The Green Hornet and The Last Airbender Getting Crappy 3D Conversions

Just stop with the 3D conversions already! 3D conversions suck, didn’t the studios learn already from how bad the Clash of the Titans 3D conversion was? It’s such a waste of time and money to cheaply convert films into 3D.

Seth Rogan’s The Green Hornet has moved it’s release date from December 22nd to January 14th 2011 so that it can be converted into 3D. Of course Sony Pictures is using the term “3D enhancements”. Deadline reports,

Because no visual effects on the film have been done yet by Sony Imageworks, which is just getting into post-production on it. So the studio says it's not a 3D conversion but an enhancement, and there's already "great depth and scope" to the shots from director Michel Gondry , who has experience with 3D videos.

Yeah, whatever they can say what they want, we all know what it really is. Then recently, Seth Rogan told HitFix,

Evan Goldberg, Michel Gondry and myself could not be more excited about going 3D. The truth is that this is something that we have wanted since the very first conversations we all had about the film. A lot of the visually driven sequences Michel came up were first conceived for a 3D movie… What gets me most excited is the fact that Gondry is so enthusiastic about it. I think that Gondry’s visuals done in 3D will give us something we’ve never seen before.

Then why didn’t they shoot the damn film in 3D? Now it's just going to look like a cheap ass pop-up book on screen.

Then Paramount Pictures is jumping on board the 3D conversion bandwagon by giving M. Night Shyamalan’s film The Last Airbender the 3D makeover. Apparently the are using the same 3D company that James Cameron used for Avatar. The only big difference is Avatar was actually shot in 3D, so it doesn't really matter.

The producer of The Last Air bender Frank Marshall recently tweeted this statement.

We have been looking at the 3-D for months. The movie was designed to take advantage of the conversion and the filmmakers will supervise.

Oh sure they say that now, but it doesn’t really matter. If these movies wanted to be 3D then they should have shot the films that way. But they didn’t. At this point they are just doing it because everybody else is, which is a shame. What sucks most about this whole this is people are going to pay almost $20 dollars to go see these movies in cheap 3D. This is just a way for the studio to try and suck more money out of movie goers.

Like I’ve said time and time again, it’s not the 3D element that gets me into the movie theater to see these films, it’s the story, and I think the filmmakers and studios should be more focused on that than on the 3D movie element. If I can see these movie in 2D I will, because neither of these films need to be converted or seen in 3D.

What do you all think?

GeekTyrant Homepage