Star Wars films to get 3D re-release starting in 2012

[nickytea]

I'm fascinated at the widespread opinion that this release (at this point, just the announcement) is somehow doing something negative to them. I just don't get it.

And, seriously? CNN published that? It was all over the place. An aimless, embarrassing mess.

 

[micdavis]

Don't worry they'll go see it. Oh yes, they will. :lol

 

[darth_myeek]

Express your disapproval by simply not going. I will probably watch the last three only.

If the majority (myself included) agree with this strategy, LFL won't produce EP4. These should be released EP1/EP4 2012, EP2/EP5 2013, EP3/EP6 2014, and in 2015 show 6-packs for those who are still into it.

 

[rollerboi]

I think the 3D re-release benefits from being able to be digitally "beamed" to the theaters. Any 3D capable (digital) screens will no doubt be used to screen the 3D versions of the films. Seems unlikely to me that they'd have film prints struck for this.

The cinema I go to has one 35mm room, the rest are all digital. But only one or two are set up for 3D, with nice glasses that make the alarm go off when you try to sneak them out under your coat. Don't ask.

At any rate, that's a bunch of possibilities to show a 2D version at the same time.

 

[nickytea]

At any rate, that's a bunch of possibilities to show a 2D version at the same time.

Interesting.
I'd be curious to know how many theaters have digital screens that aren't being used for 3D flicks. I know there's only one in my area.

 

[Jennigirl]

To All you haters, GL won't miss your money for not seeing the films in 3d cause you only make up about 5/1000 of 1% of the fans. mere pocket change.

 

[Dave Ward]

Does anyone actually think that Lucas will "miss" a few people not going?

Isn't the point just to have more self-respect than to see 3 movies you already paid once to see, hated, then paid for the dvds and one or two video games too.

 

[jlee562]

I get to share my favorite films in my favorite way (I love 3D) with my boys in a theater. I really don't get the 3D hate..it's cool and immersive. If you are preoccupied with it you wont enjoy a film.

Ebert wrote a really good piece on it, which you should google. But basically, loss of brightness and clarity.

 

[Jennigirl]

Ebert is an old man, I seriously doubt his vision is that great either.
All the 3D films I went to were very bright, and clear when you actually use the Real D Glasses. Some the background is blurry on purpose just like if you were watching say a street performer, because you are concentrating your eyes on him, anything in the background you may notice is blurry cause your vision is not focused directly on them.

 

[Dave Ward]

"Your vision is weak, old man!"

 

[jlee562]

Ebert is an old man, I seriously doubt his vision is that great either.
All the 3D films I went to were very bright, and clear when you actually use the Real D Glasses. Some the background is blurry on purpose just like if you were watching say a street performer, because you are concentrating your eyes on him, anything in the background you may notice is blurry cause your vision is not focused directly on them.

Well, ok, I don't really want to get too deep into it, but, from the technical specs, 3d movies are inherently darker than a 2d movie (based on the way they are currently projected). That's just the way the cookie crumbles. When you add a polarization filter in front of the projector, it's going to make the screen image darker, and then you're wearing glasses.

Roger Ebert: Why I Hate 3D Movies - Newsweek

Lenny Lipton is known as the father of the electronic stereoscopic-display industry. He knows how films made with his systems should look. Current digital projectors, he writes, are “intrinsically inefficient. Half the light goes to one eye and half to the other, which immediately results in a 50 percent reduction in illumination.” Then the glasses themselves absorb light. The vast majority of theaters show 3-D at between three and six foot-lamberts (fLs). Film projection provides about 15fLs. The original IMAX format threw 22fLs at the screen. If you don’t know what a foot-lambert is, join the crowd. (In short: it’s the level of light thrown on the screen from a projector with no film in it.)

I don't really have any delusions of grandeur about what Lucas might or might not do if "fans" don't show up. I'm honestly leaning against seeing the 3d installment just because I don't like 3d. Then again, seeing it on the big screen would be nice...that hasn't happened since the SEs.

 

[cayman shen]

I do have to say, I've heard a few people say that some of us are "stuck in the past" or "resistant to change" and that really twists my nipples. Is newer by default always better? That's idiotic. Just because you CAN doesn't mean you should. Would Casablance benefit from being in color and 3D? Nope. It would look like a tacky "upgrade" of a classic. Yes, SW is an ongoing cultural phenomenon, more than a mere "movie," but it is also a valued piece of cinematic history and ought to be shown a little respect as such. I don't overly object to them being made 3D, but it's a fun gimmick, not an "improvement." :rolleyes

 

[Dave Ward]

I do have to say, I've heard a few people say that some of us are "stuck in the past" or "resistant to change"

Surely it's the reverse? By paying to see a movie you've already seen, on original release, on vhs, rereleased in the cinema, then on DVD, then again in 3D, you're stuck in the past, feeding from the same old trough.

 

[cayman shen]

Does anyone actually think that Lucas will "miss" a few people not going?

Isn't the point just to have more self-respect than to see 3 movies you already paid once to see, hated, then paid for the dvds and one or two video games too.

Actually I paid for the expensive widescreen box set VHS of Ep 1 too, because Lucas wasn't going to put the saga out on DVD. :rolleyes

Regarding 3D, I hope that if it's here to stay, there is always the option to view in 2D, because seriusly, it makes my head pound.

 

[Skalen Fehl]

I don't care for another version. If anything I look forward to seeing if we'll get that live action series. I'm enjoying the current Clone Wars series, which in my opinion is better than the movies.

 

[Skyler101]

Cool...

I get to spend more money on a film I have seen hundreds of times.

Like my VHS copies, Beta copies, Laserdisk copies, DVD copies, and holodeath copies are not enough.

Sorry, but George can find the cash for his hookers someplace else...

 

[TheRealMcFly]

I don't think its fair to judge 3D as whole. Sure the goal is the same, but there are different technologies at work here.

Alarmed glasses. Yep, thats Dolby 3D. Probably my preferred way to see 3D. Instantly avoiding two major 3D pitfalls. Get a headache watching 3D? Its probably a polarized lenses in your glasses, and perhaps the video files (left and right eye) are not properly synched, or perhaps misaligned.

Too dark? Maybe the projector needs a new lamp.

Lots of factors, sure. This doesn't even include your ability to see. If you have problems with one of your eyes, of course 3D will not be for you. But I don't think its fair to make a blanket statement based on one bad experience. Give it a few trys at different locations. Hate to see anyone miss out.

Again I'll throw this out there, nothing to see till 2015.

 

[steveo]

I will probably see them just because I'm a sucker. With that said, honestly, it's not going to make them any better or 'cooler' than they are. The story and characters make a movie, not all the fancy techniques. If you start out with a bad story and bad characters, no amount of tinkering with any aspect is going to make it a better or more enjoyable experience. Now, moving on to the OT, since ANH, ESB and ROTJ are already cool movies, 3d might add to the experience, but it won't make them better because they're already great experiences.

I'm kinda glad he's starting with TPM because hopefully by the time ANH comes around, they'll already have the technique down, so the 3d effect will be better.

 

[Westies14]

Until 3D is TRUE 3D, holographic 3D, it will always be distracting. The depth of field (what's blurry and what's in focus) is locked, right now. Despite the fact that you can look at something close to you or far in the distance rather than at the principle actors, it will never come into focus the way it would if you actually looked at something close to you or off in the distance. This is what gives many people headaches, even if they don't recognize why they're getting them. Your eyes have been trained to think they can focus on anything on any plane, and being unable to as they try to take it in causes a terrible strain for many. Of course, on a flat screen depth of field is locked as well, but you're not invited to change your focus in the same way. 3D asks you to look at these elements but refuses to show them to you! There are other drawbacks of course, like filmmakers doing shots just for the 3D aspect of it rather than serving the story as best they can, the cut luminance, the crummy 3D conversions of 2D films... Give me a well-composed flat screen and a well-told story any day!

 

[jlee562]

Too dark? Maybe the projector needs a new lamp.

As I posted above, the relative darkness of a 3d movie compared to a traditional 2d movie is inherent in the technology.

Until 3D is TRUE 3D, holographic 3D, it will always be distracting. The depth of field (what's blurry and what's in focus) is locked, right now. Despite the fact that you can look at something close to you or far in the distance rather than at the principle actors, it will never come into focus the way it would if you actually looked at something close to you or off in the distance. This is what gives many people headaches, even if they don't recognize why they're getting them. Your eyes have been trained to think they can focus on anything on any plane, and being unable to as they try to take it in causes a terrible strain for many. Of course, on a flat screen depth of field is locked as well, but you're not invited to change your focus in the same way. 3D asks you to look at these elements but refuses to show them to you! There are other drawbacks of course, like filmmakers doing shots just for the 3D aspect of it rather than serving the story as best they can, the cut luminance, the crummy 3D conversions of 2D films... Give me a well-composed flat screen and a well-told story any day!

thumbsup:thumbsup

Well said!