[Movies] James Cameron and Michael Bay Hate 3D Conversion
Posted by Chris Lansdell on 03.23.2010
Find out why...
James Cameron and Michael Bay both spoke out against the current 3D movie craze. First, Cameron:
On directors not getting to choose: "This is another example of Hollywood getting it wrong. Sony says, 'We're doing Spider-Man in 3D.' The director doesn't say, 'Hey, I want to make the movie in 3D.' The studio says, 'You want to direct this movie? You're doing it in 3D, mother#@ker!' That's not how it should be."
On the similarities to the post-Toy Story CG craze: "After Toy Story, there were 10 really bad CG movies because everybody thought the success of that film was CG and not great characters that were beautifully designed and heartwarming. Now, you've got people quickly converting movies from 2D to 3D, which is not what we did. They're expecting the same result, when in fact they will probably work against the adoption of 3D because they'll be putting out an inferior product."
Michael Bay is also not a fan of conversion, despite pressure from Paramount to make Transformers 3 into a 3D-converted movie.
"I'm used to having the A-team working on my films, and I'm going to hand it over to the D-team, have it shipped to India and hope for the best? This conversion process is always going to be inferior to shooting in real 3D. Studios might be willing to sacrifice the look and use the gimmick to make three dollars more a ticket, but I'm not. Avatar took four years. You can't just s&!t out a 3D movie. I'm saying, the jury is still out."
HOLY CRAP i agree with something Mike Bay says...wow
Posted By: MaZZacare (Guest) on March 23, 2010 at 07:58 PM
They both only seem to be against quick-and-cheap conversions for the sake of having it in 3D. James Cameron is spending lots of time and money on the process of making Titanic 3D and seems to think that, when done right, it is a process that has real merit.
Posted By: ScottM (Guest) on March 23, 2010 at 08:12 PM
Both of them are absolutely correct. That being said, it's not going to change anything.
Posted By: Guest#2677 (Guest) on March 23, 2010 at 08:12 PM
"You want to direct this movie? Your doing it in 3D motherf#@ker!"
Best. Quote. Ever.
Posted By: Comic Book Guy (Guest) on March 23, 2010 at 08:14 PM
when will we be able to watch a movie in 3D without the movie becoming all dark because of the black, dark 3D-glasses?
Posted By: hiro (Guest) on March 23, 2010 at 10:03 PM
wow michael bay makes sense......who woulda thunk?
Posted By: gooched (Guest) on March 23, 2010 at 11:58 PM
If Cameron and Bay are against it, then that's all the justification I need to EMBRACE it.
Fuck those two if-they-had-an-original-idea-their-heads-would-explode prima donnas and anyone who supports them. These two hypocrites made their entire CAREERS riping off other people's work and riding the wave of the latest fad. Who the fuck are they to judge ANYBODY?
Posted By: Guest#7778 (Guest) on March 24, 2010 at 05:12 AM
Maybe if Cameron had spent 4 years on creating an original STORY instead of special effects, Avatar wouldn't just be a mega-hit.... it would actually be a good MOVIE.
And if anybody is an expert on shitting out inferior movies, it's Michael Bay.
Posted By: Guest#3976 (Guest) on March 24, 2010 at 05:17 AM
here's an idea for all of you who bitch about 3D conversion... how's about you take your ass to the 2D version and leave the rest of us the fuck alone. Nobody's forcing you to watch the 3D version, unless you're just a fucking lemming.
Posted By: Guest#9330 (Guest) on March 24, 2010 at 05:23 AM
well damn both have a good point.
Posted By: Guest#6653 (Guest) on March 24, 2010 at 10:41 AM
