‘Dawn Treader’ Converted to 3D Without Apted’s Approval?
In an article featuring Joe Dante (director of Gremlins and Small Soldiers) about films being converted to 3D, Dante mentions Director Michael Apted:
“A lot of directors don’t necessarily want to add 3D, it’s done without their consent,” [Dante] tells me. “My friend Michael Apted just did a Narnia picture, and he was very upset that they insisted that his finished film be turned into 3D, because he had no intention when he was making it of doing it. He said, ‘if I was gonna’ do a 3D movie, I would have done it differently’.
Read the full article here. Thanks to ‘Icarus’ for the find.
oh dear.
Wow, I had no idea that most directors did not like the idea of converting a movie in 3D, even if it makes more money.
At least we know it's going to be dialogue/story based and not all done for the WOW factor as far as 3D goes, right? come on fellow narnia webbers, don't be glum, chin up and see that this is most likely good news not bad.
At least we know that there won't be any obvious made-for-3D shots!!!
Yeah, I think this is actually good news. At least for people like me who were planning on seeing it in 2D anyway.
yeah, this is probably a good thing. though I do feel sorry for Michael Apted. I would be furious if I diretcted a movie and then someone turned it into 3D behind my back.
uh oh…..well, i'm gonna see it in 2D, so i wont have to worry about any intentional 3D scenes. thats kinda rude in my opinion that they do that without director's consent. boy, not only is 3D bad for your eyes, now they're turning movies into 3D without proper permission 🙁
Go 2d! 🙂
That's pretty rough but it's great that Apted created VDT with 2D in mind. 3D is a gimmick, it should not be a way of life (for movies).
Oh my, Michael just got Apted.
oh, well at least we know it will be just as good if not better. cause like with many movie's that are made for the 3D are kinda cheesey as 2D.
uh-oh. That can be very bad if Apted didn't intend VDT to be 3D. A story could never really come out correctly in a film that was never intended to be 3D. I can see why Apdet could be very upset.
Wow, Fox overrode a director's wishes? Never saw that coming! 😉
This isn't good… I can already picture the reviews: Fantasy film tainted by atrocious 3D effects.
This has better not affect the critical reaction to this film. A bad 3D film can hurt the 2D viewing, affecting the overall reception of the film and word of mouth. ;P
3D isn't bad for your eyes if you follow the safety instructions.
no way!
I don't think they should have gone against Apted's wishes, but I saw the trailer in 3D, and it did look beautiful, I mean the snow was falling out of the sceen and it looked like you could reach out and touch it. Even Mom was excited about it being 3D…
Though I don't like it that they when Apted didn't want it. But don't think it will *ruin* the movie especially since the DVD won't be 3D
I think I'll watch it in 2d.
Uh oh…. I like 2D better, but still…
I think this is good news! This means that Apted wasn't just doing stuff so it would cool in 3D.
I don't think it's wrong to do stuff just for the sake of looking beautiful sometimes. Like the snow in the library. The purpose there was to add magic and nostalgia. No necessarily to advance the plot, and I think that's okay. C.S. Lewis wrote bits in his books that are quite poetic – simply about enjoying the scenery, describing it in a way that brings great pleasure. In a movie, you do something similar, only it's visual.
So I don't think we should bash anybody for putting in shots or scenes just for their aesthetic qualities. Granted, that's not what the whole film should be focused on, and I don't think that is what they're focusing on.
Okay, that's my two cents. 🙂
Oops, I meant to say "*not* necessarily." My keyboard is being stupid! 😛
Oh no! I mean, this is good and bad news. 1, how terrible to do it without the director's consent, I think that is ridiculous. 2, He would've done it differently? Does that mean the movie will look awkward in 3D or will it be better because the focus won't be on the 3D aspect? I may watch it in 3D, but I'm more of fan of 2D, so at least the DVD will be in that…
so much for the theory that the shot of Coriakin throwing out the scroll was done just for 3D…
Glad to hear this. This means they didn't make the movie to accommodate for 3D. I didn't read the article, just the new post here. Sorry to hear Apted is upset though. I'm also glad that I won't feel like I'm missing anything special by not seeing the film in 3D.
Just one more reason to add to my list of why I'm refusing to see VoDT in 3D…
The comments really don't give us an idea of what Apted thinks about 3-D in general, just that he is upset that he didn't know they were going to do 3-D until after he was done filming! I like Dante's comments:
"To just take a film that was created to be in 2D, and send it to India and have it come back in this dark, fuzzy, View-Master slide kind of 3D, is a disservice to the movies and it's frankly picking the pockets of the audience."
What I've said all along. http://live.hollywoodjesus.com/?p=5626
I'm not seeing the movie in 3D (unless the DVD comes out in 3D–yeah, right), but I hope that the average movie-goer won't be appalled at the quality of the movie in theaters. It would be awful if everyone blasted the movie for bad 3D even though it was a good story. If the quality can just be average, it might be all right…
At least we know none of the scenes were done for 3D viewing. That is encouraging.
Ditto!
I dont see waht the big deal is,isnt a movie even better in 3d?
I hate to burst your bubble, but the fact is that since they are converting it to 3D, all they are after is to 'add the gimmick' to the movie, which means very likely that we will see some 'obvious made for the 3d shots.' like alice in wonderland the CG will most likely be rendered out in 3d and not converted. This really stinks, movies that are filmed in 3D are easier to look at and not to mention look better, because the artists actually think about their scenes and use 3d very effectively, If you've ever seen UP in 3d, talk about art, art that isn't cheese, but looks absolutely beautiful in 3d, and also think 'Avatar,' the only thing I like about that movie was the visuals and (most important to this discussion) the true filmed 3D.
lol!
ehhhhhhhhhhhhh………..
Well, we were a little worried that the directors would make the film all about the effects and not about the story.
Well, that's a visual effects shot. The decision to convert the movie to 3D was made after filming, but long before post-production finished. Therefore, the visual effects team has had plenty of time top adjust shots to make them more 3Dish.
I wouldn't say it's done "without proper permission". Apted is working for Walden Media/Fox, not the other way around. So basically, the studio can do what they wish with the finished product.
uh oh…i hope 3D is ok for the way it was shot.
yep, you said it
Its too bad, but we have to remember that these movie makers are out to make money, not to please die-hard Narnia fans like us 🙂 and that's the case with any movie. Even Apted, I'm sure, liked 2D for this film because he felt it would suit this film best, not because it would please us all. All we can do is support whatever they do to keep ourselves happy..did that even make sense?
uuuuuhhhhhhh… Im almost changing my mind to see it in 2d
Wow! if even the diector hates the idea of the movie being 3D this has to say something
I wanted to watch it in 2d anyway.
I'm SO happy to hear this! My theatre doesn't offer 3D. And to be honest I didn't want 3D at all. They try and sassy things up unnecessarily for 3D & forget the heart of the story. It makes me glad to know that what I'll watch in a few weeks time in traditional 2D is what it is and it's the way the Director wanted it to be seen.