Have a news tip for us?
Just email . Ideas for stories, links to interesting articles, and press releases are welcome.
Cameron, Jackson discuss future of film
posted by
CSWalczak
on
July 31, 2009 at 10:40 am
James Cameron and Peter Jackson recently expressed their views on the future of film and film exhibition as part of a panel at a recent convention in San Diego. Both are very enthusiastic about 3-D (Cameron plans to convert “Titanic” to 3-D and Jackson will convert his “Rings” trilogy to the process). However both emphasized that 3-D or advanced special effects alone will not help keep people going out to the movies if the films lack good stories and effective characterizations.
“There will be a lot more 3-D screens when they know the ‘Lord of the Rings’ films are going to be available,” Cameron said.
The movie industry needs 3-D, he said, to inspire originality and boost its bottom line. A “3-D ecosystem” could be built on big films converting to the format.
Read more here at CBS News.
Comments (7)
It would seem to me, however, that movies that already have lots of style and substance, as well as great stories behind them, and great soundtracks, characters, etc.,. would never, ever NEED to be converted into 3-D. Am I correct?
I say why not? These films will make even more money than they have already and best of all, I’m looking forward to seeing them in the added dimension.
You’re right. As we speak, slowly the number of theaters gearing up for 3-D, old and new, are growing for the demand for this format, which can’t be reproduced at home just yet. Until they come up with something rather than the plain red and blu glasses, moviegoers will jam the theaters paying high dollar for three-dimensional entertainment.
Well: At the risk of sounding overly obsessive, could films such as West Side Story, Lawrence of Arabia, Dr. Zhivago, Sound of Music, Wizard of Oz and many other great, golden oldie-but-goody movie classics/epics be done in 3-D, and how would they make out if they were?
Just curious.
Just like the demand for cineramma, and 70mm, that’s really popular now. Just another soon to fade away fad, it wont last.
I’m curious about the results of the 2-D to 3-D conversion.
Again, to reiterate the position(s) on the subject of 3-D, it sort of seems to me that movies that’re well-photographed, with great style, substance, with much action and a great story behind them really don’t NEED to be converted into 3-D.
Why would anybody WANT to convert such great classics as West Side Story, Lawrence of Arabia, Dr. Zhivago, Sound of Music and a whole bunch of other great classics into 3-D? It beats me….I don’t think it’s necessary.