Star Wars: Episode I The Phantom Menace in 3D

[Bryancd]

Oh, I also saw the trailer for "John Connor" in 3D and it looked great as well. Disney.

[QuadShot]

Sad thing about John Carter Bryan: Joyce and I have tickets to the "Hollywood" red carpet premiere in LA...but it's not in the financial cards to go! We have to hold on to the travel $$ to go back east when her grandson is born...bummer.

[Bryancd]

That sucks, Al, but good call.

[Meds]

Nice review Bry, so far yours is the most positive review of TPM i've seen. A lot over here in Blighty have been terrible and I decided earlier i can't be shelling out £8 to see a film i don't really like (bar the lightsaber fight) but after reading your post I think i will go and give it a go. I like the fact the colours come out nice and bold.

[Bryancd]

Ta Meds, if you don't like it I'll PayPal you 8 quid. :)

[Meds]

LOL now thats sales. ;) I'll let you know. ha ha

[Bromptonboy]

Ta Meds, if you don't like it I'll PayPal you 8 quid. :)

Ta Meds, if you don't like it I'll PayPal you 8 quid. :)

Pay him 7 and 18 bob - and to hell with metrification!    :)

[jedijeff]

I'm back!!!!

OK, first the previews. I saw "Wrath of the Titans" and the 3D looked AWFUL. I mean utter, annoying, bad, crap. Avoid this in 3D like the plague. Then "Spiderman" 3D and OH MY GOD! THAT is how you do 3D. It looked amazing and just goes to show when it comes to 3D, it all depends on how much they want to spend. Now I want to see "Spiderman" in 3D whereas I was kind of heh a few days ago on it. The last was "Madagascar" 3D and it looked beatiful and funny as all get out and I've never watched this movie series! Oh and they had one of those "Stitch" short films which was great as well.

So, "The Phantom Menace". In a word: SPECTACULAR. The 3D during the opening crawl was so amazing. All the 3D is from the screen back, nothing jumps out at you, and overall it's VERY subtle. It gives some nice depth perspective but often simply belnds into the scene seemlessly. At many point I forgot I was even watching it in 3D. Even if you are not a 3D fan, there's nothing here I think that will cause offense and the picture quality is simply out of this world. The image quality alone is worth paying the money to see this in theaters again, it's so clear and sharp. Looking forward to hearing others thoughts, but I for one plan on going again for sure!

I saw it this afternoon as well, really liked the Crawl as well at the start, looked great against the star field. Like Bryan said, very subtle, and blended in nicely. It is what I expected of the 3D for a movie that is over 12 years old. Was nice to see Star Wars again on the big screen, went with my nephews and my dad, and after had a fun discussion with my one nephew about Darth Maul and being cut in two. My other nephew did get restless in the second half, but understandable as he is 7, and the movie is slow paced. But he was pretty enthralled during the Podracing and Final Battle. It was a day off School, so plenty of parents with kids, so cool to see another Generation of Kids watching Star Wars.

[Rico]

Jeff - both you and Bryan mention the opening crawl (which I've always felt has a 3D look to it already), but it's sounding like a lot of the "3D-ness" of the rest of the movie isn't that pronounced.  Were there any other scenes that seemed to benefit much from the conversion to 3D? 

[jedijeff]

I think for the most part it was pretty subtle. The Crawl is redone from the original, as the Starfield is much more lifelike and the text stands out from it more. Some of the explosions have benefited, as not really gimmicky, but you can see pieces flying around. It was a lot more just depth, with a much cleaner and sharper picture. The pod race and battle sequences have some enhanced spots. Some 3D movies I find a strain to watch, but this was not one, I thought the lighting as well was good, not as bright as Transformers 3, but more bright then a lot of 3D movies I had seen.

[Bryancd]

Jeff - both you and Bryan mention the opening crawl (which I've always felt has a 3D look to it already), but it's sounding like a lot of the "3D-ness" of the rest of the movie isn't that pronounced.  Were there any other scenes that seemed to benefit much from the conversion to 3D? 

I felt there were, especially the scenes in space and the image was nicely layered. Look, it's well worth a few extra bucks for the 3D, I mean come on.

[ricdude]

Finishing touches on the outfits for the kids done, tickets preordered a few days ago... A little sleep, and I'll be set!

Anyone else heading to the Denver event tomorrow? I'll have an Ep. 1 Anakin, an Ep. 2 Amidala (the one with her leg in a cast), and the wife who loves me enough to be seen with is in public...   

[Dangelus]

I think it would be fair to say that the crawl is most likely totally new and "real" 3D which may be why it looks so good. It would be silly to do a conversion of the crawl as it would be pretty simple to recreate from scratch.

[Rico]

So, I went to see this today in a good size theater.  Not a really big crowd at all.  Overall, while I enjoyed seeing the movie again on the big screen I found the 3D effect fairly mediocre.  It appeared obvious to me certain scenes that were effects heavy they were able to add some depth and "3D-ness" to the view, but much of the movie had nothing really altered.  I slipped the glasses up and down several times during the film and it was interesting, the scenes that didn't seem to be touched much looked like a standard movie picture.  When a scene with a little 3D showed up the scene would then show two distinct images that the 3D glasses trick your eyes and brain into seeing it with added depth or 3D.  I have to say overall I was a bit disappointed.  It appeared like many other converted to 3D films.  Actually to me the picture wasn't nearly as bright, crisp and sharp as the Blu-Ray image on my HDTV. 

Ok, now I know I've made my view on 3D films pretty well know but I went into this with as much of an open mind as I could.  But ultimately I just still feel it's a gimmick and didn't add much at all to seeing the film.  In fact like I said above I find the picture more vibrant and stunning on Blu-Ray.  So, that's my initial impressions of this first converted film from GL.

P.S.  I will say "The Hobbit" preview (filmed with 3D gear) looked amazing!

[Bryancd]

So, I went to see this today in a good size theater.  Not a really big crowd at all.  Overall, while I enjoyed seeing the movie again on the big screen I found the 3D effect fairly mediocre.  It appeared obvious to me certain scenes that were effects heavy they were able to add some depth and "3D-ness" to the view, but much of the movie had nothing really altered.  I slipped the glasses up and down several times during the film and it was interesting, the scenes that didn't seem to be touched much looked like a standard movie picture.  When a scene with a little 3D showed up the scene would then show two distinct images that the 3D glasses trick your eyes and brain into seeing it with added depth or 3D.  I have to say overall I was a bit disappointed.  It appeared like many other converted to 3D films.  Actually to me the picture wasn't nearly as bright, crisp and sharp as the Blu-Ray image on my HDTV. 

Ok, now I know I've made my view on 3D films pretty well know but I went into this with as much of an open mind as I could.  But ultimately I just still feel it's a gimmick and didn't add much at all to seeing the film.  In fact like I said above I find the picture more vibrant and stunning on Blu-Ray.  So, that's my initial impressions of this first converted film from GL.

P.S.  I will say "The Hobbit" preview (filmed with 3D gear) looked amazing!

Yes, which is why natively filmed 3D can add a lot to the movie going experience. To be fair, the up conversion of TPM was as good as they could do, it can never compare to a natively filmed 3D movie. Still a fun way to go see these films again in theaters, IMO.