perfectly in 3D and 2D internationally – but I’m pleased that we’re maintaining the 2D only (and IMAX) formats domestically. It is the best of all worlds!” *sigh* Again, what the heck happened?! The 3D is finished. The director likes it. Yet it won't be coming to America? Some might expect that this is the result of 3D not being the big deal in America it once was. Yes, chances are we are never going to see the format account for more than 80% of the box office like it did with "Avatar" in 2010. I know that. The format experienced a rebirth of sorts with that movie, and we're unlikely to repeat that in the anytime in the near future. There was even a period where 3D was making up less than 50% of the box office results.
Times have changed though, with many major films getting a significant boost in box office because of the 3D surcharge. For "Gravity," "Life of Pi," and "Frozen," over 70% of the box office was accounted for through 3D screenings. This year "Avengers: Age of Ultron," "Jurassic World," and "Inside Out" have all opened with 3D screenings accounting for at least half of the tickets sold (and maybe more by the time they run their course). If those movies did not have 3D as part of the release, their opening numbers would have been much, much lower. And yet... we see more studios cutting back on 3D. Even when the movie has been edited and finished. What gives? This isn't like "Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows - Part I," where the 3D was so terrible Warner Bros. felt like they had no choice but to cancel the release because it would damage the perception of 3D films greatly.
I own those movies on BluRay 3D and... yeah, they weren't lying; the 3D in those movies are terrible. However, those movies came out a few years ago when up-conversion was still new. The process has gotten much better now, to the point where "The Amazing Spider-Man 2's" up-conversion looks compatible to "The Amazing Spider-Man's" natural 3D look. And, again, according to the director, the 3D for 'Mockingjay - Part 2' looked fine. I also take offense to his 'best of all worlds' comment, as the best of all worlds would be to offer the film in both formats, and let the consumers choose which version they want to see. This isn't like other movies that have had international 3D releases that were forced on the movie due to popular demand: This was a movie shot with the 3D in mind from the get go.
I'm still going to see "The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 2." Chances are you will as well. I mean, if everyone went to see the pointless 'Part 1' despite poor reception, they are going to see this one as well, 3D or not. Its just frustrating that the studio is nixing a (reportedly) perfectly acceptable 3D release of their biggest franchise, all while being vague about why the decision was made in the first place. Lionsgate, you have some explaining to do.
0
Hey everyone, I'm back! I know I've been ignoring this blog the past several months, but I'm going to be getting serious about updating more often. For the most part I haven't been updating because we have been getting most of our favorite films on BluRay 3D these days, with the very few non-releases to have not been received being bad movies (and Disney films, of course). This is a bad way to run the site though. If a movie was released in 3D, it deserves to be seen in 3D, whether the movie (or the 3D itself) was good or not. This week proves that more than any other week. On one hand, I want to applaud Nickelodeon for releasing "The SpongeBob Movie: Sponge Out of Water" in it's native 3D presentation tomorrow. The film (which I found to be largely enjoyable) was sold as a 3D event film, with cutting edge CGI you'd see in movies like "Yogi Bear" and "Alvin & the Chipmunks." What is ironic about this...
...is that the movie itself barely has any reason to be in 3D. The images that virtually all the commercials and print ads showed off take up a mere twenty minutes of the movie, and don't come into play until VERY late into the film (more than an hour to be exact)! Almost the entire film is traditionally hand drawn, giving the technique it's first real hit in years. Truthfully, because of this format, the 3D actually looks pretty awful for most of the film, and this is one time when the 2D version might be the preferable one to watch. Kudos to Paramount for giving fans of the film the choice though, since it costs them very little and goes a long way to providing goodwill to fans of the format. I will still be buying it in BluRay 3D tomorrow. Partially because I might want to watch the one sequence where the 3D matters again, and partly because the format could use all the support it can get, and the difference is going to be a measly $3.
Less lucky is the release of "The Seventh Son" we got last week.
Despite being announced for BluRay 3D along with the 2D versions of the film, despite having the disk up for pre-order for months, and despite many of the disks already being pressed, the movie hit store shelves without a BluRay 3D release, with a new date to be determined. There is no word on what happened in this case, but the fact that many sites (including Amazon) were taking pre-orders until two weeks ago suggests that the decision to forgo/delay the release of the 3D version came late in the game. "The Seventh Son" has not been the luckiest of movies, having been delayed almost a full two years after being filmed and being widely panned by critics. The 3D was tacked on at the last minute of filming to take advantage of the booming 3D craze.
Course, that was two years ago, and it's hard to deny that the format has taken a hit in popularity since then. Most TV's still have 3D capabilities, but almost none of the manufacturers use it as a major selling point anymore. Still, the format has it's fans, there is more content for it than ever before, and since there have already been disks pressed, it's all the more strange that it didn't ship to stores. That said, Vudu has once again come to the rescue by providing a 3D digital download on their service (though only to rent at the moment... oddly enough). I don't like buying things digitally, but it's nice that there is an option of sorts out there. Stay tuned for more developments on the situation as they develop.
Spongebob Pops and More Bad News for "The Seventh Son"
Labels:
seventh son,
SpongeBob squarepants
Hey everyone, I'm back! I know I've been ignoring this blog the past several months, but I'm going to be getting serious about updating more often. For the most part I haven't been updating because we have been getting most of our favorite films on BluRay 3D these days, with the very few non-releases to have not been received being bad movies (and Disney films, of course). This is a bad way to run the site though. If a movie was released in 3D, it deserves to be seen in 3D, whether the movie (or the 3D itself) was good or not. This week proves that more than any other week. On one hand, I want to applaud Nickelodeon for releasing "The SpongeBob Movie: Sponge Out of Water" in it's native 3D presentation tomorrow. The film (which I found to be largely enjoyable) was sold as a 3D event film, with cutting edge CGI you'd see in movies like "Yogi Bear" and "Alvin & the Chipmunks." What is ironic about this...
...is that the movie itself barely has any reason to be in 3D. The images that virtually all the commercials and print ads showed off take up a mere twenty minutes of the movie, and don't come into play until VERY late into the film (more than an hour to be exact)! Almost the entire film is traditionally hand drawn, giving the technique it's first real hit in years. Truthfully, because of this format, the 3D actually looks pretty awful for most of the film, and this is one time when the 2D version might be the preferable one to watch. Kudos to Paramount for giving fans of the film the choice though, since it costs them very little and goes a long way to providing goodwill to fans of the format. I will still be buying it in BluRay 3D tomorrow. Partially because I might want to watch the one sequence where the 3D matters again, and partly because the format could use all the support it can get, and the difference is going to be a measly $3.
Less lucky is the release of "The Seventh Son" we got last week.
Despite being announced for BluRay 3D along with the 2D versions of the film, despite having the disk up for pre-order for months, and despite many of the disks already being pressed, the movie hit store shelves without a BluRay 3D release, with a new date to be determined. There is no word on what happened in this case, but the fact that many sites (including Amazon) were taking pre-orders until two weeks ago suggests that the decision to forgo/delay the release of the 3D version came late in the game. "The Seventh Son" has not been the luckiest of movies, having been delayed almost a full two years after being filmed and being widely panned by critics. The 3D was tacked on at the last minute of filming to take advantage of the booming 3D craze.
Course, that was two years ago, and it's hard to deny that the format has taken a hit in popularity since then. Most TV's still have 3D capabilities, but almost none of the manufacturers use it as a major selling point anymore. Still, the format has it's fans, there is more content for it than ever before, and since there have already been disks pressed, it's all the more strange that it didn't ship to stores. That said, Vudu has once again come to the rescue by providing a 3D digital download on their service (though only to rent at the moment... oddly enough). I don't like buying things digitally, but it's nice that there is an option of sorts out there. Stay tuned for more developments on the situation as they develop.
0
There are several new releases popping into retailers this week, but chances are the only one most of you are interested in is "The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies." The ending of Peter Jackson's (some would say needlessly extended) trilogy based on Tolkien's beloved children's book (which the movies are certainly not made for), this was by far the best installment in the trilogy and contained one of the best uses of 3D any movie has seen to date. The movie is being made available in 3D by Warner Bros. And MGM in a joint effort. It's sort of funny to think that when 'The Hobbit' was first announced as a 3D trilogy, it was going to be the movie that saved 3D. While it did get some decent business in 3D, it did not save the format at the movies or at home.
In fact, in the theaters, two films brought a lot more business to the 3D format than any of 'The Hobbit' films did: "Gravity" and "Frozen." Both movies, I'm sorry to say, have been treated with absolute disrespect when it came to preserving their original looks on BluRay. We've already discussed "Frozen" at great length here and how Disney still refuses to release their high in demand BluRay 3D in America (though they can take time to release a sing-along DVD instead). "Gravity" has been treated a little better by mere virtue that we got a BluRay 3D release at all. That is about to change greatly with the "Gravity: Diamond Lux Edition" BluRay Warner Bros. is releasing. What is 'Diamond Lux?' It's a fancy term for "special edition."
This is a new lineup for Warner Bros. to present some of their classic movies in a package that is fancy, has great special features, and (usually) a newly remastered 4K print of the film. The lineup is off, as it includes movies like "The Green Mile," "Batman," and "Gremlins," movies that are all very popular, but might be more up for debate on which of these can truly be considered groundbreaking films (if any at all). I think including "Gravity" in this lineup shows some very smart forward thinking on Warner Bros. part. However, there is a strange omission when it comes to the release: There is no 3D included. This is baffling and unacceptable for a number of reasons. First of all, "Gravity" is a 3D movie. Period. There is no debating this.
It was filmed in 3D, it was built around 3D, and many people who saw the movie in 2D didn't even like it compared to the people who saw it in 3D, which should give you all the information you need to know. To take the 3D away is the same as colorizing "Casablanca." Yes, you can technically still watch these movies in these forms, but you are not watching the movies the film makers intended for you to see. Now, unlike Disney, Warner Bros. is not denying you the chance to watch "Gravity" in the way it was intended to be seen, but to make a BluRay edition that is touted as being the definitive way to own the movie (in so many words) while not including a very important aspect of the film is not only wrong, it's outright lying.
How would you feel if you bought Paramount's ultimate edition of "The Godfather" trilogy on BluRay, only to find the iconic opening scene from the first movie wasn't included? The Diamond Lux edition of "Gravity" looks very nice by all accounts. It has a new 4K transfer. It has new audio commentaries and other special features. The packaging is so very beautiful. But it does not contain the option to view the film in 3D, which is how the film was conceived and shot. There is no way any serious movie fan can make the claim that this is the ultimate edition of the movie when the look and feel of the movie itself has been compromised. Neither can the studio. Therefor, the Diamond Lux lineup is seriously compromised because Warn Bros. has ignored the most important aspect of the product: The presentation of the movie itself. And that, ultimately, is a huge problem.
Warner Bros. 'Diamond Lux' Line is Ignoring the Most Important Aspect of a BluRay: The Movie
Labels:
diamond lux,
frozen,
gravity,
hobbit
Buyer beware: Real movie NOT included!
There are several new releases popping into retailers this week, but chances are the only one most of you are interested in is "The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies." The ending of Peter Jackson's (some would say needlessly extended) trilogy based on Tolkien's beloved children's book (which the movies are certainly not made for), this was by far the best installment in the trilogy and contained one of the best uses of 3D any movie has seen to date. The movie is being made available in 3D by Warner Bros. And MGM in a joint effort. It's sort of funny to think that when 'The Hobbit' was first announced as a 3D trilogy, it was going to be the movie that saved 3D. While it did get some decent business in 3D, it did not save the format at the movies or at home.In fact, in the theaters, two films brought a lot more business to the 3D format than any of 'The Hobbit' films did: "Gravity" and "Frozen." Both movies, I'm sorry to say, have been treated with absolute disrespect when it came to preserving their original looks on BluRay. We've already discussed "Frozen" at great length here and how Disney still refuses to release their high in demand BluRay 3D in America (though they can take time to release a sing-along DVD instead). "Gravity" has been treated a little better by mere virtue that we got a BluRay 3D release at all. That is about to change greatly with the "Gravity: Diamond Lux Edition" BluRay Warner Bros. is releasing. What is 'Diamond Lux?' It's a fancy term for "special edition."
This is a new lineup for Warner Bros. to present some of their classic movies in a package that is fancy, has great special features, and (usually) a newly remastered 4K print of the film. The lineup is off, as it includes movies like "The Green Mile," "Batman," and "Gremlins," movies that are all very popular, but might be more up for debate on which of these can truly be considered groundbreaking films (if any at all). I think including "Gravity" in this lineup shows some very smart forward thinking on Warner Bros. part. However, there is a strange omission when it comes to the release: There is no 3D included. This is baffling and unacceptable for a number of reasons. First of all, "Gravity" is a 3D movie. Period. There is no debating this.
It was filmed in 3D, it was built around 3D, and many people who saw the movie in 2D didn't even like it compared to the people who saw it in 3D, which should give you all the information you need to know. To take the 3D away is the same as colorizing "Casablanca." Yes, you can technically still watch these movies in these forms, but you are not watching the movies the film makers intended for you to see. Now, unlike Disney, Warner Bros. is not denying you the chance to watch "Gravity" in the way it was intended to be seen, but to make a BluRay edition that is touted as being the definitive way to own the movie (in so many words) while not including a very important aspect of the film is not only wrong, it's outright lying.
How would you feel if you bought Paramount's ultimate edition of "The Godfather" trilogy on BluRay, only to find the iconic opening scene from the first movie wasn't included? The Diamond Lux edition of "Gravity" looks very nice by all accounts. It has a new 4K transfer. It has new audio commentaries and other special features. The packaging is so very beautiful. But it does not contain the option to view the film in 3D, which is how the film was conceived and shot. There is no way any serious movie fan can make the claim that this is the ultimate edition of the movie when the look and feel of the movie itself has been compromised. Neither can the studio. Therefor, the Diamond Lux lineup is seriously compromised because Warn Bros. has ignored the most important aspect of the product: The presentation of the movie itself. And that, ultimately, is a huge problem.
0
I know December isn't until tomorrow, but tonight I decided to start my Christmas movie watching season with "The Polar Express.". Being one of the best 3D films ever made, I of course chose that format to watch it in (and since my therapist has challenged me to look on the positive things in my life, I consider it a blessing to be able to still be able to view this film in 3D). Unlike most BluRay 3D releases, this set only comes with one disk. If your BluRay player doesn't detect a 3D TV it informs you of your need for one to view the film in 3D, then switches to a 2D menu so you can watch it without the third dimension. If the disk senses the 3D TV it will go straight to 3D with the option of switching to 2D if (for some crazy reason) you decide this is how you want to watch the movie.
Oh, and all of the special features are included as well (most of which are in standard definition, but what can you do). All of this on one disk. I find this fascinating because this release shows just how pointless all these multiple releases are. Every 3D movie you buy on BluRay comes on it's own disk. Usually the movie is all you'll get. Once in awhile you'll get a trailer for a 3D movie or a commercial recommending you buy a 3D TV (yeah, I know), for the most part, though, all your getting is the movie. I'm not sure why this is. Some people who work in the industry tells me it's because giving the 3D version it's own disk gives the manufacturers the space they need to make it look the best the movie can look. I have no problems with this response. However, when you watch "The Polar Express" in 3D it looks great. I mean, it looks demo worthy.
The thing is, when you compare this to Disney's "A Christmas Carol" (also a 3D motion capture film directed by Robert Zemeckis, ironically enough), both of the disks feature demo worthy presentations. Maybe there's a difference in the sound quality, but it all sounds great as well. Yet "A Christmas Carol" has it's own disk for the 3D, where "The Polar Express" shares it's 3D with everything else. I bring this up because it occurred to me: Why can't more studios do this? Look, if giving the 3D version it's own disk results in a better presentation then I say go for it. I'm paying lots of money for these disks, so I want them to look and sound as good as they can. Yet the reality is that studios are starting to cut back on 3D releases because they don't want to pick up the extra costs associated with extra disks for a version that might sell a fraction of the regular version.
If there is a movie where these extra costs don't seem to make financial sense on the outside, then they need to put the 3D version on the same disk as the 2D version. Really, there is no excuse not to. We know the studios can do this. We know it can look great even without the extra space on the disk. Heck, when Sony released their first BluRay 3D's they all included the 2D version to assure people who didn't have 3D TV's at the time (which was pretty much nobody) that these disks would be future proof. They would work on their current TV's, you didn't have to upgrade to watch them, but the 3D version was there for when you did. Somewhere along the line that line of thinking stopped, and I feel it's time to bring it back. The studios need to insure that if I movie was made with 3D in mind, that there is a way to put the 3D version on disk.
Even if it has to share space with the 2D version and give up some of the quality (of which there is some debate it will), I think most film lovers would prefer to have it at a compromised level than to not have it at all. Back when there was the big "widescreen debate" going on, studios would have to cater to two types of people: Film lovers who wanted to watch their movies in the format the directors originally filmed them in, and the everyday consumer who didn't like "black bars" and insisted the image be cropped so they wouldn't have to look at them. Most studios made two versions available to appease both groups (I also want to mention practically all those full screen versions are practically un-sellable now). When economics dictated that it would be financially cumbersome to do that, the studio would have to choose which version.
Sometimes they picked the consumer friendly full screen version. In fact, they did this a lot. Just ask Disney, who would almost always choose to compromise how the film was intended to look in favor of the more commercially friendly (but incorrectly looking) version... whoa, I just got a huge sense of déjà vu there. Some studios put both the widescreen and full screen versions on the same disk. Yes, this compromised the picture quality a little, but given the choice between that and no widescreen at all, it was an easy compromise for most film lovers out there. I think the compromise of the 3D and 2D sharing the same disk is one that fans of, say, "Frozen," would be more than willing to make. Also, from a marketing perspective, this would make a lot of financial sense as well as help push the market towards selling more 3D TV's.
There would be less disks to make, only one version of the product on the shelves (thus eliminating consumer confusion about different versions), and if more people had more movies in 3D (whether they intended to buy them or not) they would likely consider making sure their next TV they got would have 3D capabilities to insure they could watch them. In short, it's a win-win for everyone. Of course, the whole idea of the combo packs was also to do this very thing, but it doesn't work when you sell the products outside of the combo packs. That's another topic for another day... and possibly another blog. Anyway, I think this is something that is worth bringing up to the studios as a compromise if they insist on holding back on 3D releases because that extra $0.25 BluRay disk is just going to cost too much money.
Why Can't More BluRay's be Like "The Polar Express?"
Labels:
disney,
polar express
I know December isn't until tomorrow, but tonight I decided to start my Christmas movie watching season with "The Polar Express.". Being one of the best 3D films ever made, I of course chose that format to watch it in (and since my therapist has challenged me to look on the positive things in my life, I consider it a blessing to be able to still be able to view this film in 3D). Unlike most BluRay 3D releases, this set only comes with one disk. If your BluRay player doesn't detect a 3D TV it informs you of your need for one to view the film in 3D, then switches to a 2D menu so you can watch it without the third dimension. If the disk senses the 3D TV it will go straight to 3D with the option of switching to 2D if (for some crazy reason) you decide this is how you want to watch the movie.
Oh, and all of the special features are included as well (most of which are in standard definition, but what can you do). All of this on one disk. I find this fascinating because this release shows just how pointless all these multiple releases are. Every 3D movie you buy on BluRay comes on it's own disk. Usually the movie is all you'll get. Once in awhile you'll get a trailer for a 3D movie or a commercial recommending you buy a 3D TV (yeah, I know), for the most part, though, all your getting is the movie. I'm not sure why this is. Some people who work in the industry tells me it's because giving the 3D version it's own disk gives the manufacturers the space they need to make it look the best the movie can look. I have no problems with this response. However, when you watch "The Polar Express" in 3D it looks great. I mean, it looks demo worthy.
The thing is, when you compare this to Disney's "A Christmas Carol" (also a 3D motion capture film directed by Robert Zemeckis, ironically enough), both of the disks feature demo worthy presentations. Maybe there's a difference in the sound quality, but it all sounds great as well. Yet "A Christmas Carol" has it's own disk for the 3D, where "The Polar Express" shares it's 3D with everything else. I bring this up because it occurred to me: Why can't more studios do this? Look, if giving the 3D version it's own disk results in a better presentation then I say go for it. I'm paying lots of money for these disks, so I want them to look and sound as good as they can. Yet the reality is that studios are starting to cut back on 3D releases because they don't want to pick up the extra costs associated with extra disks for a version that might sell a fraction of the regular version.
If there is a movie where these extra costs don't seem to make financial sense on the outside, then they need to put the 3D version on the same disk as the 2D version. Really, there is no excuse not to. We know the studios can do this. We know it can look great even without the extra space on the disk. Heck, when Sony released their first BluRay 3D's they all included the 2D version to assure people who didn't have 3D TV's at the time (which was pretty much nobody) that these disks would be future proof. They would work on their current TV's, you didn't have to upgrade to watch them, but the 3D version was there for when you did. Somewhere along the line that line of thinking stopped, and I feel it's time to bring it back. The studios need to insure that if I movie was made with 3D in mind, that there is a way to put the 3D version on disk.
Even if it has to share space with the 2D version and give up some of the quality (of which there is some debate it will), I think most film lovers would prefer to have it at a compromised level than to not have it at all. Back when there was the big "widescreen debate" going on, studios would have to cater to two types of people: Film lovers who wanted to watch their movies in the format the directors originally filmed them in, and the everyday consumer who didn't like "black bars" and insisted the image be cropped so they wouldn't have to look at them. Most studios made two versions available to appease both groups (I also want to mention practically all those full screen versions are practically un-sellable now). When economics dictated that it would be financially cumbersome to do that, the studio would have to choose which version.
Sometimes they picked the consumer friendly full screen version. In fact, they did this a lot. Just ask Disney, who would almost always choose to compromise how the film was intended to look in favor of the more commercially friendly (but incorrectly looking) version... whoa, I just got a huge sense of déjà vu there. Some studios put both the widescreen and full screen versions on the same disk. Yes, this compromised the picture quality a little, but given the choice between that and no widescreen at all, it was an easy compromise for most film lovers out there. I think the compromise of the 3D and 2D sharing the same disk is one that fans of, say, "Frozen," would be more than willing to make. Also, from a marketing perspective, this would make a lot of financial sense as well as help push the market towards selling more 3D TV's.
There would be less disks to make, only one version of the product on the shelves (thus eliminating consumer confusion about different versions), and if more people had more movies in 3D (whether they intended to buy them or not) they would likely consider making sure their next TV they got would have 3D capabilities to insure they could watch them. In short, it's a win-win for everyone. Of course, the whole idea of the combo packs was also to do this very thing, but it doesn't work when you sell the products outside of the combo packs. That's another topic for another day... and possibly another blog. Anyway, I think this is something that is worth bringing up to the studios as a compromise if they insist on holding back on 3D releases because that extra $0.25 BluRay disk is just going to cost too much money.
0
Best Buy Has Exclusive "Planes: Fire & Rescue" 3D...Cover
Labels:
disney,
maleficent,
mia,
planes
Most people are already aware that Disney has skimped on releasing a BluRay 3D of "Maleficent" this week, what most of you might not be aware of is that Disney also skipped on releasing a BluRay 3D of "Planes: Fire & Rescue." Unlike "Maleficent" though, "Planes: Fire & Rescue" does not have an international release for important. Vudu does have a 3D stream available as is the custom, however what's amazing about this is that Vudu is also giving you the 2D stream and special features this time! You know, like how they should have been doing these releases all along instead of price gouging on a crummy 3D stream without special features. Never mind, that's another post for another day. If you want the cherry on top of this very strange affair check out this photo I took while I was at Best Buy today:
At first glance it looks like they might have negotiated to have exclusive rights to the 3D version, but a closer look reveles that they simply have an exclusive 3D cover. I couldn't help but laugh at the irony in this. Of course this isn't the first time Best Buy has spent money to secure the rights to an exclusive cover. Heck, this seems to be one of the more bizzar attempts retailers make to try and lure fans of movies away from Amazon.com and convince them to trek to the store and make their purchase. Does the cover make that much of a difference? I personally don't think so, but I would probably be wrong in that assumption. Anyway, I find it annoying that Best Buy would spend money on the rights to an exclusive cover but not on the 3D version. I also want to warn potential buyers that if they see this in the store it just LOOKS like a BluRay 3D, but it's not! Of course, considering how quietly this came to video, there's probably not many people who want "Planes: Fire & Rescue" in the first place.
At first glance it looks like they might have negotiated to have exclusive rights to the 3D version, but a closer look reveles that they simply have an exclusive 3D cover. I couldn't help but laugh at the irony in this. Of course this isn't the first time Best Buy has spent money to secure the rights to an exclusive cover. Heck, this seems to be one of the more bizzar attempts retailers make to try and lure fans of movies away from Amazon.com and convince them to trek to the store and make their purchase. Does the cover make that much of a difference? I personally don't think so, but I would probably be wrong in that assumption. Anyway, I find it annoying that Best Buy would spend money on the rights to an exclusive cover but not on the 3D version. I also want to warn potential buyers that if they see this in the store it just LOOKS like a BluRay 3D, but it's not! Of course, considering how quietly this came to video, there's probably not many people who want "Planes: Fire & Rescue" in the first place.
0
This week we have two major 3D exhibited movies being released with only one of them getting a BluRay 3D release. That release would be for "Hercules.". The Dwayne Johnson vehicle isn't what I would call a particularly good movie, but it's still nice that the 3D version is being made available for those who want it. The much bigger release (which also had 3D was used to much better effect) is "Maleficent" (which also isn't very good). This is the much bigger release of the two, yet Disney still insists on releasing their BluRay 3D's everywhere in the world except America. Per the custom though, Vudu has the 3D version available in digital release. It doesn't look as good as a BluRay would and good like having a connection that is consistent enough to stream it properly, but I suppose it's better than nothing. Actually, considering the recent events, I'm starting to wonder if the reason Disney has cooled on releasing BluRay 3D disks is because Vudu has paid for exclusive rights to the 3D versions? It's worth looking into at the very least.
BluRay 3D This Week
Labels:
disney,
hercules,
maleficent,
vudu
This week we have two major 3D exhibited movies being released with only one of them getting a BluRay 3D release. That release would be for "Hercules.". The Dwayne Johnson vehicle isn't what I would call a particularly good movie, but it's still nice that the 3D version is being made available for those who want it. The much bigger release (which also had 3D was used to much better effect) is "Maleficent" (which also isn't very good). This is the much bigger release of the two, yet Disney still insists on releasing their BluRay 3D's everywhere in the world except America. Per the custom though, Vudu has the 3D version available in digital release. It doesn't look as good as a BluRay would and good like having a connection that is consistent enough to stream it properly, but I suppose it's better than nothing. Actually, considering the recent events, I'm starting to wonder if the reason Disney has cooled on releasing BluRay 3D disks is because Vudu has paid for exclusive rights to the 3D versions? It's worth looking into at the very least.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Popular Posts
-
Guest blog by David Brandt-Erichsen I became a fan of home 3D in 2016 when I got my new LG flatscreen 4K OLED 3D TV. The very first time I s... -
I have gotten a few e-mails about 3D movie on Vudu. As you are all aware I am a staunch support of disks. I refuse to buy digital c... -
I managed to get a copy of "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2" on BluRay 3D at Best Buy. I need to be upfront about that so that... -
Well...I knew something would pull me out of retirement and back to this blog. Turns out, it would be IMAX doing a total bait-and-switch... -
I know there hasn't been a lot of activity here as of late. That is partly because the world of cinema more-or-less came to a halt this... -
Either movie theaters are preparing people for another 3D wave that's anticipated with the upcoming "Avatar: The Way of Water... -
James Cameron is having a busy year. Not only will "Avatar" be re-released in a week in IMAX 3D (in 48 FPS no less), but in Dece... -
I hate having to report these things, but the Matt Damon bomb "The Great Wall" appears to NOT be coming to BluRay 3D! It was a... -
I am happy to report that Sony is not out of the 3D game when it comes to BluRay as they have already announced that "Smurfs: The Lo... -
Hey everyone, sorry for the late post. I know, I know, it's been...three months since my last post. I've been working on othe...