"Pacific Rim: Uprising" Is (Almost) Playing Exclusively in IMAX 3D

Though the realization has been slow, it appears that IMAX is starting to come to terms with the fact that that their 3D showings are not only NOT the reason for declining ticket sales, but is actually an asset of theirs!  After almost completely ignoring it for "Black Panther," "A Wrinkle in Time," and "Tomb Raider" (the latter of which I only found playing in Mexico for some reason), 3D is back with a vengeance in IMAX.  Granted, it's not a complete return.  There are still a healthy amount of 2D showings, but what is promising is that 3D makes up the majority of the show times.  Heck, at the Universal Citywalk and Esquire IMAX have NO 2D showings at all (which is a nice change considering 3D really shines on those screens)!  I'm not saying 3D will completely take over again as I do believe there is a good number of people who want IMAX 2D presentations, but I think the company is having a hard time justifying 2D only screens when 3D fans are their most dedicated paying customers.

Not that "Tomb Raider" and "A Wrinkle in Time" were huge hits or anything, but how frustrating was it for them to realize most of their fans passed on seeing those movies in IMAX because they wanted to see them in 3D?  I mean, RPX and XD are nowhere near as big, but since they had 3D versions...well, that's better than nothing right?  If the movie is going to be in 2D, I think most would rather use their MoviePass and see it on a standard screen (then they aren't paying anything).  What's more, the official website confirms that "Ready Player One" and "Avengers: Infinity War" ARE going to have 3D showings in IMAX (the latter is sort of required though, being the first Hollywood movie in history to be fully filmed with IMAX 3D cameras)!  I'm seeing "Pacific Rim: Pacific" in IMAX 3D today.  I'm very grateful because while the first movie wasn't great per se, it was an excellent theater experience, and the excellent IMAX 3D format was a major reason for that.

Hopefully I'll get something similar here.

Read more »

"Justice League" on BluRay 3D: The Way it SHOULD Have Been in Theaters!

I picked up "Justice League" on BluRay 3D a couple days ago.  This isn't a movie I really wanted to own in 3D.  Not only is the movie pretty terrible regardless how much you like the characters, but I saw the movie in 3D on a Cinemark XD screen and was pretty unimpressed with what I saw.  The 3D was inconsistent, mostly flat, and rarely engaging.  It was probably inevitable that this wasn't going to be a great (or even good) 3D experience.  The movies long and troubled history resulted in the film having two directors, with two completely different styles and shooting methods.  It was one of the few times when director Joss Whedon (NOT Zach Snyder) was so unimpressed with the 3D conversion of the film as a whole, that he asked IMAX not to bother showing it in three dimensions.

So, coupled with the fact that the movie wasn't enjoyable, I was surprised to find myself buying the BluRay 3D.  I find myself doing that for a lot of movies I don't care for though, just to throw the format a few bucks (and to complete the DC Extended Universe collection...whatever that's worth at this point).  When I got home I ultimately did end up watching the movie again, and ten minutes in I was stunned and shocked: This was a COMPLTELY different 3D conversion of the film!  What's more, this is what should have been presented in theaters, and (more specifically) the kind of visual experience that would have been right at home in IMAX 3D.  This new 3D conversion is so much better, that it results in a movie that is almost completely different as far as visuals are concerned.  The dialog scenes actually have field depth that makes the images immersive.  The action sequences pop in a way they just didn't in theaters.  The IMAX aspect ratio is kept, giving the picture an epic scope.

Why on Earth wasn't this the version show in theaters?

Look, I know this doesn't make the movie any better, but it does goes to show that if the film had been delayed a little bit, Warner Bros. would have had an excellent 3D theater experience on their hands.  Heck, had they delayed it they might have also had a better movie, but I'll let other videos and articles debate that one.  In the meantime, Warner did good by going back and completely redoing the 3D conversion so that it was actually watchable at home.  They didn't need to do it.  They certainly knew they weren't going to ship a lot of copies.  But they did right by their consumers, and that is easily one of the best things I can report on this site in a long time.  Oh, also, it appears Best Buy and Target are taking the high demand for the 3D disks more seriously this time around, as there were MANY copies of the BluRay 3D on store shelves, so hopefully fans will actually have the chance to buy it this time!

Read more »

IMAX Screws 3D Fans with Release of "A Wrinkle in Time"

It looks like IMAX is not only doubling down on their belief that people don't want to see 3D movies, they are doubling down HARD!  Despite all the advertisements for Disney's upcoming "A Wrinkle in Time" promoting the new family adventure as a 3D experience, IMAX is projecting almost all of their showings in 2D.  What's more, the movie itself is largely going to be 2D only at many theaters, in one of the biggest 3D purges I've seen the format receive yet.  There are so few 3D showings in California, that I first assumed that the release had been cancelled altogether, until I noticed the few random late night 3D screenings at a couple of Cinemarks.  Because of this it should be noted that IMAX is not the only theater who seems to be taking a hard stance against the 3D showings of "A Wrinkle in Time," but I will focus on IMAX because they are still in a perfect position to prove that the format is still viable.

This whole mess started with their belief that people didn't want to see 3D movies anymore, and that they would start showing less of them.  "Blade Runner 2049" was their first experiment with not showing 3D at all.  The experiment did not result in more tickets being sold, and thus 3D screenings returned in limited form with "Thor: Ragnorok."  When "Star Wars: The Last Jedi" became a smashing hit in 3D, I was hoping we could put this silly notion that 2D only screenings were the way of the future, and that movies that people wanted to see would ultimately sell tickets.  But IMAX decided to push their agenda even father and with more passion with "Black Panther," where there were scant few IMAX 3D screenings to be found (and I had to compromise by seeing it on a less-than-ideal screen size).  While the movie wasn't hurt at the box office with the lack of 3D releases, it's not like the 3D screenings were vacant by any means.

They were mostly filled with people who wanted to see the movie, and many of the standard 3D showings were also filled in the first two weeks of the films release.  Now with "A Wrinkle in Time" though IMAX is pushing harder than ever to show that their method is going to work.  As of this writing there are actually no IMAX 3D screenings of the movie anywhere in California that I can find, and I had to search several states in to find theaters that would show it even once a day.  Since the 2D and 3D can be switched very easily on these projectors, I don't understand why IMAX doesn't at least give viewers the option of which version they would like to see.  Maybe the 3D version can be exclusive to the opening week, and further screenings could be in 2D?  But then, when people went to IMAX they rarely complain when the movies are in 3D, and most seem disappointed when the movie isn't in 3D because they expect it at this point.

Since "A Wrinkle in Time" has been described as being a visual powerhouse where the 3D was very much a focus of the filming process, why gimp the picture with 2D?  People have sent me tweets asking what they should do since they want to see the movie in IMAX, but they also want to see it in 3D.  And I have to tell them quite bluntly that this is a situation where you will most likely have to choose which you'd prefer: IMAX or 3D.  In some rare cases you can have both, but whether those options will be real IMAX screens is another matter altogether.  Personally I think places like the Esquire IMAX, the TLC IMAX, and the Spectrum IMAX should be showing the movie in 3D, as those are the biggest screens, thus the 3D works best there.  But hey, if they are going to play this game, I guess I'll go to one of those late night showings at Cinemark, and hope IMAX wakes up and realizes that if they want to sell more tickets, they have to have better movies (which there is some debate whether this one is).

Read more »

Midnight's Edge Discusses Lack of 3D Release for "Star Wars: The Last Jedi"

Midnight's Edge and The Digital Bits have uploaded a new video discussing "Star Wars: The Last Jedi."  In the video they discuss the film, their thoughts on it, the highly anticipated UltraHD release (AKA: 4K), and they express their frustration about the lack of a domestic 3D release.  It might not give us any clue as to why Disney completely passed over the 3D here in the states, but there is some speculation, and it's nice to know there's more people out there (other than me) who cares about this big problem with home media.

Read more »

Should You See "Black Panther" in RealD 3D or IMAX 2D?

The first thing that should be noted is, yes, I am aware that a few IMAX theaters are showing Marvel's "Black Panther" in 3D.  I hunted down an IMAX 3D showing myself so I can confirm it exists.  This is obviously the preferred way to see the movie, but what was disappointing is that despite being formatted for IMAX 3D, very few IMAX screens showed it in the proper format.  The screen I went to wasn't even a real IMAX, but one of those up-converted ones (albeit, one that was bigger than your usual up-converted screen, but still smaller than you'd like).  Now that the movie is in its second weekend the movie is still out on all the IMAX screens, but finding a 3D screening is nearly impossible at this point.  There are still plenty of RealD 3D screenings however (as well as XD 3D for those interested), but the IMAX version DOES have 20% more of the image, so the question is this: Does that 20% difference make it worth giving up the 3D?

Unlike previous entries in this series, the answer is more nuanced than I would have liked.  Truthfully, the 3D is sort of a lukewarm experience.  It's clearly a post-conversion job and one that isn't even very impressive.  That said, there are three scenes where it really pops in a great way: The intro, the car chase, and the climatic battle.  In all these scene the IMAX version opens up to revel more image, and the 3D is given more room to breath as characters are so close to the camera (Editor's note: As much as I loved this movie, some of the close up shots were really weird and not helpful in three dimensions in the slightest).  Without the 3D though, these scenes are slightly less compelling to watch.  On the other hand...eh, the 20% extra image space also help the scenes, so it's not like I want to toss that aspect out the door either.  It would have been nice if IMAX had just let the movie screen the way it was intended (this is one of the few posters to explicitly advertise IMAX 3D), but I guess what's done is done.

Obviously the best choice would be to see "Black Panther" in IMAX 3D, but with so few screenings of it left (and none of them on the real IMAX's) that isn't really an option.  The 20% extra image is nice, but the 3D makes such an impact in the three scenes it works in that it would be a shame to pass that up as well.  In this case I think I'm going to have to award a tie, as I find neither version to be definitively better than the other.  I would have liked to be able to make a solid recommendation, but in this case you might want to whip out your Sinemia card and see the movie in both formats.  Thankfully, it IS worth seeing twice!  My only beef is that this is a situation where you practically need to if you want to experience the movie fully.

Read more »

Those Wanting "Star Wars: The Last Jedi" on BluRay 3D Will Have to Import

Disney officially announced the release of "Star Wars: The Last Jedi" on physical media today, and a 3D version was not in the cards (not even as a retailer exclusive).  This is disappointing for a myriad of reasons (and also frustrating when you know that Warner Bros. is releasing "Justice League" in 3D, which didn't have NEARLY as big an audience as 'The Last Jedi' did).  The title will be made available to purchase in Europe with a 3D steelbook, but there is no confirmation that will be region free.  Past experiences have led me to believe that it will, but until I have the disk in my hand I can't confirm that.  I'm sorry to have to report the news (I held off on the on chance there was a retailer exclusive waiting in the wings), but it is apparent even 'Star Wars' can't get Disney to release a 3D version.

Read more »

Was "Peter Rabbit" Supposed to be a 3D Movie?

So...I saw "Peter Rabbit" today.  I'm not sure what disappoints me more; that sentence or the fact that I actually sort of liked the movie.  I know, I know, I'm probably losing a lot of you right now, but trust me: I have to see a LOT of kids movies each year, and considering this was a modern remake of a book many kids consider to be slow AND came from the studio that gave us "The Emoji Movie" of all things, I think you can admit that even if you don't like it (and there is enough here to dislike for there to be some caution attached with my recommendation), things could have been a lot worse.  That's not what we're here to discuss though (I'll have a full review tomorrow on my other site).  No, what I want to talk about is how while I was watching the movie, I was getting a strong sense that this was supposed to be a 3D movie at one point, yet we ultimately got was a 2D movie.

The questions I have are is this true (and if so...what happened to the 3D version)?  First of all, I need to mention that I combed through lots of pre-release material for this movie in order to see if my theory had any weight to it (which is not something I expected to do for "Peter Rabbit" of all things).  In my search I found no posters (either here or internationally) that advertises the movie in 3D.  There are no commercials saying this will be presented in 3D.  Wikipedia doesn't even give a hint that 3D was in the equation.  So, to make it clear right now: There is NO pre-release proof or interview I could find that suggests a 3D version was planned!  Normally that would be the end of the discussion, but it's not because there is one major source that suggests the 3D version was at the very least planned: The actual movie itself!  There are several moments where objects appear to be 'thrown' at the screen.

A couple scenes involving birds flying (while rapping...again, not a perfect movie) that involve a camera that moves and sways as if the scenery was supposed to surround you.  There are a couple of dance sequences where not only are the rabbits jumping toward the screen, but in two instances they appeared to be hovering.  Heck, many of these moments can be found in the trailer itself (pay attention to the porcupine getting electrocuted).  If that wasn't telling enough, there is a scene late in the movie where two characters are being told the events that happened during the first half of the film.  After hearing the story, the wife laughs and comments "why, that sounds like a 3D adaptation of a popular children's book."  The meta-joke may or may not strike a cord with you personally, but that is an oddly specific description for a movie that ultimately wasn't in 3D.  Also, it should be noted that this and "The Star" are the only Sony Animation movies that are NOT in 3D aside from "Surf's Up" (which was released in 2007)!

The question a lot of people might have now is if this was supposed to have a 3D version...what happened to it?  Answer: I don't know.  The most logical explanation is that the studio made the choice to forgo a 3D release altogether.  Judging by how certain shots are presented and the line of dialog being delivered the way it was, we can (probably) safely assume that this version was cancelled late enough into production that shots and script lines were filmed with it in mind, but early enough so that it wasn't a major focus in the advertising.  Now, does the 2D only version hurt the film?  It's hard to say.  The fact that I noticed some of the shots looked weird is an indicator that those scenes should have been reshot so as to not stand out as much, but I can also see why a studio wouldn't want to pour millions of dollars into commissioning reshoots for "Peter Rabbit."  Unless we hear otherwise, this is just a conspiracy theory though.  In the meantime, if you have kids who want to see this...eh, whop out your MoviePass.  It might not be great cinema, but I think most will be surprised at how charming it is at times.

Read more »

Apparently, Tommy Wiseau's "The Room" is Being Re-released in 3D

I've had to report on so many disappointing stories, that I'm pleasantly surprised when I have good news to share.  "The Room" is a movie that is considered by many to be one of the worst movies ever made.  It is so legendarily bad, that screenings of it are still held in theaters, where people go to scream at the screen, throw spoons, and just have a good time.  It's one of the rare films that even critics consider their negative reviews to be a shining endorsement.  Well, if you enjoy the experience of watching "The Room," apparently you will soon be able to experience it in 3D!  No joke, Tommy himself has confirmed this via a tweet on Twitter...

5.1
4K
3D https://t.co/pbvnOeT5js

— Tommy Wiseau (@TommyWiseau) January 27, 2018

...which, I have to say, is really pretty cool to hear.  Now, I have no illusions that this is going to be pure 3D.  It's probably not going to be GOOD 3D!  In fact, I imagine Tommy will screw this conversion up so badly, that it will only add to how hilariously awful the whole experience of "The Room" can be.  I not only look forward to seeing Tommy's bare ass on the big screen, I look forward to the butt cheeks not even lining up in the third dimension.  I imagine the football looking like it is going to fly off the screen before it jerk back into place when someone catches it.  The possibilities are endless, and (like the movie itself) I expect it to be terrible in the most fun, organic way possible!

Read more »

Is Disney Officially Done with BluRay 3D?

So, as you can probably imagine, I've been getting a LOT of e-mails from people who are concerned that Disney is finally dropping support for BluRay 3D in general!  They are basing this on the fact that "Coco" is confirmed as having no 3D release in the states, "Thor: Ragnorok" doesn't have one, and it's looking like "Star Wars: The Last Jedi" won't be getting a release either.  Personally, I would wait until the official announcement before writing 'Star Wars' off ("Rogue One" sold VERY well in 3D as a retailer exclusive, so that's the route that may be taken here as well), but, yes, it's certainly looking like even Pixar and Marvel can't convince the mouse to release any more BluRay 3D's in the states.  Now, the good news is that (so far) ALL of these movies will have European 3D releases!  What's more, these disks tend to be VERY import friendly (to the point where the only disks that didn't work on my American players were "Ratatouille" and "The BFG"...and apparently Disney didn't even release the later themselves overseas, so who knows why that one was region locked)!

What's more, most of them get steelbook releases from Zavii, which make them look almost like American releases (sans the disk artwork).  This is (obviously) very disappointing, but we all know that 3D is in a pretty bad state right now.  If it weren't...well, I wouldn't be running this blog, now would I?  Right now the only company that is really releasing BluRay 3D's consistently is Warner Bros.  And keep in mind that "The LEGO Ninjago Movie" was released in VERY limited quantities and "Blade Runner 2049" was a Best Buy exclusive.  Things are going to be rocky with 3D releases for a little while.  Thankfully, imports DO exist, and future articles will be focusing on how you can obtain and watch these imports in the comfort of your own home!  In the meantime, thankfully there are European imports that look to work on your American players, and they are only slightly more money than you would have paid anyway.

Read more »

Relax Folks: "The LEGO Ninjago Movie" WAS Released on BluRay 3D!

Here's the first post of 2018 folks!  Hope you all had a great Christmas and Happy New Year!  I, personally, have had neither, but life moves on, and I am looking forward to new opportunities and prospects!  In the meantime, while I was on vacation I did get several e-mails from people asking if Warner Bros. secretly cancelled the BluRay 3D release of "The LEGO Ninjago Movie."  And, um, here's the thing guys...Warner Bros. DID release this in 3D!  They still did fans a solid.  However...the thing is really hard to find.  Like, this was a pretty bare bones, rare release.  Not many copies were made and most stores didn't even get it.  Basically, if you want this, you need to buy it from a third party seller on Amazon or eBay.  Don't worry, so far there aren't too many listings for more than the retail price, but if you want this in your collection you might want to hop on that soon, because who knows how long that will be the situation.

I don't like that this was released in such short supply, but this is just the reality of the business in America.  But, there are three positive's to take from this. 1) America got an official release, PERIOD!  2) You can import this from Zavii for a cheaper price (and the disk appears to be region free).  3) This didn't come in a steelbook to make it artificially more difficult to find (this one is just hard to find because people wanted it).

Read more »

Where is "Ferdinand" in 3D? (Hint: Blame "Star Wars: The Last Jedi")

"Ferdinand" is the new family comedy from Blue Sky Studios that opened this weekend to pretty decent reviews and two Golden Globe nominations.  Yeah...really!  While not being advertised on any of the posters, it WAS made in 3D, and the trailers even did a good job showing off some really nice 3D effects and making it clear this is the format to see it in!  Yet (as some readers have said on my Facebook page) they are having a difficult time finding the 3D version.  Some didn't realize it was supposed to be in 3D, but the movie goes so much out of it's way to BE an effective three dimensional experience, that most have figured out what format the movie is really supposed to be seen in!  So, the question many have is this: If "Ferdinand" was meant to be in 3D, why can't I find it?  Was the release cancelled?  No, I can assure you it wasn't.  It is playing in 3D in my area...though only at a couple of theaters, and very few show times.

Are theaters prejudice against family films?  Is this a '3D is dead' thing?  The answer to all these questions is no, no, and no.  Honestly, this isn't so much a '3D is dead' thing as it is a...well, 'it's not 'Star Wars' so screw you' thing.  I'm sure most of you are aware that "Star Wars: The Last Jedi" hit theaters this weekend (and is on it's way to a $200+ million dollar opening).  It's such a big deal that I'm starting to think the reason my blog numbers aren't very good at the moment is because I'm not writing about it (and if I did it would likely get swallowed up in all the other articles being written on the movie).  Honestly, I'm sort of impressed people brought up their difficulty in finding "Ferdinand" in 3D at all.  But the sad reality is that while "Star Wars: The Last Jedi" might be a good movie, the franchise is (on a whole) VERY detrimental to the movie business!  I know it's not the movies fault that everyone and their mother wants to see it, but this is a franchise that is so huge, it swallows the industry whole whenever a new installment comes out.

It commands over 4,000 screens.  People don't see other movies.  The Walt Disney Company is making HUGE demands on theater owners in order to make sure NOTHING pushes it off screens for a whole month!  Theaters are getting more wary of showing too many 3D movies, so they limit screen time to just a few screens a day (and guess what movie gets to use those screens).  It doesn't matter if people were still seeing "Coco" in RealD 3D; 'Star Wars' is in town, so get that much loved, highly original movie off the screen ASAP.  Oh, you mean you've got all these great movies like "The Disaster Artist," "Lady Bird," and "Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri" in theaters?  Well, see them before 'Star Wars' kicks them out of town.  I understand that people like what they like, but it is so frustrating that every two Decembers the whole world basically acts as if there is only one movie worth seeing (and seeing again, and again, and again, and again...).

The obsession with this franchise really is unhealthy, and it made me want to pass on the movie altogether (though I didn't do that, so, you know, part of the problem and all that jazz).  What was I talking about again?  Oh, yeah, "Ferdinand."  Anyway, it's a cute movie.  Nothing revolutionary, but it is cute, and it's more than worth seeing in 3D if you can find it.  It's a shame you are unlikely to find it, but hopefully those of you reading this who want the opportunity to see it this way will have the chance to do so.  And, yes, I will mention that "Star Wars: The Last Jedi" is a GREAT 3D experience!  I have to say that to be fair.  It's just a shame "Ferdinand" got screwed by it's mere existence.

Read more »