Star Wars in 3-D?

Mechwarrior · Post by **Mechwarrior** » 2003-12-07 09:48pm

Ive noticed some time ago that ever Star Wars movie has at least one scene in it that could be enhanced by making it 3-D

SW1; The Pod Race scene
SW2; When Obi-wan and Anikin chase the Bounty Hunter through the city on Courusant and Obi-Wan pursuit of Jango Fett through the Asteriods
SW3; Well have to wait and see
SW4; The Trench Run
SW5; the Enpire chasing the Falcon through the asteriods field
SW6; the Speeder bike chase through the forest

Opinions?

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2003-12-07 10:16pm

3D is a dead novelty.

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2003-12-07 10:26pm

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:3D is a dead novelty.

No, 3D is good if done RIGHT.

The professionals in ILM and such have been slacking off. People like WETA, on the other hand, have not.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2003-12-07 10:30pm

Do you even know what we're talking about, Space Cadet?

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2003-12-07 10:36pm

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:Do you even know what we're talking about, Space Cadet?

Yes. The prequel movies used extensive CG, the OT did not. What I can gather is that you and he are saying that CG has become overrated, in the light of how poorly it was done in many spots in the prequel.

What I responded with was that that was poorly done CG. CG itself is not poor, or a "dead novelty" as you so put it.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2003-12-07 10:38pm

3D as in filming with two cameras a certain distance apart so that when projected and viewed with special glasses, the image appears to be three-dimensional and occasionally outside of the screen.

Jesus, you mean you've never heard of 3D movies?

Did your parents keep you locked in a cage?

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2003-12-07 10:42pm

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:3D as in filming with two cameras a certain distance apart so that when projected and viewed with special glasses, the image appears to be three-dimensional and occasionally outside of the screen.

Jesus, you mean you've never heard of 3D movies?

Did your parents keep you locked in a cage?

Ehem...

When one says "3D", in today's modern world a majority (a vast majority, I might say, today) would assume you were talking about CGI.

If there's a more descriptive terminology for the camera technique you mentioned, do use it. Otherwise you only confuse people like me and many others.

EDIT: And I know what "3D" you're talking about: the one where you wear those funky paper glasses to make everything seem holographic.

Like I said, in today's modern world, the commonly accepted definition has changed.

darthdavid · Post by **darthdavid** » 2003-12-07 10:45pm

Shinova wrote:
Spanky The Dolphin wrote:3D as in filming with two cameras a certain distance apart so that when projected and viewed with special glasses, the image appears to be three-dimensional and occasionally outside of the screen.

Jesus, you mean you've never heard of 3D movies?

Did your parents keep you locked in a cage?
Ehem...

When one says "3D", in today's modern world a majority (a vast majority, I might say, today) would assume you were talking about CGI.

If there's a more descriptive terminology for the camera technique you mentioned, do use it. Otherwise you only confuse people like me and many others.

EDIT: And I know what "3D" you're talking about: the one where you wear those funky paper glasses to make everything seem holographic.

Like I said, in today's modern world, the commonly accepted definition has changed.

I think your just confuzed 'cause i knew what he meant and have never been to a 3d movie.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2003-12-07 10:47pm

Shinova wrote:Ehem...

When one says "3D", in today's modern world a majority (a vast majority, I might say, today) would assume you were talking about CGI.

Heh, no they wouldn't. Nice try trying to disguise your niavity, Shin. I can assure you that if you asked 1000 people randomly, at least 70% would identify the term "3D" with the filming process, and not some term you seemed to have made up as a short hand. Most say CG to refer to CGI.

I have never, ever, EVER heard someone refer to CGI as just "3D".

If there's a more descriptive terminology for the camera technique you mentioned, do use it. Otherwise you only confuse people like me and many others.

I just did. 3D is 3D. It's not my fault your parents decided to use your childhood as an experiment in isolation and lack of exposure.

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2003-12-07 10:47pm

darthdavid wrote: I think your just confuzed 'cause i knew what he meant and have never been to a 3d movie.

Meh. Mechwarrior didn't say "3d movie". He was just talking about individual scenes. It could be either the funky 3D or CGI 3D.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2003-12-07 10:49pm

God, you so totally deserve your title, Shin...

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2003-12-07 10:50pm

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:Heh, no they wouldn't. Nice try trying to disguise your niavity, Shin. I can assure you that if you asked 1000 people randomly, at least 70% would identify the term "3D" with the filming process, and not some term you seemed to have made up as a short hand. Most say CG to refer to CGI.

I have never, ever, EVER heard someone refer to CGI as just "3D".

Right...I bet they do. Either that or the 1000 people you ask would be all people older than you or less technically up-to-date with today's tech.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2003-12-07 10:52pm

Maybe some of you modeller freaks do as some kind of Martian verbal shorthand on message boards, but the professionals don't, or at least in my ~ten years of familiarity with special and visual effects, they haven't.

Again, don't try and cover up your nievity.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-12-07 10:56pm

Shinova wrote: Ehem...

When one says "3D", in today's modern world a majority (a vast majority, I might say, today) would assume you were talking about CGI.

No they wouldn't, that's simply an absurd. You're trying to cover up your screwup and looking stupider for it with every post.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2003-12-07 10:56pm

Anyway, while a dead novelty, I think that the scenes you suggested would be awesome to see in 3D, as long as it was in a cinema, of course.

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2003-12-07 11:15pm

A dead novelty? *blinks*

Would this be a bad time to admit that I am hanging out for Spy Kids 3D?

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2003-12-07 11:29pm

Not really.

3D was a big, brief fad when it was first developed in the 1950s, but it experianced a short revival in the 1980s after some obscure independent film that was filmed in 3D was well received by critics and made a nice wad of cash for its small release.

It quickly died when theatre patrons remembered or rediscoverd just how much 3D sucks in terms of quality when compared to standard non-3D features, not to mention that the glasses often gave people headaches.

Outside of themeparks like Disneyland/Disney World, 3D is little used these days, and less than a handful of commercial films come out each year that are 3D. Spy Kids 3D was more an attempt to draw in a larger audience a third time with the promise of a gimmick.

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2003-12-07 11:38pm

Sea Skimmer wrote: No they wouldn't, that's simply an absurd. You're trying to cover up your screwup and looking stupider for it with every post.

Would the majority of the general public, like everyday people, say that too?

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2003-12-07 11:40pm

Shinova wrote:
Sea Skimmer wrote: No they wouldn't, that's simply an absurd. You're trying to cover up your screwup and looking stupider for it with every post.
Would the majority of the general public, like everyday people, say that too?

If I'm interpreting your garble correctly: Yes, of course they would.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-12-07 11:53pm

Apparently the OP was perfectly crystal clear to everyone except Shinova.

Only Shinova thinks that 2D is actually 3D.

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2003-12-07 11:58pm

If the guy had used the term stereoscopic somewhere in his post I would've known it was something other than CG.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2003-12-08 12:00am

Shinova wrote:If the guy had used the term stereoscopic somewhere in his post I would've known it was something other than CG.

Well, excuse him for the fact that you're a naive space cadet whose parents raised in a cage in their basement for eighteen years...

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-12-08 12:04am

Shinova wrote:If the guy had used the term stereoscopic somewhere in his post I would've known it was something other than CG.

Shinova, fuckin eh. Just admit defeat and move on. To help you do so, I will tell you yet ANOTHER reason why you should have known what he was talking about.

The OP mentioned the Pod Race in Episode I being re-done in 3D. If Mechwarrior were talking about CG, then why would he discuss a scene that was ALREADY 100% CG?!?!?

Companion Cube · Post by **Companion Cube** » 2003-12-08 02:56am

Wow, this turned into a 'Bash Shinova' contest real fast--I don't see why anyone but Spanky needs to be jumping all over his ass.

On topic: Yeah, the Pod race might look slightly more interesting in 3-D, but i'd think that would be the only one that would really benefit.

Chardok · Post by **Chardok** » 2003-12-08 07:51am

I dunno, 3I, I saw Ice Pirates in 3-d as a kid in the movie theatre, and it was great! Though only one part stands out in my head when a ship flies towards the camera and the it gos offscreen towards the audience. I almost shit my pants! 3-D was awesome, and I'd like to see another revival of sorts.