Jack the Giant Slayer (2013) Blu-ray 3D [Region Free]

[BleedOrange11]

Jack the Giant Slayer isn't a conversion. (But maybe the original comment was a joke?)

Originally Posted by Impossible

The conversion argument just doesn't wash anymore as the conversions of the last 2 years have been far superior to anything filmed natively.

Totally disagree. There just hasn't been much phenomenal, native live-action content with a good story.

[Impossible]

Originally Posted by BleedOrange11

Jack the Giant Slayer isn't a conversion. (But maybe the original comment was a joke?)


Totally disagree. There just hasn't been much phenomenal, native live-action content with a good story.

I meant the actual 3D. Apart from Hugo, the conversions whooped everything else that was shot natively.

[BleedOrange11]

I have high expectations for Jack the Giant Slayer and several others that I haven't seen yet, but at the very least, I'd rate the 3D in these films above Titanic, The Avengers, Top Gun, MIB III, John Carter, etc.

Hugo
Flying Swords of Dragon Gate
Prometheus
Resident Evil: Retribution
Journey 2: The Mysterious Island
Pina
Drive Angry
Rescue
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey
The Three Musketeers
Final Destination 5
Sanctum
Life of Pi
Plus almost every animated film

Conversions will never be as satisfying because the director can't get 3D feedback of what he's shooting while he's on set. Not to mention the current technical challenge of converting things like hair. Maybe it's just me over-analyzing things, but there are too many little quirks in converted depth that look wrong. Titanic is the only one I've seen that's come close to looking like native depth, and it wasn't even originally story-boarded to use 3D dramatically.

[Impossible]

Originally Posted by BleedOrange11

I have high expectations for Jack the Giant Slayer and several others that I haven't seen yet, but at the very least, I'd rate the 3D in these films above Titanic, The Avengers, Top Gun, MIB III, John Carter, etc.

Hugo
Flying Swords of Dragon Gate
Prometheus
Resident Evil: Retribution
Journey 2: The Mysterious Island
Pina
Drive Angry
Rescue
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey
The Three Musketeers
Final Destination 5
Sanctum
Life of Pi
Plus almost every animated film

Conversions will never be as satisfying because the director can't get 3D feedback of what he's shooting while he's on set. Not to mention the current technical challenge of converting things like hair. Maybe it's just me over-analyzing things, but there are too many little quirks in converted depth that look wrong. Titanic is the only one I've seen that's come close to looking like native depth, and it wasn't even originally story-boarded to use 3D dramatically.

I haven't seen Pi or Hobbit yet in 3D, but Prometheus was very weak 3D I thought. I would say Titanic, Avengers, Abe Lincoln, Wrath, Top Gun (apart from the dire PQ) and many others have been just as good if not better than anything I have seen that was native. They were certainly better than Spiderman or Prometheus.

I don't even count animated films as native as they are all entirely computer generated and not 'filmed' as such. TBH I don't really enjoy live action 3D half as much as animated films as I don't ever think they really 'look right' or that convincing in 3D.

[BleedOrange11]

We'll agree to disagree then. Recent conversions are more of a 3.5/5 to 4/5 (Titanic) for me, which is about the same level of enjoyment I get from the 3D in TASM, Dredd, and other stuff with poor live 3D and strong animated 3D.

Originally Posted by Impossible

TBH I don't really enjoy live action 3D half as much as animated films as I don't ever think they really 'look right' or that convincing in 3D.

The only 3D movies that have looked like real life from 6-8 ft away on my TV have been IMAX documentaries with really strong parallax and maybe parts of Journey to the Center of the Earth, Sanctum, Hugo, and a couple of others. It's a different story if I'm sitting in a theater though, especially IMAX.

[Paul H]

Originally Posted by BleedOrange11

The only 3D movies that have looked like real life from 6-8 ft away on my TV have been IMAX documentaries with really strong parallax and maybe parts of Journey to the Center of the Earth, Sanctum, Hugo, and a couple of others. It's a different story if I'm sitting in a theater though, especially IMAX.

Consumers need appropriate upgrade refinement capabilities for their home systems.
It's going to take time for IMAX quality at home. The consumer 3D display/technology, IMO, is the major problematic culprit for the lack of a native "real-life"-look perception on the home dispaly. It causes all sorts of disturbing variability proclamations. IMO, very few people have capable equipment which can depict the artiistic 3D nuances professionally authored and captured on consumer BD 3D media.

[Chaotic]

I saw this in 2D and loved. i plan on seeing it in 3D next time. Day 1 blu buy.

[Impossible]

Originally Posted by Paul H

Consumers need appropriate upgrade refinement capabilities for their home systems.
It's going to take time for IMAX quality at home. The consumer 3D display/technology, IMO, is the major problematic culprit for the lack of a native "real-life"-look perception on the home dispaly. It causes all sorts of disturbing variability proclamations. IMO, very few people have capable equipment which can depict the artiistic 3D nuances professionally authored and captured on consumer BD 3D media.

I don't think cinema or IMAX 3D look half as good home cinema 3D.

[BleedOrange11]

Originally Posted by Paul H

Consumers need appropriate upgrade refinement capabilities for their home systems.
It's going to take time for IMAX quality at home. The consumer 3D display/technology, IMO, is the major problematic culprit for the lack of a native "real-life"-look perception on the home dispaly. It causes all sorts of disturbing variability proclamations. IMO, very few people have capable equipment which can depict the artiistic 3D nuances professionally authored and captured on consumer BD 3D media.

The big problem with the "image disparity" setup in theater vs. home 3D is viewing distance, which of course affects the angle that the eyes converge and the roundness (or volumetric proportions) of on-screen objects. Since movies are typically authored for theatrical exhibition, they always look less round than they're supposed to on typical home setups. I think that (along with shy filmmakers and conversions) is the reason why only movies with giant parallax values look life-like on my TV.

A 1080p 3D HMD might be the only way to ever see the 3D without any sort of negative side-effects from the display method. I've never tried one out, but would love to do so. Does this viewing method solve the problem I'm talking about, or is viewing distance and roundness still an issue if the interaxials aren't specifically tailored for the headset?