Wrath of The Titans 3D June 26 - Review

[Big3dfan]

Originally Posted by brian9229

Well i can now say i really, really, reeeeeeally enjoyed that movie. Its been quite awhile since ive rode the edge of the chair cheering through a movie I would agree this one is better in many ways, especially the 3d. I would definitely agree with everyone who says this movie is among the best converted 3d movies. The only thing i noticed was the color on the 3d version looked slightly washed out and grainy. The depth was gorgeous as was the various rocks and such flying out of the screen. I watched the 2d version immediately after the 3d, which was when i noticed the color difference, but it was only slight.

I have to say this is one of the best conversions out there...infant better than some native 3d I have seen like Underworld and Resident evil.

The 3d is very well used and it was a pure joy to zoom through scenes with the flying camera! Some scenes have wowed me as to how the hell did they make it so good. The volume is so evident in smallest detail as if it's a native 3d.

If this is what conversions look like, I have to say 3d future is secure ! For reference I watched this on my 120" Epson 3010 and the 16:9 aspect ratio is a pure joy to watch as it was in Hugo.

The movie itself is a fun romp and mindless fun ! It was hard to understand some of the dialogue, next time I will watch with subtitles !

The lenticular is also one of the best I have seen off late.

[umadbrah]

Yeah...is it just me or the movies that are actually shot in 3d look like crap these days... and the post-converted ones are more impressive? kind of a paradox

[Big3dfan]

Originally Posted by umadbrah

Yeah...is it just me or the movies that are actually shot in 3d look like crap these days... and the post-converted ones are more impressive? kind of a paradox

I was wondering the same !

I guess it also depends on how much CG is there as that will most likely be natively renderred thus making a Conversion look excellent !

[Zivouhr]

Originally Posted by nitinblurayfan

Natively shot movies use very little parallax for some reason whereas conversions are employing loads of parallax with a lot of layering and most importantly, foreground objects.

That is a good point as native 3D definitely needs to take more risks as a whole, like the upcoming The Great Gatsby 3D has done, which has strong filmed 3D that really pops. Why don't they all film them with the parallax like Hugo 3D?

As far as Wrath of the Titans 3D, I enjoyed the movie, but had a different experience in my theater. The previews before it had stronger 3D layers, including The HOBBIT 3D, Avengers 3D: and MIB 3D. Having seen Avengers 3D and MIB 3D, I can confirm my preview 3D experience. But when they were playing Wrath 3D, I felt the 3D was only average, with mostly decent layer separation, as when I flipped my glasses up to see the double image, there wasn't much double image visible.

"Loads of Parallax" would be present in Journey to the Center of the Earth 3D and Hugo 3D. Also Open Season 3D, with strong layer separation. Not sure conversions can reach that level with the present technology (2D conversions requiring a lot of in-fills to fill in the empty spaces, where we get the warping effect if done without great care).

Originally Posted by tuck301

wow. for the first time a converted 3d movie has wowed me. i might be jumping the gun here, but I would say that this is far and away the best conversion i have ever seen. wrath destroys carter and grider 2 without a doubt in terms of 3d effect. i think the aspect ratio helps a lot, but like i said - the 3d in this was GREAT!

This proves that two people can see the same 3D movie, and have contrasting opinions on what was seen for the 3D, neither one needs to be right, as it all comes down to what each individual sees to a large degree, and what our 3D standards are for great 3D. But I will agree about Ghost Rider 2, which had pale 3D overall, Wrath being better for 3D.

I wonder if Wrath 3D was a hybrid conversion (half CGI 3D/half 2D to 3D), or all converted from a 2D source? It makes more sense for them to use the CGI and render it separately with a virtual 3D camera rig, then paste in the digital 2D humans and convert the 2D to 3D to match the CGI 3D.

[Paul H]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

This proves that two people can see the same 3D movie, and have contrasting opinions on what was seen for the 3D, neither one needs to be right, as it all comes down to what each individual sees to a large degree, and what our 3D standards are for great 3D.

Wonder if accuracy of exhibition would be the key to the matter. Would opinions change if people would watch the same 3D exhibition; same movie, same showing at the same theater in the same seating location, or the same BD 3D showing using the same equipment?

Too many variables are present for proof "that two people can see the same 3D movie and have contrasting opinions" without a controlled testing scenerio.

Paul

[Zivouhr]

Originally Posted by Paul H

Wonder if accuracy of exhibition would be the key to the matter. Would opinions change if people would watch the same 3D exhibition; same movie, same showing at the same theater in the same seating location, or the same BD 3D showing using the same equipment?

Too many variables are present for proof "that two people can see the same 3D movie and have contrasting opinions" without a controlled testing scenerio.

Paul

Hi Paul,

Good point.
I was thinking about that, but my theater plays the 3D consistently. Plus I have to wonder why the previews would look better than the movie itself, but not the case with other, stronger 3D movies?

Is the film itself on a different calibration for the 3D projector compared to the previews?

[Paul H]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

Plus I have to wonder why the previews would look better than the movie itself, but not the case with other 3D movies?

Is the film itself on a different calibration for the 3D projector compared to the previews?

Have no answers. Possibilities abound. Will it be the same technician who runs the previews at the different time, using his personal tastes in calibrations and settings that will run the feature film?

One thing I try to do if possible to minimize one variable is to try to always sit in the same seat when evaluating if it happens to be the same auditorium. Definitely not always possible and it can be frustrating to attempt it at times.

Paul

[Zivouhr]

Originally Posted by Paul H

Have no answers. Possibilities abound. Will it be the same technician who runs the previews at the different time, using his personal tastes in calibrations and settings that will run the feature film?

One thing I try to do if possible to minimize one variable is to try to always sit in the same seat when evaluating if it happens to be the same auditorium. Definitely not always possible and it can be frustrating to attempt it at times.

Paul

Same here. I like to sit in the seats of the walking aisle, just before going up the stairs to the stadium seating. People walk in front, but Great 3D is possible from that viewing angle, that close to the screen. I don't like to sit way back, otherwise it feels like I'm watching TV on a small screen.

[Dubstar]

I have yet to watch the bluray, but does the scene where the Chimera's tail jutts towards the viewer face retained at 2.35 or is it full screen - I noticed this at the IMAX-Digital screening I saw.

[BleedOrange11]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

I wonder if Wrath 3D was a hybrid conversion (half CGI 3D/half 2D to 3D), or all converted from a 2D source? It makes more sense for them to use the CGI and render it separately with a virtual 3D camera rig, then paste in the digital 2D humans and convert the 2D to 3D to match the CGI 3D.

Agree with most of your points here and your 3D experience with Wrath compared to Avengers and MIB3.

I think nearly all 3D movies with CGI effects render those natively in 3D with two virtual cameras. Animation is usually created in 3D in virtual space, so rendering with virtual cameras would be the easiest, best-looking way to render 3D CGI in nearly all situations. Almost every single conversion is a "3D hybrid" to some extent.

Originally Posted by Paul H

Wonder if accuracy of exhibition would be the key to the matter. Would opinions change if people would watch the same 3D exhibition; same movie, same showing at the same theater in the same seating location, or the same BD 3D showing using the same equipment?

Too many variables are present for proof "that two people can see the same 3D movie and have contrasting opinions" without a controlled testing scenerio.

Paul

You are right that we can't "prove" the hypothesis that people can see a 3D movie with exactly the same technical experience, but form different opinions about the 3D. Even controlled tests wouldn't "prove" anything.

However, in my experience, opinions about 3D are largely based on whether it met someone's personal standards for optimal 3D, formed prior to their viewing. For example, most BD reviewers and people on 3D forums report a very satisfactory experience after watching A Very Harold and Kumar Christmas, citing its array of outrageous pop-outs as their primary enjoyment factor. I went into viewing the BD3D with the expectation of multiple extreme demo pop-out moments that would be appropriate for a raunchy comedy with obvious 3D gimmicks in the trailer. However, I now count it among my worst 3D blus because it has the weakest parallax I've ever seen in a native release, and none of the pop-out gimmicks topped or equaled those found in several other movies I own. It was a huge disappointment as I expected a demo disc with awesome 3D pop-outs, but got one with horrendous depth and many average pop-outs. (I value immersive depth, more than pop-outs, and my opinion of a pop-out's success strongly correlates with the distance that the object emerges from the screen.)

[Jsmith82]

Watched this last night, 3 words:

Standard Setting Conversion


Quite possibly the best conversion I've seen yet, this was an enjoyable experience and I feel great about my purchase. Bravo!

[MovieFanatic2010]

I just picked up the Wrath of Titans Steelbook for $22.99 at BB

[mseeley]

Originally Posted by Jsmith82

Watched this last night, 3 words:

Standard Setting Conversion


Quite possibly the best conversion I've seen yet, this was an enjoyable experience and I feel great about my purchase. Bravo!

I want this soooo badly now haha! I saw it in 3D in the theater, but wasn't sure how to rate the conversion(despite the fact that it had some magnificent 3D moments ). I may have found a super cheap legit deal somewhere and I may jump on it soon!

[mseeley]

Originally Posted by MovieFanatic2010

I just picked up the Wrath of Titans Steelbook for $22.99 at BB

That's an awesome looking steelbook. Any chance their may be any left at Best Buy?

[brian9229]

Originally Posted by Big3dfan

I have to say this is one of the best conversions out there...infant better than some native 3d I have seen like Underworld and Resident evil.

The 3d is very well used and it was a pure joy to zoom through scenes with the flying camera! Some scenes have wowed me as to how the hell did they make it so good. The volume is so evident in smallest detail as if it's a native 3d.

If this is what conversions look like, I have to say 3d future is secure ! For reference I watched this on my 120" Epson 3010 and the 16:9 aspect ratio is a pure joy to watch as it was in Hugo.

The movie itself is a fun romp and mindless fun ! It was hard to understand some of the dialogue, next time I will watch with subtitles !

The lenticular is also one of the best I have seen off late.

I would probably soil myself watching this in 3d on 120" I also agree about the dialogue, We actually had to skip back a few times to understand certain lines but it wasnt bothersome in the least to me. I did remark too, to my wife during the movie, about the excellent use of camera movement, what a trip! I love that certain directors and dp's arent afraid to let the camera fly around or swoop or flip, it added a very nice kind of rollercoaster perspective at times. What fun!

[MovieFanatic2010]

Originally Posted by Big3dfan

I have to say this is one of the best conversions out there...infant better than some native 3d I have seen like Underworld and Resident evil.

The 3d is very well used and it was a pure joy to zoom through scenes with the flying camera! Some scenes have wowed me as to how the hell did they make it so good. The volume is so evident in smallest detail as if it's a native 3d.

If this is what conversions look like, I have to say 3d future is secure ! For reference I watched this on my 120" Epson 3010 and the 16:9 aspect ratio is a pure joy to watch as it was in Hugo.

The movie itself is a fun romp and mindless fun ! It was hard to understand some of the dialogue, next time I will watch with subtitles !

The lenticular is also one of the best I have seen off late.

Great to hear you liked it I will be watching this tonight on my Epson 3010 as well........ There is nothing like 3D on a Big Screen Please post some pictures of your set up..... Thanks

[Big3dfan]

Originally Posted by MovieFanatic2010

Great to hear you liked it I will be watching this tonight on my Epson 3010 as well........ There is nothing like 3D on a Big Screen Please post some pictures of your set up..... Thanks

You will not regret it !

I have observed that many times when other say 3D was so-so in a certain movie.......I found the opposite on the 120".....,my explanation is that bigger screen gives wider separation of images and naturally results in more depth.

Wrath in particular has some amazing camera fly-by sequences and this is the best technique to show off 3D.....especial the climax is nothing but 3D-AWESOMNESS !!

Dreamworks routinely employs this technique in many moveis like KungfuPanda12, MvsA, Megamind etc which results in superior 3D compared to Pixar.

BTW watched Transformers 3D 3rd time yesterday....I didn't like the 3D first time around....but am absolutely wowed with it 3rd time ! Can't explain that !

My setup is ultra simplistic...nothing to brag about....PJ is on a coffee table and screen is a pulldown screen. No batcave. But that doesn't stop me from having the best 3D experience I have seen thanks to the superb quality of 3010 in brightness and colors and amazing image size.

[sookymonster]

Sad...still waiting here in Australia...You guys are lucky!

[MovieFanatic2010]

I just watched this last night and i loved it........ The 3D was unreal for a conversion..... It was way better than the first one in every aspect.... My 2 Subwoofers and Bass Shakers got a real workout during this movie.... My whole room was constantly shaking through out the whole movie..... I think the 3D added so much more excitement to the film... If i watched it in 2D i do not think i would of liked it as much.... This is the reason i got a 3D projector..... I am glad the aspect ration was 1.85:1... I think that is the best ratio to view 3D Blu-rays ......This was the best conversion that i have seen so far.... Anyway it was well worth the price and i will be watching this again.

[poke smot]

Originally Posted by MovieFanatic2010

I just watched this last night and i loved it........ The 3D was unreal for a conversion..... It was way better than the first one in every aspect.... My 2 Subwoofers and Bass Shakers got a real workout during this movie.... My whole room was constantly shaking through out the whole movie..... I think the 3D added so much more excitement to the film... If i watched it in 2D i do not think i would of liked it as much.... This is the reason i got a 3D projector..... I am glad the aspect ration was 1.85:1... I think that is the best ratio to view 3D Blu-rays ......This was the best conversion that i have seen so far.... Anyway it was well worth the price and i will be watching this again.

yeah buuddy! +1