Spider-Man shot in real 3D

[Smokey]

The Amazing Spider-Man which will be released on July 3th is in true 3D as oppose to other 3D movies that are post-converted to 3D. If any movie deserve it, Spiderman is probably an ideal choice for 3D as I imagine there will be alot of "swinging" and chasing shots.

Shot on Red Epic camera with 5K resolution, Spiderman director Marc Webb said about his style of 3D " [Avatar director] James Cameron likes to play 3D as depth. The jungles of Avatar are a great example of that. I liked pushing the 3D a little bit further, so that it would come out at you."

http://collider.com/wp-content/uploads/amazing-spider-man-andrew-garfield-subway-600x346.jpg

[3LB]

I'm sure this will be a good movie, but a reboot of what was already one of the best comic book transitions? Almost smacks of "if it ain't broke..." The few trailers I've seen looked good, but I dunno if I feel like paying money to see another 'origin' flick so soon after the last Spiderman movie (which wasn't very good). I realize Toby McGuire can't be Spiderman forever, but at least The Incredible Hulk stayed away from trying to reintroduce an alternate origins plot.

[Smokey]

May be for the fact that ths film was shot in [real] 3D using new specialized cameras will set it apart from other instalments that were not in real 3D. But you do have a point as to redundancy of this film so soon out of gate as I was thinking the same thing.

Maybe they are trying to make it franchize like Batman with new cast and director every couple of years. And hopefully new direction in romance as bubble-gum romance in last movie almost tanked the whole film.

[E-Stat]

I liked pushing the 3D a little bit further, so that it would come out at you."
What I really liked about Avatar was that the 3D perspective didn't "come out at you" as some do - perhaps intentionally. My aesthetic for music and video alike is to replicate the live experience such that your senses are sufficiently fooled and really don't notice the artifice. You're just there.
.

[RGA]

Well I saw the Avengers and Men in Black in 3D and I felt both were actually pretty good. Not the movies - but the 3D didn't bug me.

Men In Black I was fortunate enough to see in a SOTR theater and it may have been the best out of the films I've seen using 3D since Avatar.

I am going to see Prometheus tonight but in 2D because the girl I am going with gets bad headaches from 3D.

[Feanor]

Well I saw the Avengers and Men in Black in 3D and I felt both were actually pretty good. Not the movies - but the 3D didn't bug me.

Men In Black I was fortunate enough to see in a SOTR theater and it may have been the best out of the films I've seen using 3D since Avatar.

I am going to see Prometheus tonight but in 2D because the girl I am going with gets bad headaches from 3D.
... Sometimes compromises are necessary.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

May be for the fact that ths film was shot in [real] 3D using new specialized cameras will set it apart from other instalments that were not in real 3D. But you do have a point as to redundancy of this film so soon out of gate as I was thinking the same thing.

Smoke, these camera's are not all that specialized, but they are the current flavor of the year among Hollywood cinematographers. Also the argument between post 3D and shot live 3D is basically a psychological one. Well done 3D created in post, and live shot 3D does not look any different from one another. Both will result in clean 3D images devoid of crosstalk. If I didn't tell anyone which was live or post, it is likely they would not know which is which.


Maybe they are trying to make it franchize like Batman with new cast and director every couple of years. And hopefully new direction in romance as bubble-gum romance in last movie almost tanked the whole film.

It did not almost tank the movie, it tanked it - hence the reboot.

I think they are making a big mistake in pushing images "off " the screen towards you. This is much harder on the eyes(MUCH harder) than using 3D as a tool of depth like Cameron does. Those of us that do not have problems with 3D and depth, will likely get headaches from having images pushing out to us. Besides, you do this too much, and it begins to look cheesey and gimmicky.

[RGA]

FWIW

I ended up seeing Prometheus in 3D with the girl and she didn't get ill - even with the Aliens movie gore. It is probably my favorite 3D movie in terms of picture and sound - especially sound - THX but better?

Amazing Spiderman was amazing - better than the 1st and 3rd movies - I liked part 2 the best (I consider it the best super-hero movie as a complete story)

This new one is darker but I'd slot in behind part 2. Ebert's review is bang on The Amazing Spider-Man :: rogerebert.com :: Reviews (http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20120628/REVIEWS/120629969)

I was worried about the new casting since Tobey seemed to fit the role perfectly. Garfield may be even better - he is more of a quiet introspective outsider kind of nerd with a sadness but it comes off more realistic than Tobey's Parker. Not Tobey's fault as that is what Raimi was after.

The villain here is pretty good too although Doc Ock is difficult to beat as he's a more sympathetic villain.

My only complaint is that it might be a bit too dark for a character I grew up with on those old cartoons and Spidey should be a bit "brighter" and funnier than moving towards the Batman end of the spectrum.

Still 4/5 and the 3D was never intrusive or distracting. OTOH I also didn't get any Gee-Wiz Moments and could just has easily have seen it in 2D without losing anything.