This is the location for conversations that don't fall anywhere else on FlameFans. Whether its politics, culture, the latest techno stuff or just the best places to travel on the web ... this is your forum.

Moderators: jcmanson, Sly Fox, BuryYourDuke

User avatar
By RubberMallet
Registration Days Posts
#336842
yeah, the machinist is a bale movie i think .
By ALUmnus
Registration Days Posts
#337615
Why our brains can't properly process 3-D movies/TV:

http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2011/01/post_4.html
The 3D image is dark, as you mentioned (about a camera stop darker) and small. Somehow the glasses "gather in" the image -- even on a huge Imax screen -- and make it seem half the scope of the same image when looked at without the glasses.

I edited one 3D film back in the 1980's -- "Captain Eo" -- and also noticed that horizontal movement will strobe much sooner in 3D than it does in 2D. This was true then, and it is still true now. It has something to do with the amount of brain power dedicated to studying the edges of things. The more conscious we are of edges, the earlier strobing kicks in.

The biggest problem with 3D, though, is the "convergence/focus" issue. A couple of the other issues -- darkness and "smallness" -- are at least theoretically solvable. But the deeper problem is that the audience must focus their eyes at the plane of the screen -- say it is 80 feet away. This is constant no matter what.

But their eyes must converge at perhaps 10 feet away, then 60 feet, then 120 feet, and so on, depending on what the illusion is. So 3D films require us to focus at one distance and converge at another. And 600 million years of evolution has never presented this problem before. All living things with eyes have always focussed and converged at the same point.

If we look at the salt shaker on the table, close to us, we focus at six feet and our eyeballs converge (tilt in) at six feet. Imagine the base of a triangle between your eyes and the apex of the triangle resting on the thing you are looking at. But then look out the window and you focus at sixty feet and converge also at sixty feet. That imaginary triangle has now "opened up" so that your lines of sight are almost -- almost -- parallel to each other.

We can do this. 3D films would not work if we couldn't. But it is like tapping your head and rubbing your stomach at the same time, difficult. So the "CPU" of our perceptual brain has to work extra hard, which is why after 20 minutes or so many people get headaches. They are doing something that 600 million years of evolution never prepared them for. This is a deep problem, which no amount of technical tweaking can fix. Nothing will fix it short of producing true "holographic" images.

Consequently, the editing of 3D films cannot be as rapid as for 2D films, because of this shifting of convergence: it takes a number of milliseconds for the brain/eye to "get" what the space of each shot is and adjust.

And lastly, the question of immersion. 3D films remind the audience that they are in a certain "perspective" relationship to the image. It is almost a Brechtian trick. Whereas if the film story has really gripped an audience they are "in" the picture in a kind of dreamlike "spaceless" space. So a good story will give you more dimensionality than you can ever cope with.

So: dark, small, stroby, headache inducing, alienating. And expensive. The question is: how long will it take people to realize and get fed up?

All best wishes,

Walter Murch
By ATrain
Registration Days Posts
#337621
Interesting, I've never had problems with heaches/dizziness while watching 3D movies.
By blwall1416
Registration Days Posts
#337902
"Moving seats that vibrate, twist, turn and lurch along with the action, smells wafting, wind blowing and rain falling"
Yay....can't wait until the new TMNT movie & they are running through the sewers. They probably capture the smell from that place near the Wingate.


Trailer, for those that care:

http://fightthefoot.com/
By ALUmnus
Registration Days Posts
#338329
Here is Screen Rant's 20 Most Anticipated Movies of 2011, in reverse order. It's basically all fantasy, scifi, and comedy, but a bunch of stuff I'm looking forward to.

http://screenrant.com/2011-most-anticip ... 779/all/1/

Apollo 18
Paul
Conan the Barbarian
The Muppets
Fast Five
Your Highness
Super 8
The Hangover Part ii
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol
Sherlock Holmes 2
Sucker Punch
X-Men: First Class
Transformers: Dark of the Moon
Cowboys & Aliens
Green Lantern
Battle: Los Angeles
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollow
Thor
Captain America: The First Avenger
User avatar
By BJWilliams
Registration Days Posts
#338339
ALUmnus wrote:Here is Screen Rant's 20 Most Anticipated Movies of 2011, in reverse order. It's basically all fantasy, scifi, and comedy, but a bunch of stuff I'm looking forward to.

http://screenrant.com/2011-most-anticip ... 779/all/1/

Apollo 18
Paul
Conan the Barbarian
The Muppets
Fast Five
Your Highness
Super 8
The Hangover Part ii
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol
Sherlock Holmes 2
Sucker Punch
X-Men: First Class
Transformers: Dark of the Moon
Cowboys & Aliens
Green Lantern
Battle: Los Angeles
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollow
Thor
Captain America: The First Avenger
MOvies Im looking forward to in bold
By ATrain
Registration Days Posts
#338357
ALUmnus wrote:Here is Screen Rant's 20 Most Anticipated Movies of 2011, in reverse order. It's basically all fantasy, scifi, and comedy, but a bunch of stuff I'm looking forward to.

http://screenrant.com/2011-most-anticip ... 779/all/1/

Apollo 18
Paul
Conan the BarbarianThe Muppets
Fast Five
Your Highness
Super 8
The Hangover Part ii
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol
Sherlock Holmes 2
Sucker Punch
X-Men: First Class
Transformers: Dark of the Moon
Cowboys & Aliens
Green LanternBattle: Los Angeles
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hollow
Thor
Captain America: The First Avenger
And to that lets add Twilight: Breaking Dawn Part I
By ALUmnus
Registration Days Posts
#338364
I don't think Screen Rant shares your enthusiasm for Twilight...nor do I.
By ATrain
Registration Days Posts
#338386
flamesfan30 wrote:
ATrain wrote:And to that lets add Twilight: Breaking Dawn Part I
i hope that's sarcasm.

twilight = :guntohead
:flamethrower
:lol:
No, it really wasn't (however, I won't be attending any midnight showings...I can do without the annoying teenage girl crowd...and their moms). Personally I thought New Moon had an amazing soundtrack, and the movies are produced well. I would also like to state that I am in no way attracted to Robert Pattison or the character Edward Cullen.

And to ALUmnus, do you really think I care about whether or not you share my enthusiasm?
By ALUmnus
Registration Days Posts
#339924
After decades of speculation:

[youtube]
[/youtube]
User avatar
By RubberMallet
Registration Days Posts
#340222
twilight....lol
User avatar
By RubberMallet
Registration Days Posts
#340223
Apollo 18
The Muppets
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
Transformers: Dark of the Moon
Cowboys & Aliens
Battle: Los Angeles
Thor
Captain America: The First Avenger

the ones i care about.

thor and CA are only intriguing to me, i assume they'll be bad though.
User avatar
By Th3rd
Registration Days Posts
#340993
[youtube]
[/youtube]
User avatar
By Purple Haize
Registration Days Posts
#344082
RubberMallet wrote:Apollo 18
The Muppets
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
Transformers: Dark of the Moon
Cowboys & Aliens
Battle: Los Angeles
Thor
Captain America: The First Avenger

the ones i care about.

thor and CA are only intriguing to me, i assume they'll be bad though.
Saw Battle: Lost Angeles and I really liked it. Was sort of expecting something SUPER cheezy but it wasn't that bad. I recommend it! I liked the fact that the aliens weren't 'invincible' like in some movies where it seems that even a full auto clip from an M4 can't stop em. At least these guys you could kill!
By ALUmnus
Registration Days Posts
#344721
Good news and bad news.

The good news is that The Hobbit has started production.

The bad news is that it's going to be filmed in 3D.
User avatar
By adam42381
Registration Days Posts
#348895
ALUmnus wrote:Teeheee....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookou ... nce-member

[youtube]
[/youtube]
Awesome.

In the last month the wife and I have seen both Bridesmaids (8/10) and The Hangover 2 (7/10). Bridesmaids surprised me and was hilarious and not a chick flick. The Hangover 2 was very funny, but not on the same level as the original. I'd recommend both to those who don't mind watching R-rated comedies. You know what to expect.
By NG33
Registration Days Posts
#348899
The Hangover 2 was very funny, but not on the same level as the original.
This. It's almost the same exact movie, but set in Thailand and with a few "twists". I still enjoyed it though.
User avatar
By adam42381
Registration Days Posts
#348903
NG33 wrote:
The Hangover 2 was very funny, but not on the same level as the original.
This. It's almost the same exact movie, but set in Thailand and with a few "twists". I still enjoyed it though.
Exactly. You knew where it was going, but still enjoyed the ride. I'd probably have rated it just as highly as the first one if the release order was swapped. It was very funny, but definitely derivative of the first.
By ALUmnus
Registration Days Posts
#348904
Is it just me or does Cars 2 look really bad? Could be Pixar's first mistake.

Saw Hanna the other day. It was enjoyable, but nothing really original about it, with a couple strange, awkward scenes thrown in.
WKU 1/21/26 7:30

I gotta believe that our relative roster stability[…]

Delaware 1/24/26 1PM

Been hearing rumors of postponements across the […]

Transfer Portal Reaction

Back to Henderson, I follow the Aggies after payin[…]

Flames Baseball

Any LU Armchair coach baseball fans wanna chat abo[…]