Geostorm (2017) Blu-ray 3D [Region Free]

[MercurySeven]

Originally Posted by Hardkore

I never said there was. I may have accidentally implied that but didn't mean to. Most movies now a days tend to try to take themselves too seriously. It's nice to just sit back and enjoy the ride from time to time.

Exactly what I'm hoping for with this one. A big-destruction rollercoaster. If it's even half as entertaining as San Andreas and 2012, I'll have gotten my money's worth. Fingers crossed for some high-end 3-D as well.

[Breakspear]

I'm conflicted. I don't think I agree with 'turn off your brain' sentiment, as I feel it's just an excuse for bad filmmaking. A film can be light, fun, not take itself seriously and still be made well. Pacific Rim is a great example, it's a movie about giant robots fighting giant monsters but it has great direction, characters and some quotable dialogue. This film seems to lack those. However, I do own some bad films because they have nice 3D lol.

[MercurySeven]

Originally Posted by Breakspear

I'm conflicted. I don't think I agree with 'turn off your brain' sentiment, as I feel it's just an excuse for bad filmmaking. A film can be light, fun, not take itself seriously and still be made well. Pacific Rim is a great example, it's a movie about giant robots fighting giant monsters but it has great direction, characters and some quotable dialogue. This film seems to lack those. However, I do own some bad films because they have nice 3D lol.

We'll have to see. I think we all have our guilty pleasure movies, though--the 'feast for the eyes, famine for the brain' variety. The Fast and Furious films are good examples. They're cinematic lobotomies, but they're also good fun and technically well-made. Most Hollywood blockbusters fit that stripe. I'd even put Pacific Rim in that category. There's not a single thing about it that engages my brain, but it's a dazzling spectacle. If there are enough elements that we like, we're happy to just go along for the ride.

For a disaster movie junkie like me, Geostorm has guilty pleasure written all over it. I guess I'll find out sometime tomorrow...

[reewinder]

They didn't have a Thursday night early showing for this which got me worried. Usually if there's no early screening the day before then the movie is kinda bad. I did get tickets for tonight but to my surprise the theater I usually go to has one 3D showing per day for the week. It's playing on one of 17 screens only with the last showing in 3D and the rest of the day in 2D only. I have never ever seen my theater do this before.
I'll try and track down the GM that runs the place and ask them about it.

[mar3o]

I wanted to see this in 3D but my local Showcases are only having 1 3D showing per day and it's at 10:00pm, too late for my girlfriend and I to go. We always go in the afternoon, but lately my Showcases have been dropping most 3D showings.

So I'll probably skip it and wait until it's on 3D blu-ray. They are purposely killing 3D. They have an agenda and I have no idea what it is or why. Hollywood spends the money to make these 3D films and conversions, yet they barely get a 3D theatrical release at all, and half the time lately no US 3D blu-ray release at all. What is their end goal here? Why make 3D films not to show them? How can people see it and spend money if they don't play it?

[MercurySeven]

Okay, the good news first: there's some very solid 3-D in Geostorm. The space sequences have impressive depth, as strong as anything in Independence Day 2 or Gravity. Quite a bit of the film is set on the Dutchboy space station, so it was a pleasure, visually, to watch those segments. The disaster scenes on Earth are fine in terms of 3-D, but nothing striking (more about those in a minute). It felt as though the stereo team at least tried to push the layering and depth whenever they could throughout the rest of the film, though they were hampered by too many shots of characters just talking. All in all, not a bad effort.

The bad news is that the marketing for this film is a total con job. This isn't a disaster movie; it's a sci-fi conspiracy mystery/thriller with a handful of trailer-bait destruction scenes inserted arbitrarily. There's so much technobabble and waffle that I got bored well before the money shots from the trailer showed up. If you go in expecting anything remotely on a par with San Andreas or 2012 then you've been duped. The big disaster stuff appears randomly, quickly, and far too much time is spent waiting for it. If the mystery storyline had been gripping, I wouldn't have minded as much, but it was utterly predictable. Three of us went to see this, and we all shared the same verdict afterwards: a huge disappointment.

Surprisingly, though, the 3-D was the only thing I found satisfying. Those space scenes really delivered.

[Mobe1969]

Originally Posted by Breakspear

I'm conflicted. I don't think I agree with 'turn off your brain' sentiment, as I feel it's just an excuse for bad filmmaking. A film can be light, fun, not take itself seriously and still be made well. Pacific Rim is a great example, it's a movie about giant robots fighting giant monsters but it has great direction, characters and some quotable dialogue. This film seems to lack those. However, I do own some bad films because they have nice 3D lol.

I'd have to disagree with you purely on your example movie. Pacific Rim absolutely requires switching off your brain. The entire premise was ludicrous from every aspect. I mean you have a spot in the Pacific ocean spurting random monsters, you set up defenses and offenses around that. Not try to build a wall around the entire pacific ocean. And the dual pilots and their synchronized dancing another over thought concept. Why not have something more logical like say a pilot and weapons officer. It is the best example of a movie where I know I have to switch my brain off and I do, but it still gets to me...

[Zivouhr]

Originally Posted by MercurySeven

Okay, the good news first: there's some very solid 3-D in Geostorm. The space sequences have impressive depth, as strong as anything in Independence Day 2 or Gravity. Quite a bit of the film is set on the Dutchboy space station, so it was a pleasure, visually, to watch those segments. The disaster scenes on Earth are fine in terms of 3-D, but nothing striking (more about those in a minute). It felt as though the stereo team at least tried to push the layering and depth whenever they could throughout the rest of the film, though they were hampered by too many shots of characters just talking. All in all, not a bad effort.

[Show spoiler]
The bad news is that the marketing for this film is a total con job. This isn't a disaster movie; it's a sci-fi conspiracy mystery/thriller with a handful of trailer-bait destruction scenes inserted arbitrarily. There's so much technobabble and waffle that I got bored well before the money shots from the trailer showed up. If you go in expecting anything remotely on a par with San Andreas or 2012 then you've been duped. The big disaster stuff appears randomly, quickly, and far too much time is spent waiting for it. If the mystery storyline had been gripping, I wouldn't have minded as much, but it was utterly predictable. Three of us went to see this, and we all shared the same verdict afterwards: a huge disappointment.

Surprisingly, though, the 3-D was the only thing I found satisfying. Those space scenes really delivered.

Thanks for the 3D review MercurySeven. The 3D sounds hopeful.

Sorry to hear the movie was not a direct disaster movie as the marketing suggests.
Reminds me of Armageddon with Bruce Willis. That was disappointing since the movie did not even live up to the title. It was all about preventing it, with just hints of what could've happened with the meteorites hitting the city. I'm guessing this sounds similar in the sense that it's not the disaster films that 2012 or San Andreas are.

I still haven't seen Deep Impact or The Day After Tomorrow yet.
But I did see The Day After with Jason Robards, from the 80's, which lived up to the term disaster movie; during and after a nuclear war.

Still good to hear the 3D held up. I wonder who converted it.

[Law212]

Armageddon is probably my favourite disaster movie. Though i think i like most. I cant think of one i dont like.

[Hardkore]

Not too bad of a movie. It had some really nice 3D in it, high end medium to strong. The interior dialog heavy room scenes even had enough separation and depth to show some nice 3D. Certainly worth it to see this in 3D.

The only 3D trailer before this was Thor Ragnarok. That had some of the best 3D I have seen in a while.

[Creed]

Originally Posted by Hardkore

Not too bad of a movie. It had some really nice 3D in it, high end medium to strong. The interior dialog heavy room scenes even had enough separation and depth to show some nice 3D. Certainly worth it to see this in 3D.

The only 3D trailer before this was Thor Ragnarok.

[Show spoiler]That had some of the best 3D I have seen in a while.

Can't wait to hopefully see the film in 3D for my B-day!

[Zivouhr]

Originally Posted by Hardkore

Not too bad of a movie. It had some really nice 3D in it, high end medium to strong. The interior dialog heavy room scenes even had enough separation and depth to show some nice 3D. Certainly worth it to see this in 3D.

The only 3D trailer before this was Thor Ragnarok. That had some of the best 3D I have seen in a while.

Good to hear you also enjoyed the 3D, thanks Hardkore. Knowing more about the movie, maybe I can see it without being disappointed that it's not a direct disaster film, but one about preventing disasters.

[8traxrule]

They are purposely killing 3D. They have an agenda and I have no idea what it is or why. Hollywood spends the money to make these 3D films and conversions, yet they barely get a 3D theatrical release at all, and half the time lately no US 3D blu-ray release at all. What is their end goal here? Why make 3D films not to show them? How can people see it and spend money if they don't play it?

People at theaters say they usually sell more tickets for the 2D shows than 3D, which shows the stupidity of the general public as a lot of them say they don't "like" 3D or wearing the glasses, but I bet a lot of it is also due to the upcharges. At any rate, it's clear at this point that they're not making more money charging extra for 3D, so why are they still doing it? I don't go to theaters a lot because of the pricing, but if a movie's in 3D I'll either see it that way at full price or not see it at all. I'd hoped that if people avoided 3D because of the upcharges then they'd simply drop those, but instead they're just dropping 3D showings! Very sad and proof of how messed-up the whole theater business is.

[UFAlien]

This was godawful. Worst blockbuster of the year. The Last Knight was at least bad in a head-slapping, disbelief-inducing, unintentionally amusing way. This thing here is just a boring, sloppy, lowest-common-denominator, nigh-unwatchable mess.

Thanks to MercurySeven and a few others I knew going in there wasn't much disaster, and that point really can't be overstated - all the disaster scenes in the movie are in the trailer. There's disaster in the trailer that's not in the movie. There's maybe ten minutes of it in the whole movie, which might be okay if it was spaced well or especially good/thrilling, neither of which is true. They're chopped-up, brief, and unegaging, totally not worth the wait.

And the techno-thriller that surrounds them is not only stupid and impossible, it's also so unbelievably predictable that it's practically impossible NOT to guess the bad guy the first or second time they appear. The characters are all paper-thin cliches and most of them are actively unlikeable. It's a boring slog of bad acting, horrible writing, and worse editing. Even the special effects are mostly awful. I honestly can't think of a single substantial redeeming element.

The 3D - a conversion by Stereo D - is very deep most of the time. Unfortunately it's also one of the sloppiest conversions I've seen in a while. Translucent or transparent objects like windows and out-of-focus plants pull the background forward with them constantly. Warping is visible in many scenes along the edges of objects or even trailing behind moving objects (one shot of a car pulling up to the White House is especially horrible in this regard). Human faces are sculpted unconvincingly, especially the noses.

I'm all for supporting 3D and trying to save it, but you've gotta pick your battles. I can't condone anyone paying to watch this. It's at 15% on RottenTomatoes and projected for an opening under $14 million. Buying a ticket and subjecting yourself to this is not going to help 3D's cause at all. Don't waste the hours of your life.

[reewinder]

I won't get into the quality of the film itself but the 3D in this was acceptable for me. I thought it made the film better and more worthwhile than a letdown. It wasn't showcase 3D material but it also wasn't lackluster.
For the type of movie this is, I was entertained enough to recommend it.

[Zivouhr]

If every 3D film had medium to strong 3D layering (more pop outs), chances are less of the general audiences would be upset about paying extra to see a 3D movie, compared to paying extra to see a nearly 2D, mild 3D presentation as we get more often than we like in cinema (Resident Evil: Final Chapter's mostly mild 3D being one recent example). The trouble is, general audiences often don't know what to expect for many new 3D movies, and if they got burnt once or twice with weak 3D, then they tend to avoid it in the future, assuming the next one's 3D could be just as mild.
Marvel tends to have a better track record, especially with 2017's Guardians of the Galaxy 2's strong 3D, and possibly Thor 3 3D and maybe even Black Panther 3D based on the hopeful 3D in the trailers.

On topic, good to hear this had a noticeable conversion.

Originally Posted by UFAlien

[Show spoiler]This was godawful. Worst blockbuster of the year. The Last Knight was at least bad in a head-slapping, disbelief-inducing, unintentionally amusing way. This thing here is just a boring, sloppy, lowest-common-denominator, nigh-unwatchable mess.

Thanks to MercurySeven and a few others I knew going in there wasn't much disaster, and that point really can't be overstated - all the disaster scenes in the movie are in the trailer. There's disaster in the trailer that's not in the movie. There's maybe ten minutes of it in the whole movie, which might be okay if it was spaced well or especially good/thrilling, neither of which is true. They're chopped-up, brief, and unegaging, totally not worth the wait.

And the techno-thriller that surrounds them is not only stupid and impossible, it's also so unbelievably predictable that it's practically impossible NOT to guess the bad guy the first or second time they appear. The characters are all paper-thin cliches and most of them are actively unlikeable. It's a boring slog of bad acting, horrible writing, and worse editing. Even the special effects are mostly awful. I honestly can't think of a single substantial redeeming element.

The 3D - a conversion by Stereo D - is very deep most of the time. Unfortunately it's also one of the sloppiest conversions I've seen in a while. Translucent or transparent objects like windows and out-of-focus plants pull the background forward with them constantly. Warping is visible in many scenes along the edges of objects or even trailing behind moving objects (one shot of a car pulling up to the White House is especially horrible in this regard). Human faces are sculpted unconvincingly, especially the noses.

I'm all for supporting 3D and trying to save it, but you've gotta pick your battles. I can't condone anyone paying to watch this. It's at 15% on RottenTomatoes and projected for an opening under $14 million. Buying a ticket and subjecting yourself to this is not going to help 3D's cause at all. Don't waste the hours of your life.

Helpful 3D review, thanks UFAlien. I don't mind a few errors as I noticed some warping in San Andreas' 3D once in awhile, though this sounds like a lot more than usual. From Stereo D, thanks!

Originally Posted by reewinder

I won't get into the quality of the film itself but the 3D in this was acceptable for me. I thought it made the film better and more worthwhile than a letdown. It wasn't showcase 3D material but it also wasn't lackluster.
For the type of movie this is, I was entertained enough to recommend it.

Thanks Reewinder for the 3D details. The 3D sounds good enough.

[Creed]

Grace Randolph saw the film in 3D since they're weren't much choices for her and thought it wasn't worth it, but she loved the 3D for the Pacific Rim: Uprising trailer.

[film11]

Originally Posted by creed123

Grace Randolph saw the film in 3D since they're weren't much choices for her and thought it wasn't worth it, but she loved the 3D for the Pacific Rim: Uprising trailer.

I'm sorry. Who?

[xbs2034]

Pretty good 3D I thought. I certainly wouldn't put the space stuff up there with the 3D in Gravity, but it and the weather sequence had some strong 3D, though it was more medium in dialogue sequences as is common.

I also saw it in 4DX (the only 3D option that Regal was having) and while I definitely think that format can be distracting and is limited in the films it works with, this was an ideal fit for that, a well under two hour movie (those effects get tiring in films much over two hours I find), story that suits the effects, and a very dumb and predictable movie which doesn't really matter if you get taken out of the story at some moments.

For the most part, I think it works as dumb fun, but it is very cheesy, in particular one thing that bothered me was the

[Show spoiler]super bowl like celebration when two people were saved at the end. I'm sure everyone is glad they survived and there is relief that the geostorm was stopped, but clearly many thousands had still just died, including tons of government officials such as the vice president, speaker of the house, and presumably most of the democratic party. So you think there would a more restrained mood

No 3D trailer, the Pacific Rim, Last Jedi, and Justice League (think this trailer has been 2D only anyway) trailers all played in 2D

[Zivouhr]

Preview: Pacific Rim 3D trailer, medium 3D. The 3D is not on par with the first film from this trailer anyway... Darn.

Black Panther teaser trailer 3D: medium to strong 3D. Looks promising.

GEOSTORM 3D:

3D Layering: Mostly a nice range of medium, high medium and strong 3D layering and dimension throughout.

3D Pop Outs: Some pop outs like a blurry gun held out of the screen a few times, particles blasting out of the screen during explosions, some snow flakes, etc.

3D Framing: While not many close up shots of people are framed for 3D since they crop the tops of heads off, there are many mid and far range shots that work great for 3D layering in Geostorm 3D.

3D Summary: 8.5/10. A generally very good 3D conversion with medium to strong 3D throughout. I didn't notice any in your face conversion errors on my first view. I didn't stay for the end credits, but it's reported to be a Stereo D conversion (thanks).


The movie kept my interest from start to finish, and I'm thankful for the reviews above which said to go in not expecting a disaster movie. Geostorm entertained me and I actually enjoyed most of the performances from Gerard Butler, Ed Harris, the brother, Abigail Cornish (name? Robocop) and Andy Garcia. This is more of a thriller movie first, with lots of outer space station scenes, as Butler spends much of his time on the space station, where lots of things go wrong. There is a good amount of building tension and things going wrong, with explosions on the space station and a number of disaters on earth that keep things interesting.

I actually really enjoyed the ending's action and build up. The idea of satellites controlling the weather was only partially explained, but the pace of the movie was enjoyable and I found the conflicts in the movie entertaining as well. I liked Geostorm as a movie, though I would call it a lite disaster fiim, and more of a technological/sci-fi thriller instead.