Gamer 3D Blu-ray (2009) [Region Locked]

[UFAlien]

Holy crap, DoBlu gave a 3D movie a bad review for 3D. Guys, the world just exploded. Though it's all about the fast editing and nothing about conversion errors, so... eh.

I'll need to take a closer look later but glancing quickly at the YouTube sample through anaglyph lenses, I was pleasantly surprised. Definitely sloppy, and would not at all hold up to a theatrical release, but also not nearly as bad as I'd feared. Could be amusing to watch through at home. If Crank really does end up getting a conversion of similar quality and it's fairly cheap, I'd probably pick it up.

[tigermoth]

Originally Posted by Jsmith82

I put that video onto a USB card, popped it in the TV and watched it last night in 3d.

And I wasn't that disappointed...

Looking at I,Robot - the conversion was a little more clean cut but there was not depth, to the point some scenes were almost identical to the 2d versions, also there was a lot of wavy roto lines from frame skipping the maps. They would pan a decent depth here or there, but the majority was minimal which I chalk up to the ability of a 3 person team on a 3 month project - there is not a lot of time to properly paint in a ton of background and a stretch instead while using less depth speeds up the process.

Looking at Gamer 3D - the first thing that came to mind was that they listened to the feedback around Fox's first catalog conversion, and semi acted accordingly. This conversion has a much greater sense of depth, at points I paused it just to check out the separation and was pretty surprised they went that far, really they did go for it. Where I think Gamer 3D is going to bring in the negative reviews, buyer refusals, and criticism - they really relied (from what I saw) exclusively on the stretch and zero artistry IE instead of drawing in the missing backgrounds, they stretch what is already there to fill. It works, but some scenes look strange because of it, and with that method you're going to see a lot of errors. A lot of "bends" in objects that shouldn't be bent.

The overall it appears as an improvement on the catalog conversion process, though I don't think it's good enough to appease the majority, especially around here. I'm not expecting very many of the regs to buy it, but I'm planning on picking it up. I'll write a more thorough review at that time.

Except there is no separation between "layers" in this garbage. It's all just one lumpy image like an extreme emboss. I robot may have been flat with minimal layer separation but at least they tried to do it right.

[BleedOrange11]

Originally Posted by Jsmith82

Well, we are the pros

I just have a very glass half full attitude on these conversion processes, I try to offer encouragement, helpful notions towards the final goal, and try to focus on improvements (because I'm stupid enough to think that studios browse sites like this looking for opinions and feedback ).

I admire your optimism and passion for 3D conversion. My affinities lie more with native stereography and movies that use 3D as a story-telling tool.

[Jsmith82]

Originally Posted by BleedOrange11

I admire your optimism and passion for 3D conversion. My affinities lie more with native stereography and movies that use 3D as a story-telling tool.

It's one of my favorite parts of the format, conversion blows my mind! I find the process fascinating. I agree that native should always be first option and 3d is an excellent story telling tool, I'm in love with the format in general and hope to see more regular films explore the option.

Tigermoth, I do agree that the I,Robot team took a more artistic approach to thier conversion, though they to stretched the background to fill rendered perspective blanks, they most the time tried to correct the warps and bends. It really lacked depth and that is where I think Gamer stepped up - the depth is undoubtably there, but it appears they stretched it all and didn't fill blanks at all, which causes the odd looking errors.

It's obvious you don't have an interest in it anyhow so I don't want to get in a pointless debate, I just feel this was a step in right direction, not perfect by any means, but a step forward.

Who knows, maybe I'll think differently after watching it in its entirety.

[Jsmith82]

This might help explain what I'm talking about - Here is a rendered shot in I,Robot pre touch up:



Notice the smudges around its body, the warps in the background, etc.

After that team made the correction:



Source: click here

The less or easier the correction needed, the less time the frame takes - the less depth you try and implement, the less correction is needed.

Now I think the Gamer team went for more depth as one of, if not the largest complaint over I,robot was the lack of depth with a lot of the reviews comparing many scenes to the 2d version, but they did not go back and correct those warps in the background which gave it a sloppier appearance.

It's the question Z and I were discussing earlier in the topic - would you rather have it clean with little depth, or sloppy with more depth? Inevitably the answer would be a clean conversion with more depth, the best of both worlds. I think they are moving towards it, give it another year or two and I'm willing to bet the quality greatly improves.

[Impossible]

I'd rather if they weren't going to do it properly they didn't do it in the first place.

Both titles are dung and all they do is give 3D & conversions a worse name than they already have.

If we as customers accept this kind of mediocrity, it is what we will get more of.

Speak with your wallet and stop funding this shit otherwise we might stop getting great conversions and be stuck with only this crap!

[Zivouhr]

The Three Stooges 3D and March of the Wooden Soldiers (Babes in Toyland) 3D are each 14.99$, both with good 3D conversions with clear 3D layers all the way. (I don't regret buying them even slightly).
If this movie, Gamer 3D, can live up to those respectable 3D standards at 14.99$, that would be worthwhile, but from the sound of things, maybe the Gamer 3D conversion budget was too low?

[UFAlien]

Well the titles Ziv just mentioned were done by Legend3D, they of Top Gun and Transformers, not by some new algorithm an electronics company (JVC or Samsung) made up. Legend3D DOES use a ton of algorithms and other "shortcuts" - chairman Barry Sandrews (who always comes off as a total egomaniacal jerk to me, just as an aside) loves to brag about them in interviews - but since the conversion business is their bread and butter and they've been working at it longer it's totally understandable their tools would be much better. They also seem to have more of a human element - understandable since they have an entire workforce whose job it is to do 3D conversion.

One of the things Barry loves talking about is just how ready they are to do DTV 3D conversions. Top Gun, in a way, is an example of that. It got an IMAX 3D run, sure, but it was very limited and only pulled in $3 million. I was pretty underwhelmed by that conversion, but there's no question that on a technical level it was far better than I, Robot or Gamer. I do suspect they're considerably more expensive too, though - despite what Barry says about affordability.

Anyhow, took a closer look at Gamer and yep, it's pretty damn bad by any objective standard with tons of warping all over the place, but I guess I can't hate it as much as I should because truth be told it's still not QUITE the disaster I was expecting.

A thought did occur to me though; a lot of people are talking about how this and Crank don't make sense for 3D since the quick cutting means you don't have time to really get a sense of depth. After looking at this, I'm pretty sure that was the point. The errors are much more noticeable the longer the shot is. Neveldine/Taylor's frentic editing style serves as a distraction from all the screw-ups.

[tigermoth]

i'M SURE THIS WILL INTEREST THE VERY SMALL NUMBER OF PEOPLE INTERESTED IN CONVERSION TECHNOLOGY BUT EVEN THEY MUST ADMIT THIS ISN'T FIT FOR THE CONSUMER MARKET. Sorry I wrote that in caps, couldn't be bothered re writing it. When technology is this bad it must be refined until it is ready for the market. I just can't rationalise a major studios decision to release this.

[Jsmith82]

Originally Posted by UFAlien

A thought did occur to me though; a lot of people are talking about how this and Crank don't make sense for 3D since the quick cutting means you don't have time to really get a sense of depth. After looking at this, I'm pretty sure that was the point. The errors are much more noticeable the longer the shot is. Neveldine/Taylor's frentic editing style serves as a distraction from all the screw-ups.

I had thought about this as well, and it could definitely be. They listed the first 4 conversions (in no particular order) to be Gamer, Crank, Bangkok Dangerous, and The Decent.

I've seen the Decent, that is a bit slower. I never saw the gem Bangkok Dangerous, no interest in it. Truth told I've never seen gamer before either, no interest, but the conversion is what drew me in.

Originally Posted by IMPOSIBRUUUU!!

I'd rather if they weren't going to do it properly they didn't do it in the first place.

Both titles are dung and all they do is give 3D & conversions a worse name than they already have.

If we as customers accept this kind of mediocrity, it is what we will get more of.

Speak with your wallet and stop funding this shit otherwise we might stop getting great conversions and be stuck with only this crap!

Preach on with your bad self there, Impossible!

I do agree with you that if everyone came out and raved over these 2 conversions, the studio would probably find a comfortable place and probably not advance much in corrective action with their conversion errors, but it wasn't the case with IRobot and doubtfully that will not be the case with Gamer. We ALL see the errors, they are in your face impossible not to see (no pun intended). It looks safe to say the majority around this forum doesn't have an interest in picking this up, and I take a lot of notion from you guys and opinions around here for what we'll expect to see in the GP - I'm not expecting to see a lot of praise, or sales over this. I'll be buying a copy for my own interests however I'll definitely come back here and share my honest thoughts be they good or bad.

Hollywood will always revolve around money, but if you look at Clash and Airbender, these shit conversions that rode the 3D coat tails of Avatar - Clash is still ranked #18 opening weekend on a list of 150+ 3D movies since 1980 (Boxofficemojo source), and that theatrical release was a junker - pure cash grab, pissed me off, I'm sure you as well if you saw it. Even though they could deem that movie a success IE profits, the conversion standards were raised after that year on most theatrical releases and I'd like to think that bar went up via the feedback of the public. They got our money, and a whole lot of earfuls, therefore reacted accordingly.

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

The Three Stooges 3D

True story, I had the VHS that contained those episodes and watched the hell out of it when I was younger. This was one of those "no way... really?? Awesome!" conversion choices for me. What were the odds lol, I still laugh.

Originally Posted by tigermoth

i'M SURE THIS WILL INTEREST THE VERY SMALL NUMBER OF PEOPLE INTERESTED IN CONVERSION TECHNOLOGY BUT EVEN THEY MUST ADMIT THIS ISN'T FIT FOR THE CONSUMER MARKET. Sorry I wrote that in caps, couldn't be bothered re writing it. When technology is this bad it must be refined until it is ready for the market. I just can't rationalise a major studios decision to release this.

Agreed - I do think this is moving in a good direction but the quality has already started pissing everyone off, before it's even hit the shelves.

[UFAlien]

Wow, these guys must be blind in one eye.

[Zivouhr]

Avsforum.com's review definitely seems to suggest Gamer's conversion of 3D is decent, but nothing spectacular. The other review suggests the 3D is "very good", but doesn't mention "very good compared to"...

I Robot 3D I don't regret buying, but only because I didn't own the Blu Ray, only had the DVD, and because it's one of my favorite sci fi movies (which needs a sequel). The 3D on the other hand, is hardly worth mentioning. It's there, but barely most of the time. Had I already owned the Blu Ray, I would have regretted buying the 3D version because it is lacking except for some better 3D during action scenes.

3D Conversions take a lot of work, that's for certain. The 3D Team's budget has to be large enough to allow for a medium to strong 3D result. If the team is not given that budget or time, weak 3D or an error filled conversion is what 3D fans might expect.

[Mikeatron85]

I think I could stomach this conversion a little easier if there weren't obvious errors to my eyes on every single frame. The rest of the movie may be better, but those first 5 minutes aren't helping to convince me otherwise

[dogofwar]

I'm picking this up tomorrow for sure, with the U&S this is 9.99.

[dogofwar]

I wasn't able to pick this up, BB said they were not going to carry in the store. At least my location wasn't.

[Jsmith82]

Originally Posted by dogofwar

I wasn't able to pick this up, BB said they were not going to carry in the store. At least my location wasn't.

Looks like Best Buy, Target, and Wally World are order only and not carrying it in the store.

A couple more bullets in the gun there fellas, have at it...

[samdvd1]

Originally Posted by UFAlien

Wow, these guys must be blind in one eye.

What are your opinions on the 3D as a whole?

[ObiWanShinobi]

Originally Posted by dogofwar

I'm picking this up tomorrow for sure, with the U&S this is 9.99.

Instinctively I pre-ordered mine online. Should be on my doorstep when I get home

[ObiWanShinobi]

Watched it last night.

Pleasantly surprised by the 3D in this. Its good not great but the sense of depth is apparent and pleasing mostly throughout. I forgot how shaky and all over the place the camera work is in this...it DOES make it hard for the 3D to stand out or make a lasting impression when it cuts from scene to scene at such a rapid pace. It doesnt completely ruin the 3D during these sequences but its a bit annoying at times.

The movie itself? As "meh" as the last time I saw it but it was more enjoyable as trashy cinema this time around.

[Zivouhr]

Originally Posted by ObiWanShinobi

Watched it last night.

Pleasantly surprised by the 3D in this. Its good not great but the sense of depth is apparent and pleasing mostly throughout. I forgot how shaky and all over the place the camera work is in this...it DOES make it hard for the 3D to stand out or make a lasting impression when it cuts from scene to scene at such a rapid pace. It doesnt completely ruin the 3D during these sequences but its a bit annoying at times.

The movie itself? As "meh" as the last time I saw it but it was more enjoyable as trashy cinema this time around.

Good to hear it wasn't a total bust with the 3D despite the shaky camera work. It must have been tough for them to track the 3D alignments with all of the motion blur and shakiness in each shot.
I saw this one in theaters way back when, but it wasn't what I was hoping for.
If you have I Robot 3D, how would you compare it (or compared to the weakest 3D movie you've seen)? Thanks ObiWanShinobi.