Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 27
  1. #1

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    Posts
    2,899

    3D in theme parks vs. 3D in movies

    So the gf and I want to see Journey to the Center of the Earth 3D the other day. We enjoyed it, fun movie, good 3D...but. Well, here's my only objection to the movie: having experienced 3D/4D attractions in the Disney parks -- particularly the magnificent Mickey's PhilharMagic -- I have to wonder about 3D theatrical releases like Journey. Specifically, why can't they (or won't they) make images come right out of the screen in movies like Journey? Journey has all kinds of prehistoric beasties, the movie is in digital 3D, and yet the creatures don't really get in your face.

    Honey I Shrunk the Audience is almost 15 years old, and it features a giant snake jumping out of the screen and opening its mouth at you. Journey is the newest, latest thing, and the danged T-Rex never did anything like that. Especially considering that Journey is a Disney release...I'm puzzled. Can anyone shed some light on this mystery?

  2. #2

    • Huh?
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    6,808

    Re: 3D in theme parks vs. 3D in movies

    Because, as a wide theatrical release, they're not trying to repeat the huge mistakes of the short-lived 3-D booms of the 50s and 80s.

    In good 3-D, you want to keep the picture behind the viewing window pretty much at all times and only step out of that window in rare cases. When the images go in front of the window, it basically gets very hard to focus on images and can cause a lot of headaches. Also, it's a good indication that somebody's doing 3-D for the sake of 3-D, not 3-D as an enhancement to a film.

    Images being shoved in your face every few seconds was exactly the major cause of the deaths of the first two 3-D booms. Look at Ammityville Horror 3-D for a great example -- bad movie made for no reason other than to stick some random object in your face every few seconds for an hour and a half. When things like that become the focus, the movies tend to be REALLY bad.

    Also look at the big difference: In a theme park, you'll be in the film for 15-20 minutes. Your experience is enhanced by Castle-like theatrical effects. It's fine for a short period. Would you want that to go on for a feature? If it did, what do you think would be the actual draw of the film -- the movie or the illusions?
    -Tim

  3. #3

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    Posts
    2,899

    Re: 3D in theme parks vs. 3D in movies

    Good point and good explanation. Of course it would be overkill to do that "every few seconds". But, come on. They could have at least made the T-Rex come out of the screen once. And some of the other creatures. That wouldn't have been every few seconds -- it wouldn't even have been every 10 or 15 minutes. The prehistoric animals only show up about halfway through the movie. I really think they missed the boat by not using the full potential of 3D for those scenes. They could have put the monsters in your face just a few times, and it would have greatly enhanced the experience.

  4. #4

    • Hall Of Promise
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Rohnert Park, CA
    Posts
    668

    Re: 3D in theme parks vs. 3D in movies

    Quote Originally Posted by disneyfann121 View Post
    ... Especially considering that Journey is a Disney release...I'm puzzled. Can anyone shed some light on this mystery?
    Journey to the Center of the Earth 3D was released by Warner Bros.

  5. #5

    • Frustrated A/V Engineer
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    3,344

    Re: 3D in theme parks vs. 3D in movies

    I agree with what Tim - err, Frumious Boojum (wow, what a handle!) had to say above. It's more about depth of the image than getting things in your face. And with a film that's also released in non-3D format, it would be tough to put in special in-your-face effects just for the 3D version. It would change how the sequence is edited, how it flows, etc.

  6. #6

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    Posts
    2,899

    Re: 3D in theme parks vs. 3D in movies

    Well, the depth of perception on the screen is great, sometimes amazing. I have no quibbles with that. But there are some scenes where something almost-but-not-quite comes out of the screen, and that's a little frustrating when you've experienced theme park 3D movies.
    Last edited by disneyfann121; 07-24-2008 at 06:59 PM.

  7. #7

    • Frustrated A/V Engineer
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    3,344

    Re: 3D in theme parks vs. 3D in movies

    I can understand that feeling. I was the 3D projection engineer on the KISS 3D tour a few years ago. And lemme tell you, it was all about the tricks! When the 3D camera pointed up at Gene Simmons, and he flicked that 3 foot long tongue out at the camera, and 30 thousand KISS fans in their 3D glasses all at once shouted "EEEEWWWWWW!!!", that's when we knew the 3D effect was working!

    Maybe the current 3D movie producers need to come up with at least 1 or 2 in your face effects, just to keep everyone happy.

  8. #8

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    Posts
    2,899

    Re: 3D in theme parks vs. 3D in movies

    Yeah, just a few would do it. The T-Rex was a perfect opportunity for a memorable "in your face". Right now, there's just a little too much...restraint.

  9. #9

    • Disney Memory Maker
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Kissimmee, Florida, United States
    Posts
    8,671

    Re: 3D in theme parks vs. 3D in movies

    3D in movies are supposed to be an enhancement, not a gimmick.
    “You can design and create, and build the most wonderful place in the world. But it takes people to make the dream a reality.” - Walt Disney

  10. #10

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    Posts
    2,899

    Re: 3D in theme parks vs. 3D in movies

    The 3D movies in theme parks are great attractions, not just a collection of gimmicks. And they all have things jumping out of the screen.

  11. #11

    • Minion
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,206

    Re: 3D in theme parks vs. 3D in movies

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDisneyInquisitor View Post
    3D in movies are supposed to be an enhancement, not a gimmick.
    I saw Journey 3D also, and I was hoping that there would be some more thrilling 3D effects. I really that it isn't suppose to be a gimmick, but Journey 3D was only good mainly because of the 3D. When a movie relies that heavily on 3D, it desperately needs 'in your face' effects. A movie like Wall-E should never be in 3D. I think 3D in movie theatres should only be saved for movies with very little plot and value, and only exsist to give some 3D thrills. The upcoming Piranha 3D and My Bloody Valentine 3D are good choices for 3D.

    Also, the theme park 3D attractions are in immersive environments that can include things such as a themed theatre, air blowing on your feet (HISTA mice), audio-animatronics, live performers (Muppet Vision 3D and T2:3D at Universal), and other effects that can greatly enhance the experience.

  12. #12

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    Posts
    2,899
    I agree with GhostHost2. While we still enjoyed the movie, it was really a summer popcorn flick that would have been perfect for "in your face" 3D effects. And can you imagine the word of mouth on a movie that sends a T-Rex practically in your lap? It would be a much bigger hit.

    As for those "4D" type effects he mentions, of course I don't expect that in a theatrical release. The best 3D movies will probably always be in the theme parks.

  13. #13

    • Disney Memory Maker
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Kissimmee, Florida, United States
    Posts
    8,671

    Re: 3D in theme parks vs. 3D in movies

    Quote Originally Posted by GhostHost2 View Post
    When a movie relies that heavily on 3D, it desperately needs 'in your face' effects.
    If a movie relies that much on 3D... it either shouldn't be made or its storyline and writing should get a major overhaul.

    A movie like Wall-E should never be in 3D. I think 3D in movie theatres should only be saved for movies with very little plot and value, and only exsist to give some 3D thrills.
    But that's not the point of Digital 3D. When done correctly, the digital 3D adds a great depth to the film, enhancing the film all that much. Take Chicken Little and Meet the Robinsons for example. Whether or not you liked the story of either movie, nearly anyone who has seen it in the Digital 3D format can tell you how much depth it adds and that it is far better than the 2D version.

    And one of the major reasons why the earlier 3D fad was just a fad (along with the bad red/blue glasses) was because it got too gimmicky. It is to the Studios' advantage to make good movies with the Digital 3D as an enhancement as that is an enhancement that can only be seen in theaters. Just my opinion though.
    “You can design and create, and build the most wonderful place in the world. But it takes people to make the dream a reality.” - Walt Disney

  14. #14

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    131

    Re: 3D in theme parks vs. 3D in movies

    I agree with you DisneyFann
    A few images would shock you and really make you think, wow, that was really cool and totally unexpected.
    I think it should be done personally

  15. #15

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Montreal, Quebec, Canada
    Posts
    2,899

    Re: 3D in theme parks vs. 3D in movies

    Thanks, tracestar. And I don't see why things coming out of the screen is "gimmicky" but depth of perception isn't. They're both essential elements in 3D.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 01-11-2009, 01:04 AM
  2. Things to Do Outside the Theme Parks
    By SummerInFL in forum Orlando Travel Planning
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 02-02-2008, 01:14 PM
  3. Rank Your Favorite WDW Theme Parks, Water Parks & Other Areas
    By Ride Warrior in forum Walt Disney World Resort
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 07-21-2007, 01:24 PM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-13-2005, 11:22 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •