Showing posts with label avatar. Show all posts
Showing posts with label avatar. Show all posts

Friday, April 2, 2010

"3-Don't"???

This weekend marks the release of "Clash Of The Titans" in 3D (And 2D). While it boasts an impressive cast list, and certainly a timeless storyline of ancient gods and goddesses, along with fantastical mythological creatures, there's an overriding issue that has cast a pall over the movie: it really wasn't meant to be in 3D.
The film was originally shot in standard 2D, then, wait for it, retrofitted to 3D in the hopes of raking in more dough from moviegoers. So, here's the deal, it was converted into a 3D movie at the last minute, following the success of, you guessed it, that money making machine known as "Avatar."
Now, "Avatar" is a completely different story. It was always meant to be in 3D, was shot specifically with those stereoscopic effects in mind, and meant to be released that way.
Unfortunately, the trend now is, if it isn't in 3D yet, let's do it after the fact. Personally, I think this is a mistake that will ultimately lead to lower film quality. Let's face it, not everything was made to be viewed in 3D. Thankfully, moviegoers will have an option to see these "conversions" in standard form.
Recently, "Alice In Wonderland" proved to be another 3D cash cow. But, again, the movie was not originally produced for 3D. Still, it made a ton of money. And that's obviously the key for studios. If it looks like 3D will pull in the crowds, then let's have more, please.
And that's exactly what you'll get. This year, there are more than a dozen movies scheduled to be released in the 3D format. Some, like "Toy Story 3," (which I'm really looking forward to) were shot for 3D. Others, like Ridley Scott's "Robin Hood," with Russell Crowe, were given the 3D treatment after production had already ended. Check out this article from The New York Times about the proliferation of 3D conversions. So, watch out--don't be fooled into thinking that every movie thrown at you with a nice "3D" marketing campaign is the real deal. And they definitely won't be marketed like this: "Come see the big blockbuster action movie converted to 3D in postproduction!" No. They'll be pushed at you just like a regular 3D movie. Clever, eh? Deceptive, methinks.
To be honest, I think despite the controversy, "Clash Of The Titans" will do well at the weekend box office. I think people will be curious, and that most of them will see it in the retrofitted 3D format. It's the "novelty effect." It's still up against that 3D juggernaut, "How To Train Your Dragon," though.
So, what's next for the 3D bandwagon? Television manufacturers have already released 3D TVs, and certain programming outlets, notably DirecTV, have said they'll begin providing 3D channels starting this summer.
In my opinion, this will go down as one of the biggest blunders in the history of home entertainment. People are just now turning loose of the cash for nice flatscreen LCD televisions. Why on earth would they want to spend money on an unproven electronic device with, for now, an extremely limited amount of programming??
We are, however, witnessing an important shift in the direction of home entertainment. And, even though we may scoff at the idea of 3D televisions in our living rooms, someday in the not too distant future, all of this will be pretty standard stuff. We'll be tuning into holograms for sports coverage, and immersing ourselves in the action of our favorite drama series or sitcom by "living the experience."
I have no doubt that will happen. The technology already exists. And you can bet somewhere in those research and development labs, manufacturers are hard at work to deliver this form of entertainment for your home.
So, while 3D TV may not immediately be a huge hit (even if it crashes and burns, it's still an important step), it will probably eventually take off--maybe not right away, though. I predict that we'll see it become more mainstream in around 5 years. That timeframe will also allow prices to drop, and manufacturers to develop competing technologies.
Kinda fun to think about what comes next, hm?

Saturday, March 6, 2010

PopSnap! 2010 Oscar Picks

It's that time of year again. Oscar time! So, grab yourself a Barley Pop--if you're A Single Man, get an Avatar, take your Crazy Heart, and go Up to The Hurt Locker to take a look at our predictions for the winners of top prizes this year.
Before we get to the picks, in many ways this has been an easy year for Oscar, with favorites certain to win in many categories. But you never know what or who might pull an upset.
Here are our selections for the golden statue this year:

Best Supporting Actress:
We were united on this one. Grant, Katie, and I all selected Mo'Nique for her performance in the film "Precious." This would be her first Academy Award. Although my heart still goes out to Vera Farmiga for her work in "Up In The Air."



Best Supporting Actor:
Another unanimous decision, and a pretty easy choice here. We all chose Christoph Waltz for "Inglorious Basterds." He's already received the Golden Globe and Screen Actors Guild awards for this one.





Best Actress:
Another great list of nominees:

Katie says she's pulling for Sandra Bullock in "The Blind Side," but also feels like Gabourey Sadibe from "Precious" could win.
Grant's pick: Sandra Bullock.
My pick: Meryl Streep for "Julie & Julia," a charming, mesmerizing performance in my opinion.









Best Actor:
We all chose Jeff Bridges for his fine work in "Crazy Heart." Such a true to life portrayal of a broken man on a search for redemption, and some wonderful music featured here.







Best Director:
Many people say it all comes down to Kathryn Bigelow for "The Hurt Locker," and her ex, James Cameron for "Avatar."

Katie's pick: James Cameron.
Grant's pick: Kathryn Bigelow.
My pick: Kathryn Bigelow.

Overlooked director nominee: Jason Reitman for "Up In The Air."









Best Picture:
For the first time in many years, there are 10 Best Picture nominees this year.
Katie's pick: "The Blind Side"
Grant's pick: "Avatar"
My pick: "The Blind Side"

Congratulations to all of the nominees. Tune in Sunday night on ABC to watch co-hosts Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin, and find out who will take home the coveted statuette!

Be sure to listen to our Podcast on blogtalkradio for more discussion on this year's nominees. You'll find it on the right hand side of the page. We'll recap the show, and the winners next week.

Friday, January 29, 2010

James Cameron Sinks His Own Ship


"Avatar" can’t be stopped. While the doe-eyed rainforest warriors have yet to overtake the Caped Crusader in “The Dark Knight,” (in domestic sales) the oversea box office has surpassed James Cameron’s other indie flick, Titanic. Raking in $1.859 billion in the process, "Avatar" offers more than just a pretty face and $13 ticket price.

Leaving the visuals out of the equation in a sea of remakes and wish-they-had-never-been-mades, the original idea of the Na'vi people created by Cameron is refreshing. I can’t agree with the people who say this movie is an old idea with new visuals; The film stands for more than that, and money speaks louder than words. Word–of-mouth from this film should happily keep people in their 3D glasses.

Much has changed since the movie “Titanic” debuted in 1997. Theatre-goers can experience "Avatar" in multiple formats including 2D, 3D, and IMAX.

I saw this movie in 3D, and the anticipation of what would be flying out of the screen was worth the extra dough!! I suggest seeing "Avatar" in 3D while you can. I don’t know about you, but I won’t be buying a 3D TV anytime soon. If you can appreciate the movie for what it is, an action blockbuster filled with creative creature and lush landscapes, you will enjoy the experience. In the end, isn’t that what movies are all about anyway?

Cameron’s "Avatar" set the standard for blockbusters from now on. This is the season where the Oscar indie-flicks reign supreme, and the winter months don’t usually see movies with huge budgets; "Avatar" maintained a rumored $300-500 million budget. I have a feeling “It’s no Avatar” will be a widely used phrase to characterize a movie that just doesn’t impress the way "Avatar" has for present audiences and critics. Until we can start tasting movies, I think "Avatar" has laid the map outlining the directions all new movies will ultimately have to follow. It looks like James Cameron has sunk the Titanic yet again, but either way, he wins.

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Kettle Corn


Kettle Corn is what's popping in the world of pop culture. It's like someone just popped a fresh batch of popcorn -- and the smell is too good to pass up!

Experts believe "Avatar" will surpass "Titanic" as the highest grossing film of all-time!

Head on over to hulu to check out the "A-Team" trailer.

One of the most anticipated games of the year, "Mass Effect 2" hits store shelves today.

Jay Leno will be appearing on "Oprah" Thursday.

Lady Antebellum's second album, "Need You Now" is out.