Walter Murch on 3d. Let's chat.

[PatC]

Let the games begin!

[KETCH ROSSi]

Just an other Opinion ;)

Edit: Far from the truth might I add..

[Noah Kadner]

He makes some valid (and well-known) points from a technical POV. But from a box office perspective, let's face it audiences are eating up 3D. And at the end of the day that's the thing that matters to career filmmakers.

Noah

[Steven-Marc C.]

Isn't the problem lessened through the use of (mostly) positive convergence (ie. behind the screen)?

[Charlie Anderson]

I know that the green hornet was shot 2d and converted to 3d, saw it last night (not in 3d though, will only see a movie in 3d if it's shot in 3d) and noticed that at the end. So when he talks about a review of the green hornet in 3d that might be throwing some of the issues there. I would have to say though, after seeing 3D work in the field, especially with the guys from OH, I could see a difference in the quality of 3D when it is shot 3D as opposed to making it an after thought. if any of that made sense haha

[Francesco Bonomo]

Just an other Opinion ;)

Absolutely, but an opinion expressed by one of the greatest film editors of all time is not really "just another opinion", wouldn't you agree?

Edit: Far from the truth might I add..

Could you please tell me where in his letter Mr. Murch is saying something false?

But from a box office perspective, let's face it audiences are eating up 3D.

Well, that's not entirely true. Actually, the studios are getting more money per screen (and per movie) when it comes to 3D because of the premium on tickets, but 3D hasn't caused more people to go to theaters.

And at the end of the day that's the thing that matters to career filmmakers.

I believe what matters to filmmakers is to tell their stories the best way they can and possibly make a living out of it, not just to make huge amounts of money (besides, I don't think it's the filmmakers who benefit economically from 3D, it's the studios).

[KETCH ROSSi]

Absolutely, but an opinion expressed by one of the greatest film editors of all time is not really "just another opinion", wouldn't you agree?

I only agree with his well known factors and technical aspects of 2D Monoscopic Cinematography, but I absolutely
disagreed on his entire opinion on 3D, no matter how great of an Editor He is BIAS, what it is in concern?
The need to re-learn the art?

Just saying, don't pay too much attention to me, I'm just expressing my Opinion as well and I'm really a NO body ;)

But the Love for the Arts in my point is that I love everything about it, and I love every single tool at my Disposal to
express it, 3D is yet and other, POWERFUL tool i the Bag, some see it some don't some love it some hate it, but it is
in there and it will not be thrown away any time soon no matter how much some oppose to it, they need to get over it!!

3D today, is in the same place as Sound, Color, HD, and many other Technological advancements that we
will see in the near or far feature, HOLOGRAM CINEMA??

Thing is that all that is new takes time to adjust to, some more the others, but adjust we will, especially when the
Economics derived form far out pass those of other technologies available, and 3D now does surpass more then 3 to 1
any and all its 2D Monoscopic sales per each individual Title, despite of the large difference in lower numbers of Cinema
were 3D can be currently showed in, vs. 2D Monoscopic.

[Peter Matthes]

... one of the greatest film editors of all time.

I think he is the greatest film editor of all time.

[Francesco Bonomo]

I think he is the greatest film editor of all time.

I was about to write that, Peter, but I thought it would've focused the conversation on different things :-)

I absolutely
disagreed on his entire opinion on 3D, no matter how great of an Editor He is BIAS, what it is in concern? The need to re-learn the art?

Fair enough. I think things are pretty simple, he doesn't like it and was voicing his opinion, I don't really believe he has a secret agenda or he's scared by something "new". After all, as the article points out, he's the only editor who has been nominated for movies shot on 4 different editing system, from the moviola to FC.

Just saying, don't pay too much attention to me, I'm just expressing my Opinion as well and I'm really a NO body ;)

You see, I asked that question because I like to hear everyone's opinion, Murch, Rossi, everyone, even more so from people who have a different point of view from mine :-)

As for 3D being another tool, I do agree with you, although I don't like it at all and won't see another movie in 3D no matter what, but that's me, a matter of personal preference, I guess. As I've written many times before here and elsewhere, I'm sure it's perfect for some things, and wrong for others, and in the end it's always great to have different tools to choose from.

[Felix K.]

And I agree with him, sorry Ketch. I experience exactly what he says and even if I didn't, the eluding "Brechtian" element of 3D movies is exactly the opposite of what made the art-form "film" successful. Otherwise, we'd still rather go and see a play (that is real 3D by the way). :)
Sure, some movies take you on a ride; a setting like the new TRON movie is perfekt for 3D. I wouldn't want to have 3D in a drama or lovestory though. Not even a thriller or a comedy film.
Still, this is also coming from a nobody, much more "no" then Ketch is for sure, the humble man!