Iron Man 2 Could Be Converted To 3D

Shooting in 3D is all the rage right now and is a trend that comes and goes. Many think it may be here to stay now… other believe, like all the other times, it will fade away soon. But everyone agrees it is here right now.

Generally speaking, when a film intends on being a 3D film today it’s planned well in advance. Scenes are shot with 3D in mind. The proper gear is used to shoot with 3D in mind. Essentially you shoot the film as a 3D film.

However… with today’s technology, that’s not always the case. Case in point, “Iron Man 2″

Director Jon Favreau always wanted to shoot “Iron Man 2″ in 3D, but for a few reasons didn’t do it, and the film was shot in the traditional manner. Now,the studio is toying with the idea of converting Iron Man 2 into a 3D film utilizing modern technology to do it. Apparently the comic book and film company had one minute of the sequel converted into 3D as a demo that apparently impressed all who saw it. So impressed that they sent out a request to three companies that do this sort of conversion to ask for quotes and more importantly, how long it would take to complete the procedure.

No word yet on it this will happen or not, but it does raise the question: Would you be interested in an Iron Man 2 film that was converted to 3D? (Source: AICN)

This post was written by :

The Movie Blog

Kaneda979

Well, I’m going to see the non 3D version first and if I hear enough good things about the 3D one, then I’ll go see it.

The last movie I saw in 3D was Up and it definitely wasn’t planned as a 3D movie by Pixar in advance at ALL. That it was the same thing that’s happening here with Iron Man 2. The movie was made first, then converted to 3D. Only a few times in the whole movie did the 3D effect really stick out at all and even then it didn’t feel worth the extra money we paid. Nothing flew at the screen or anything like that.

Infact, the previews were also in 3D and made in 3D, and they were MUCH cooler and funner to see in 3D then all of the movie. When people asked me how the movie was, I’d say, “it was great, one of the best movies ever. But don’t see the 3D version, hardly any of it was really 3D and isn’t worth the extra money”.

Seems like Disney just made it 3D at the last minute to make some extra cash, when Pixar didn’t feel the need to make the animation 3D friendly in the first place. That it was going to be a great movie and make loads of money, regardless.

Now granted Iron Man 2 is going to be a huge action flick, with many more chances for things to come flying at you then Up had. Like bullets, missiles, Whiplash’s whips, and so forth. But I still can’t help but remain pessimistic after my first experience with the converted 3D in Up.
http://www.thestub.ca Rodney

Personally, I would RATHER see a film that was not intended to be 3d converted to 3d just because for some reason the film makers who intend 3d seem to want to put obligatory “in your face” scenes that otherwise make no sense in the film except to wow you with the arm or bouncing ball coming right at you.
- thematticus
  
  Agreed.
- Tomi
  
  I agree that 3D is a fad and will die out. However, I hate hearing this argument. When sync-sound first came out, would you rather have watched a silent movie that just “happened” to be made with mics on, though the sound contributed in no way to the story? Or how about one that is up-converted into a sound film with dubbing. No, I think we’d all prefer to see a movie that was made with sound in mind, fully utilizing the technology. Otherwise sound movies wouldn’t have grown into what we see them as today.
  
  In my opinion, converting 2D movies to 3D like this is the equivalent of when they started “colorizing” older black and white movies in the 60s. I say 3D should go for it. It probably won’t last long anyway!
  - http://www.realvision.ae/blog clyde
    
    Good analogy!
Shane Hero

I saw Up in 3D today. Just a gimmick, and in no way is it going to revolutionize the industry. I doubt I’ll be rushing out to see a whole heap of other 3D movies any time soon.

If Iron Man 2 is converted to 3D, I doubt I’d bother.

If the studio think they can recoup their money, and consider it a worthwhile investment, they can be my guest. I won’t complain.

Soon enough the 3D fad will die out, like it has plenty of times before. Iron Man 2 will come out before the fad has ended, and it will be a popular film, and may encourage a lot of people to see it in 3D. So it’s probably a smart move if they get it done.
herby

It was shot in 2D, so I will see it in 2D.
- Louisgamers
  
  Yh i have never seen a live action film in 3D and im not sure i want to
http://thecinematard.blogspot.com/ nerrojj

I don’t think it’s as much as a fad as people saying it is. I say this because the digital 3-D experience can’t really be recreated for a home theater set up, therefore more and more Sci-Fi/ Fantasy films are also being released in 3-D. As for Iron Man II being in 3-D it could add too the film if the filmmakers utilized the technology. Great example, G-Force is the latest 3-D movie I have seen, which in my opinion was a crappy film but it utilized the 3-D technology very well. Compared to the also crappy Monster Vs. Aliens which had one very noticeable 3-D scene. Then there was Up which the 3-D wasn’t 100% noticeable but it enhanced the film, but it’s Pixar which equals perfection.
- http://www.thestub.ca Rodney
  
  That 3D can be made for the hometheater setup. There is a device you can get for your computer that works with nvidia video cards that instantly transforms any 3d game into that blurry double vision image that is clarified by the glasses.
  
  They had commercials during the superbowl and an episode of Chuck that uses the glasses.
  
  The camera is no different for 3d than it is for 2d. Its just the print they screen on that camera. There is no reason they cant put that print on a bluray as an option. You can pick up the gray dvd glasses at the dollar stores here.
  - Jeremy K.
    
    “The camera is no different for 3d than it is for 2d. Its just the print they screen on that camera.”
    
    Are you talking about stereoscopic 3D, like Cameron uses? Because that is pretty different in both camera used for filming and how it displayed in the end. Regular TVs are not capable of newer 3D technology, hence the new 3D TVs that are coming out or are out.
    
    Feel free to correct me if I am wrong on this.
  - Tomi
    
    not true - the superbowl commercials utilized red-blue 3D. I had “real D” glasses and tried to watch, but they didn’t work.
    
    besides, 3D is supposed to involved 2 separate images, eye-distance apart, that are projected together. So when they make something 3D from a single image, it usually doesn’t look as good
  - Jeremy K.
    
    Stereoscopic is slightly different than Red/Blue 3D. It flashes back and forth between the same scene with two slightly different angles of filming. The polarized glasses either flicker or block out the spectrum of the the opposite shot. The flickering takes place so fast that our brain doesn’t pick up the shots as separate, but rather combines them to create the 3D experience by mimicking the way our eyes see the real world.
    
    Feel free to correct any of that, I running off memory at the moment since I am at work.
  - http://thecinematard.blogspot.com/ nerrojj
    
    I am no techie. I am not 100% up to speed on the latest toys especially those surrounding home theater equipment. From what I have experienced the best studio have to offer for home viewing of a 3-D movie is the traditional Red/Blue 3-D glasses from yesteryear. If I am not mistaking the Coraline DVD came with R/B glasses. Form experience I have only seen digital 3-D glass “Real-D” at the movie theater, hence why you have to pay at lease 2.50$ extra for the 3-D experience, not necessarily to pay for the glasses but for a experience you can’t get at home. All of my friends who have seen the same 3-D movie in theaters and at home, have said the movie theater’s digital 3-D was better and that the R/B glasses doesn’t cut it. So as being a non-techie I vote for digital 3-D…Real-D
  - http://thecinematard.blogspot.com/ nerrojj
    
    This is from Real-D’s website on the subject manner
    
    http://www.reald.com/Content/in-the-home.aspx

Around the Web

Iron Man 2 Could Be Converted To 3D

This post was written by :

Recent Posts

Blogroll

Archives