Ironman II News

sheldor · March 08, 2010, 04:12:30 PM

And guess what - its IN 3D!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:)

Meds · March 10, 2010, 03:46:24 PM

3D oh yawn, that's put me off.

Darkmolerman · March 10, 2010, 06:23:44 PM

3D Iron man? as long as its not red and blue I would love to see it

Rico · March 30, 2010, 08:02:51 PM

Domestic poster one-sheet. I like it!

sheldor · March 30, 2010, 08:37:55 PM

Neat

X · March 30, 2010, 09:32:49 PM

I really don't see what the problem with 3D is. It's not as if they are requiring you to see it in 3D. It's simply another option like DTS or THX. Another thing it offers is a way to see the movie this is not common to the average home theater system. You don't have to see it in 3D. You don't even have to see it at a cinema, but they would be fools not to put movies in a way that can still be unique to the theater experience.

Seems like a good solution to me for the drop in tickets that are partly due to people wanting to watch it on their home systems because they feel the experience can be mimicked there.

Meds · March 31, 2010, 04:30:07 AM

Regarding the poster why have the two iron suits looking straight at the viewer. Doesn't look right. Still bloody well looking forward to this film in glorious, as it should be, pretentious free 2D ;)

Rico · March 31, 2010, 05:22:36 AM

With regards to the 3-D comments (which seem to be creeping into every big new movie discussion), I do feel they are trying to force it on us. For example, the theater I go to much of the time (a very nice one and voted the best in the area many years running) has only a certain number of theaters. When a 3-D film pops up, (like the recent "Alice") showing it in some theaters in 3-D limits your options (times) in seeing it in 2-D. It also greatly limits the number of movies one theater can show if every 3-D film that comes out requires double the theaters to show it. I don't like having to pay $2.50 more per ticket for 3-D (which I feel is excessive). Most of these films have not been filmed with 3-D cameras, it's been "computerized" into 3-D. I don't feel it really adds much to the movie going experience. Again, I maintain a good movie is still a good movie - period. I don't need little things floating at me to prove it, or get me into the theaters. I think this spring and summer crop of movies are going to make studios realize this even more.

Meds · March 31, 2010, 05:56:52 AM

Yup agree Rico. With Avatar Fair enough because it is filmed with new tech, just adding a few scenes and saying hey look it's 3D is insulting. What next Ghandi in 3D, wow look at his flip flops flapping in my face.

Bryancd · March 31, 2010, 06:34:37 AM

I am very excited to see Ironman II and will likely make the effort to see it in 3D. I could care less how many screens it takes up from other movies, I go to the movies a few times per year and want it to be as fun an experience as possible. So the extra money is meaningless and the I like to see somthing I can't at home, so bring on 3D. I can tell you from the stanpoint of marketing, I am the person they are targeting with this, the much more casual movie go'er who they want in the theaters more often. 3D works great in that regard regardless if it's just an add on.

..oh, and I want it in IMAX, too.

X · March 31, 2010, 07:09:12 AM

Quote from: Bryancd on March 31, 2010, 06:34:37 AM
I am very excited to see Ironman II and will likely make the effort to see it in 3D. I could care less how many screens it takes up from other movies, I go to the movies a few times per year and want it to be as fun an experience as possible. So the extra money is meaningless and the I like to see somthing I can't at home, so bring on 3D. I can tell you from the stanpoint of marketing, I am the person they are targeting with this, the much more casual movie go'er who they want in the theaters more often. 3D works great in that regard regardless if it's just an add on.

..oh, and I want it in IMAX, too.

Yep. This is where we agree Bryan. If they were trying to force it on people, they wouldn't release 2D at all. Movie houses work off supply and demand. If more people are going to the 2D, it will show in more houses. I think more people want 3D and to see it in a way that they can't get from watching it at home.

I took my 5 year old to see Dragons last weekend in 3D. It was 27 bucks for two tickets and it was worth it. We had a great time and try to do two movies a month for daddy daughter day. 3D made this experience better for her and she has been telling everyone about the fun she had.

For me, the 3D experience offers a bit more than the 2D one and is worth the value.

It's also something that can't be uploaded and cam copied to the internet hours after being released. That only makes good businesses sense. If 2D movies aren't making what they should because of other factors, why not provide a way that can't be duplicated to the web and convinces people who would have otherwise waited for the DVD to buy a ticket?

I have to respectfully disagree with you Rico about the Studios. They aren't going to stop with 3D when it is something that's bringing them cash while reducing the losses created by pirating.

The only part I don't agree with Bryan on is IMAX.

I have rules to seeing movies that IMAX violates except for nature movies.

For me the ideal location to sit is in the center of a row where eye level is equal to the center level of the screen (usually the middle of the theater. This location provides optimal viewing of the whole screen without needing to turn the head. It also puts you in the acoustic center of the surround sound system for optimal audio immersion. By taking those seats, the likely hood of people having to cross into your LOS becomes reduced and you avoid many children who's parents keep them near the aisles for possible bathroom and snack emergencies.

That being said, I remember when people were complaining about the cost of tickets when stadium seats were being retro fitted into some houses and built into newer ones. I don't watch movies if I can't have stadium seating. I think 3D is a great feature that will do the same. Sure you can still see stuff in a 2D house without stadium seats.

But would you want to? Why not just wait for the DVD and see it at home in the home system that you invested thousands into?

sheldor · March 31, 2010, 07:12:24 AM

The latest entry in this fad. This Saturday eMagine theatre will be showing the NCAA semifinals in 3D!! They are charging $25. People will show up because MSU is playing but this is getting ridiculous.

Rico · March 31, 2010, 07:18:24 AM

Quote from: sheldore on March 31, 2010, 07:12:24 AM
The latest entry in this fad. This Saturday eMagine theatre will be showing the NCAA semifinals in 3D!! They are charging $25. People will show up because MSU is playing but this is getting ridiculous.

Hmmm, 3-D basketball? Now, that I'd like to see. ;)

X · March 31, 2010, 07:21:18 AM

Quote from: Rico on March 31, 2010, 07:18:24 AM
Quote from: sheldore on March 31, 2010, 07:12:24 AM
The latest entry in this fad. This Saturday eMagine theatre will be showing the NCAA semifinals in 3D!! They are charging $25. People will show up because MSU is playing but this is getting ridiculous.

Hmmm, 3-D basketball? Now, that I'd like to see. ;)

I was thinking about seeing the superbowl in 3D and how I'd love that and would being willing to part with 25 a ticket for it.

Bryancd · March 31, 2010, 09:24:11 AM

Quote from: Just X on March 31, 2010, 07:21:18 AM
Quote from: Rico on March 31, 2010, 07:18:24 AM
Quote from: sheldore on March 31, 2010, 07:12:24 AM
The latest entry in this fad. This Saturday eMagine theatre will be showing the NCAA semifinals in 3D!! They are charging $25. People will show up because MSU is playing but this is getting ridiculous.

Hmmm, 3-D basketball? Now, that I'd like to see. ;)

I was thinking about seeing the superbowl in 3D and how I'd love that and would being willing to part with 25 a ticket for it.

x3, that sounds cool!