Wrath of The Titans 3D June 26 - Review

[Jbug]

The last Clash movie had some very good characters and a nice story.

[Zivouhr]

They convert films to 3D instead of filming 3D for one reason.
-They don't want to use up time and money on the set. Post production is cheaper than the costs of having an entire cast and crew on the set.
-Plus the learning curve and set up time required for every single 3D shot in the movie. That might take a lot longer for a new director looking to save a dollar.

Thankfully, there are studios out there that see the value in filming in 3D. It doesn't bother me much either way, as long as the layers have plenty of depth between them. If it's flatter like Tron Legacy, which was filmed in 3D, or Star Wars I 3D, which was converted to 3D, then it doesn't matter much if it was filmed 3D or converted IMO... (not counting cardboard cutouts, errors)

[RiseDarthVader]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

I can't find the company who converted the 3D for Wrath of the Titans. Probably done in-house by Warner Brothers this time or the studios who did the Special FX?

They most likely went to Prime Focus again. They're not too bad but accepting the Clash of the Titans job has tarnished their reputation quite badly. I doubt any studio would really do any conversion in-house because it does take a lot of R&D to get the software pipeline set up and generally a VFX house would rather spend all their efforts on advancing their VFX pipeline and getting more work in that.

[Zivouhr]

Originally Posted by RiseDarthVader

They most likely went to Prime Focus again. They're not too bad but accepting the Clash of the Titans job has tarnished their reputation quite badly. I doubt any studio would really do any conversion in-house because it does take a lot of R&D to get the software pipeline set up and generally a VFX house would rather spend all their efforts on advancing their VFX pipeline and getting more work in that.

I checked Prime Focus' website, I didn't see this as a project. Their last listed project was Star Wars I 3D...

[BigNickUK]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

They convert films to 3D instead of filming 3D for one reason.
-They don't want to use up time and money on the set. Post production is cheaper than the costs of having an entire cast and crew on the set.
-Plus the learning curve and set up time required for every single 3D shot in the movie. That might take a lot longer for a new director looking to save a dollar.

Thankfully, there are studios out there that see the value in filming in 3D. It doesn't bother me much either way, as long as the layers have plenty of depth between them. If it's flatter like Tron Legacy, which was filmed in 3D, or Star Wars I 3D, which was converted to 3D, then it doesn't matter much if it was filmed 3D or converted IMO... (not counting cardboard cutouts, errors)

That actually wasnt the reason according to the director. He wanted to use film instead of digital to achieve a certain style and give it a more natural grainy look. There is an interview posted further up the thread. He says he couldnt achieve that with native digital 3D

[mseeley]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

I can't find the company who converted the 3D for Wrath of the Titans. Probably done in-house by Warner Brothers this time or the studios who did the Special FX?

If you look at the cast an crew section for the movie on IMDB, people from Prime Focus show up. And judging from viewing the trailer in anyglyph 3d, it looks like Prime Focus learned a TON from their mistakes. I am probably going to catch this movie in IMAX 3d if I can

[RiseDarthVader]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

I checked Prime Focus' website, I didn't see this as a project. Their last listed project was Star Wars I 3D...

I'm guessing NDA's are signed between both parties to not reveal before the movies release who is doing the conversion. We probably won't know who is doing the Titanic conversion until the release when we can see the credits. And even then sometimes they won't show it like with Harry Potter it doesn't mention IMAX or Prime Focus and others that worked on those conversion.

Originally Posted by mseeley

If you look at the cast an crew section for the movie on IMDB, people from Prime Focus show up. And judging from viewing the trailer in anyglyph 3d, it looks like Prime Focus learned a TON from their mistakes. I am probably going to catch this movie in IMAX 3d if I can

What also impacted the Clash of the Titans conversion a lot was that Prime Focus only had the Mumbai team on it which were less skilled combined with communication/time zone differences. http://www.fxguide.com/featured/art-...sion-2d-to-3d/

[ZeDoctor]

Originally Posted by Mrbrownst0ne

..



Jonathan Liebsman is a puppet to the studio. Anyway This clash of the titans wasnt even 50% as good as the original clash of the titans, which i hope u have seen.

I have, I preferred the remake (though I think that it was just good).

[Blu-Ray 3D President]

So who are the titans showing in this movie?

Who are the notable titans absent? I want to see Atlas. That would be something. He's this giant who holds the world... He could simply squish Perseus like a tiny bug.

[mseeley]

Originally Posted by Blu-Ray 3D President

So who are the titans showing in this movie?

Who are the notable titans absent? I want to see Atlas. That would be something. He's this giant who holds the world... He could simply squish Perseus like a tiny bug.

LOL! that would be awesome!

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by Blu-Ray 3D President

So who are the titans showing in this movie?
Who are the notable titans absent? I want to see Atlas. That would be something. He's this giant who holds the world... He could simply squish Perseus like a tiny bug.

(Little-Known-Fact Police mode: )
Uh, actually, he doesn't: Atlas was on earth, holding up the main pillar which supported the sky, and was eventually turned into Mount Atlas.

But then, I didn't expect the remake producers to know anything relating to real Greek mythology either, outside of whatever the God of War games tell them.

[Zivouhr]

With Clash 3D, Prime Focus admits they get a lot of grief from that one, having completed it with only a few weeks total time frame when they took the project, before the theatrical release deadline, while most movies take 10 months or so to convert as an average guess. Considering they did it in 3 weeks, there are some decent 3D moments on blu 3D.

I like the 3D they did on Green Lantern.

Wrath will have Zeus and Hades return. Liam Neeson playing a bigger role I'd guess. He's the underdog this time around, as the other gods go against his leadership.

[Zivouhr]

Originally Posted by BigNickUK

That actually wasnt the reason according to the director. He wanted to use film instead of digital to achieve a certain style and give it a more natural grainy look. There is an interview posted further up the thread. He says he couldnt achieve that with native digital 3D

Film grain can be achieved with a grain filter post production, so if that was his reasoning, he should just admit he didn't want to deal with the learning curve and time set ups of dual 3D cameras, which are much heavier. On that note, if he's doing handheld, then yes, that is a good reason to go 2D, as current professional 3D cameras are too heavy to carry on foot.

Who's going to check out Wrath 3D this weekend? I must have seen the preview on TV 30 times this week alone. The trailers shots where Perseus is riding the flying horse and carrying a blue glowing spear, combined with the video game like, 'rising' sound FX, reminds me of the game JOUST.

This looks like a fun action/adventure movie.
Just rewatched Clash 3D which was good enough and had nice action scenes.

I hope the 3D lives up to the Wrath Trailer.

[mseeley]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

Film grain can be achieved with a grain filter post production, so if that was his reasoning, he should just admit he didn't want to deal with the learning curve and time set ups of dual 3D cameras, which are much heavier. On that note, if he's doing handheld, then yes, that is a good reason to go 2D, as current professional 3D cameras are too heavy to carry on foot.

Who's going to check out Wrath 3D this weekend? I must have seen the preview on TV 30 times this week alone. The trailers shots where Perseus is riding the flying horse and carrying a blue glowing spear, combined with the video game like, 'rising' sound FX, reminds me of the game JOUST.

This looks like a fun action/adventure movie.
Just rewatched Clash 3D which was good enough and had nice action scenes.

I hope the 3D lives up to the Wrath Trailer.

I think I'm going to go to the midnight Imax 3D screening tomorrow Can't wait! I think the the 3d will be very good. At the very least, it seems like the film is going to have a lot of helicopter type shots to show off scenery and epic scale, which from what I've seen from the 3d trailers has looked pretty good so far

[BleedOrange11]

Prime Focus did the conversion again for Wrath of the Titans. It sounds like they've really developed the company's infrastructure since the Clash catastrophe and have a much better system for converting full features now. It will be interesting to see the 3D reviews!


YouTube 3D conference lecture with Matthew Bristowe, stereoscopic producer and Prime Focus Head of Production:

[Show spoiler]

Matthew Bristowe - The Art and Mechanics of Stereo Conversion - 3D Storytelling 2012 - YouTube

[Zivouhr]

I was thinking about the midnight show, but I'd fall asleep on the way home probably.

I saw another TV preview, and it said something along the lines "The Best 3D so far this year", or something like that. But it had the words Best and 3D. They also said this movie is better than the first.

Both good things. Yes, Prime Focus has proven they can do some good conversions in terms of the layers when given the order to deliver it. I see their name quite a bit at the end credits of movies. They had a big hand in Immortals 3D, Green Lantern 3D, Wrath 3D, etc.

[Gae]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

I was thinking about the midnight show, but I'd fall asleep on the way home probably.

I saw another TV preview, and it said something along the lines "The Best 3D so far this year", or something like that. But it had the words Best and 3D.

Am I the only one who thinks that they should be legally entitled to advertise this as a 3D conversion? Therefore reviewers should say...this is the best 3D conversion, not the best 3D.

Gae

[Blueoktober]

A reviewer on Aint It Cool states that the 3D is just as bad if not worse than the original. I've been following them for 13 years and definitely trust them. Will wait for the BD.

And yes, I think it would be nice for them to have a disclaimer that it was post conversion, but most people wouldnt know what that means....

[Gae]

Originally Posted by Blueoktober

A reviewer on Aint It Cool states that the 3D is just as bad if not worse than the original. I've been following them for 13 years and definitely trust them. Will wait for the BD.

And yes, I think it would be nice for them to have a disclaimer that it was post conversion, but most people wouldnt know what that means....

That's probably true but I still think they should be legally entitled to do it. Maybe native 3D movies could state that the film was "shot in 3D". At least that would be some kind of distinction. There definitely needs to be some standards for advertising and promoting 3D.

Gae

[Zivouhr]

Originally Posted by Gae

Am I the only one who thinks that they should be legally entitled to advertise this as a 3D conversion? Therefore reviewers should say...this is the best 3D conversion, not the best 3D.

Gae

Originally Posted by Blueoktober

A reviewer on Aint It Cool states that the 3D is just as bad if not worse than the original. I've been following them for 13 years and definitely trust them. Will wait for the BD.

And yes, I think it would be nice for them to have a disclaimer that it was post conversion, but most people wouldnt know what that means....

It's actually amazing how two people can see the same 3D movie, and one will say the 3D was great, while the other thought it was terrible. Reading the 3D movie threads on this forum proves it.

I think it has something to do with 3D conversions having errors that aren't present in filmed 3D (native), such as cardboard cut outs (flat people with no volume), warping (around the edges of the shifted object caused by inconsistent fill-ins), sloppy layer adjustments (like a hand in the foreground, but its fingers in the far background) and whatever else (Piranha 3D being a good example of an error filled movie).

I prefer filmed 3D, but I don't mind conversions if the parallax layers are far apart from each other in depth, like a pop up book. If it's flat like paper, then I'd say, despite any errors, it was a bad conversion. I'm sure someone would disagree, but that's how it goes.

If Wrath's 3D lives up to the 3D in the trailer, this will be a good 2D to 3D conversion in my opinion.