2010 Movies

Yaya · Post by **Yaya** » Sat Nov 20, 2010 11:46 pm

Professor Smooth wrote:http://www.cracked.com/article_18877_4- ... -suck.html

Very nice article, Smooth.

It basically sums up why I thought Avatar, How to Train Your Dragon, and Megamind were the best 3-D movies I've seen for reasons I didn't fully realize until I read this article.

It also explains why I thought the re-release of Toy Story in 3-D was so much better than other movies that were originally shot in 2-D and then converted to 3-D. Didn't realize it was that easy to do with animation without loss of quality.

Ya learn something new everyday.

I especially agree with using 3-D to enhance the settings and landscapes to pull you in. I think that's the key behind 3-D movies. That's when I really feel I'm actually in a new world.

inflatable dalek · Post by **inflatable dalek** » Sun Nov 21, 2010 3:49 am

Avatar would have been OK as a silly dumb action film knocked out in 18 months at most. As a film that took a decade to make... it's utter crap. No one should spend that long making a movie only to come up with Aliens knock off crap for the humans and painting everything blue (and when in doubt, adding useless extra limbs and joints) for the aliens. How did anyone spend a decade doing that? Very long lunch breaks?

saysadie · Post by **saysadie** » Sun Nov 21, 2010 5:26 pm

But it's BEAUTIFUL utter crap.

You know what, I was torn on Avatar... on the one hand, I wasted a good 13-ish bucks going in to see a derivative POS and normally with any other derivative POS, this would annoy me greatly. Yet it was so pretty, I thought it worth seeing in 3-D. In fact, I probably would have been pissed off had I seen it as a regular film.

Impactor returns 2.0 · Post by **Impactor returns 2.0** » Sun Nov 21, 2010 10:06 pm

I've worked briefly with the 3D software used on avatar, ocula.

One of the reasons 3D looks better on animated films is the intergration with 3D tools. Live footage requires more hardwork.

I was Reading yayas comments about Tron and the discs, the discs are animated so they should look great, and have every technically advantage an animated movie does...

The problem is depth of field.

The 3D we see in the cinema today is really only 2.5D to be honest, for example watch a 3D film and at some point an object will be thrown out of the screen, if you look at the object it will be sharp and in focus the background out of focus. That's known as juxtoposition.

Now, try looking at another point on the screen, an object that is not the focal point, it's blured.

If you make an animated movie the virtual camera doesn't render depth of field everything is in focus, so when u apply the split field effect using software like ocula the effect isn't so confined. The viewer can look elsewhere and it's less blured...

Live action cameras have a focal point and the film will have DOF regardless.
To create A 3D effect on film requires alot more pre-planning. It's no wonder Avatar is nearly all CG because it allows far greater controll over the DOF and 3D quality.

It also costs more as every shot is built from the ground up.

There is true 3D tech out there that allows the user to put any object they look at into focus... True 3D!

I think think the quality of live action 3D will improve dramatically over the next few years as the tech improves but for now the animated movies or the exceptional films like avatar will offer the best results.

inflatable dalek · Post by **inflatable dalek** » Mon Nov 22, 2010 7:56 am

But will we ever see a more amazing and developed use of 3D than this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yRtO8XtOyc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0n0Wj8R2 ... re=related

"Pickled in time... like gherkins in a jar!"
"Woman... What year is this?"
"A verrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry long journey!"
"Who was that terrible WOMAN?"

Cameron wishes he had half that talent.

Yaya · Post by **Yaya** » Mon Nov 22, 2010 9:43 pm

Impactor returns 2.0 wrote:I've worked briefly with the 3D software used on avatar, ocula.

One of the reasons 3D looks better on animated films is the intergration with 3D tools. Live footage requires more hardwork.

I was Reading yayas comments about Tron and the discs, the discs are animated so they should look great, and have every technically advantage an animated movie does...

The problem is depth of field.

The 3D we see in the cinema today is really only 2.5D to be honest, for example watch a 3D film and at some point an object will be thrown out of the screen, if you look at the object it will be sharp and in focus the background out of focus. That's known as juxtoposition.

Now, try looking at another point on the screen, an object that is not the focal point, it's blured.

If you make an animated movie the virtual camera doesn't render depth of field everything is in focus, so when u apply the split field effect using software like ocula the effect isn't so confined. The viewer can look elsewhere and it's less blured...

Live action cameras have a focal point and the film will have DOF regardless.
To create A 3D effect on film requires alot more pre-planning. It's no wonder Avatar is nearly all CG because it allows far greater controll over the DOF and 3D quality.

It also costs more as every shot is built from the ground up.

There is true 3D tech out there that allows the user to put any object they look at into focus... True 3D!

I think think the quality of live action 3D will improve dramatically over the next few years as the tech improves but for now the animated movies or the exceptional films like avatar will offer the best results.

Thanks for this explanation. Insightful.

And exciting to hear 3-D will continue to improve.

Yaya · Post by **Yaya** » Fri Jan 14, 2011 12:02 am

So now that the year is over, what movies did it for you in 2010?

For me:

1) Tron:Legacy IMAX 3-D. No exaggeration. This was the greatest movie experience I have ever had.

2) Inception. Overall, the best movie I've seen in the last decade. It kind of in that class of Lord of the Rings, a sci-fi/fantasy movie that trascends the genre and is appreciated by movie audiences of all demographics. I hope it wins Best Picture.

3) How to Train Your Dragon, 3-D. Surprisingly good, best animated 3-D I've seen in a movie.

4) Toy Story 3. Nice heartfelt ending. What an incredible run. Not often you see all three movies in a series deserve "A+" marks, but Toy Story certainly does

5) Alice in Wonderland. This was the surprise for me.

Obfleur · Post by **Obfleur** » Fri Jan 14, 2011 12:47 am

Inception: Cool movie. Enjoyed the zero gravity fight scene. Not the greatest movie ever, but I enjoyed it.

Kick-Ass: More like "Lame-Ass". Enjoyed the first fourteen minutes, then it slowly turned to ****.

Shutter Island: It was okay.

Buried: Really liked it. Cool movie.

The Town: Really enjoyed the first half of the movie.

Alice in Wonderland: Pure ****. Boring as hell. Pointless. **** **** ****.
The scene in the end when Johnny Depp's dancing? My face turned red. ****!
[composite word including 'f*ck'] Tim "I've been making the same movie for the last fifteen years" Burton.

Ozz · Post by **Ozz** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 4:06 pm

Ozz's Top 10 of 2010:

Iron Man 2
The A-Team
Inception
Sherlock Holmes
Easy A
Kick-Ass
Up In The Air
The Social Network
Breakfast With Scot
Bad Lieutenant: Port Of Call New Orleans

Yeah, I know BWS is three years old for instance, but it was in our cinemas this year so for me it counts as 2010.

The Wolfman remained the only movie that I wish I didn't bother with. One out of seventy, not bad I guess.

Brendocon · Post by **Brendocon** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 4:40 pm

Brend's Top 10 of 2010, in no particular order

Cemetary Junction
Four Lions
Inception
Iron Man 2
Kick Ass
The Book of Eli
The Losers
The Social Network
Toy Story 3 3D
Up in the Air

Ozz · Post by **Ozz** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 7:21 pm

The Losers would probably be high on mine if it actually showed up here, same with Scott Pilgrim. Will have to see both on DVD.

inflatable dalek · Post by **inflatable dalek** » Sat Jan 15, 2011 7:38 pm

I think Iron Man 2 and Paranormal Activity 2 are the only films I've seen made last year.

Impactor returns 2.0 · Post by **Impactor returns 2.0** » Mon Jan 17, 2011 9:55 pm

I thought inception was really bland.
The action sequences are clearly matrix inspired but come no where near. The visuals and imagination are ok but apart from the city bending part there's nothing I haven't seen before.

The plot, it's dull, I dint care about what they are trying to achieve. I dint care how hard it is for these guys to pull off because I don't know if it is or not. Yes u need to drill down levels of conscience but they could suggest 3 or 300 it doesn't matter.

I was left watching a number of action sequences which were dull.
Seriously was anyone watching that snow sequence and really on the edge of there seat?

The twist... The film opens with a sequence that drops more hints of of a plot twist then anything I have seen... When it came it was no surprise.

Existence Z did that better.

I just think it's an average film, compare it to the dark knight for example, or pirates of the carrabiean etc... Average.

Optimus Prime Rib · Post by **Optimus Prime Rib** » Tue Jan 18, 2011 7:35 am

loved Book of Eli

saysadie · Post by **saysadie** » Sun Jan 23, 2011 1:48 am

I saw a bunch of movies and I thought most of them were pretty good. The ones I liked/disliked I'm sure I have already been fairly vocal about.

Scott Pilgrim suffered a bit upon rewatching, I thought. Certain parts seemed annoyingly slow. It was still pretty entertaining overall though.