I don't really like 3D movies, so I won't see VDT in 3D. But I don't really care if it is made in 3D as long as they don't add stuff too it and they show it also in 2D.

I do think that seeing the painting go from a flat picture to something with depth would look really cool and would be an artistic addition to the storyline.

Although I am usually against 3D movies throwing things at the audience, I might be able to handle a wave or some spray being thrown at us, from out of the picture. Don't you think that this scene above all would benefit from a 3D interpretation?

If I were making the film, I would be tempted to keep the movie in 2D until they get sucked into the painting and then everything would be in 3D, something akin to The Wizard of Oz going from B&W to Color. In a small way it would make Narnia feel more real than this world. (Which isn't true, but I'm tired of interpretations fo Narnia where it is merely a "fantasy" world or a dream world, -something less than real. This might be a nice counter balance.) Of course though, I'd have the audience wearing the glasses from the beginning of movie. No pesky "GLASSES ON" signs flashing on the screen.

Whatziznehm, I explained how 3D technology works in my previous comment on page 3. I'm not going to rewrite it all, so I suggest you refer back to my other comment. As to how they convert a 2D movie made for 2D into 3D, I'm not sure. I can look it up, though. And I'm guessing that it'll be ten times easier since they filmed it digitally, rather than with 35mm film.

Oh, okay. Thank you for clearing that up for me. Now that I know how 3D works, I am really beginning to see how they might be able to convert the movie to 3D. I have done a short film before so I know a little bit about the process of making a movie. I would think that they would have to produce the second "angle" digitally. So, if you went to see the movie in 3D, half the image would be "real" and the other half would be created digitally. That is the only way I can think of where they could convert the movie to 3D and not have to re-shoot all the scenes.

In essence, I am also agreeing with Fire Fairy: if the way I have described is the way that they convert 2D films into 3D films, then, because VDT was shot digitally, it will be a whole lot easier to convert than a movie that was not shot digitally.

I am really quite excited about this. One thing I was think was a problem with some of the previous 3D movies is that the story wasn't the greatest, but the effects were awesome, which made it worth seeing. I think the difference here will be that we have one of the best storylines ever written. I think that since VDT is in 3D, it will have more viewers, thereby grossing more money, which means more movies!!

And let me explain how 3D works... The glasses are made so that one lens pops inward slightly, while the other pops outward, changing the way your eyes see the image.

I'm not sure if that's how 3D works. I've never heard of creating a 3D effect by using different degrees of curvature on the glasses.

I do know of two ways that are used to make a 3D image:

One way is to color the two images: one red, and the other cyan. Then you superimpose the two images. You have to wear a set of glasses with a red gel over the left eye and a cyan gel over the right in order to see the film properly. The red eye can only see the red image and the cyan eye can only see the cyan. The brain blends the colors and the images and, viola, you get a 3D image.

Another way is to take the two images and to project the one image polarizing the light clockwise, and to project the other image polarizing the light counter-clockwise. The audience then wears a pair of glasses in which one lens is polarized clockwise and the other counter-clockwise, so again, each eye is seeing only the image intended. The brain does the blending, and, tada, the 3D image appears!

Walden was very kind to explain the process in their study guide to "Journey of the Center of the Earth." You can find it here:

http://www.walden.com/guide/journey_to_ ... the_earth/

^^ when a movie is filmed for 3D, it is a digital body camera with twin lenses.....

I saw an article today which made a very interesting point about the plethora of recent 3D announcements which i hadn't yet considered.... Given how many 3D films there are now scheduled to come out at Christmas, how are cinemas going to find a sufficient number of 3D screens to accommodate them all?

Avatar had pretty much a free run on 3D-capable screens throughout last Christmas, but when Alice in Wonderland was released, all the cinema exhibitors kicked Avatar off its 3D screens to make way for Alice, even though Avatar was still going strong at that point. As a result Avatar was reported to have lost out on a fair few extra million from the tail-end of its box-office run.

So what will happen with Dawn Treader, when Tron Legacy comes out in 3D just one week after? No doubt most cinemas will clear Dawn Treader from its 3D screens in order to make way for Tron, and that will be that. Admittedly most movies do make a large proportion of their box-office in their first week, so it might still prove to be worth the cost when you factor in the higher ticket charges for 3D, but still Dawn Treader in 3D could prove to be a "one week only" deal.

Even if Dawn Treader hangs around on a limited number of 3D screens for a second week whilst Tron takes top billing, they would both then face competition for screen space when Fox's own Gulliver's Travels comes out in 3D the week after that.

Basically, i'd go and see it in 3D the first week, or you probably wont get to see it in 3D at all (unless your local cinema is blessed with having a very large number of 3D capable screens)

^^ good point! if Harry Potter is going to be 3D, then it will be in a lot of theaters.....wow! I hopw that 3D won't be a bad thing for VotDT!

So what will happen with Dawn Treader, when Tron Legacy comes out in 3D just one week after? No doubt most cinemas will clear Dawn Treader from its 3D screens in order to make way for Tron, and that will be that.

Good point icarus. By your logic the studio will have little over a week to make extra $$$ on the 3-D tickets.
After that the movie's success will depend on its own merit in storytelling and film-making –not 3-D pizzazz.

So what will happen with Dawn Treader, when Tron Legacy comes out in 3D just one week after? No doubt most cinemas will clear Dawn Treader from its 3D screens in order to make way for Tron,

I hadn't thought of that. I know the local theater has a very limited number of 3D screens and I can see VDT getting kicked off them.

The more I think about VDT in 3D, the less I'm liking the idea. Yes, technological advancements have been made, but VDT was originally only going to be in 2D and therefore will probably look better in 2D no matter what technology can accomplish. Avatar may have been superb cinematography wise, but it was supposed to be. The strength of VDT is not in the graphics, it is in the story. There is potential for great graphics moments, but that shouldn't be what drives the film. If it brings in more money, great, but if it doesn't, then I think it's a bad idea.

I saw an article today which made a very interesting point about the plethora of recent 3D announcements which i hadn't yet considered.... Given how many 3D films there are now scheduled to come out at Christmas, how are cinemas going to find a sufficient number of 3D screens to accommodate them all?

Let us not forget that Phil Anshutz, owner of Walden Media, also owns a little organization known as the Regal Entertainment Group, a theater company. Per Wikipedia, Regal Entertainment owns "6,775 screens in 548 locations in 39 states and the District of Columbia." Me thinks those theaters won't exactly clear VDT out to make room for a competing film after the first week...

I am very excited that it will be in 3D - I think that the film (or as much as I know of it) will be very compatible with 3D...And I know that 3D movies are an expanding market and I think that (the film being 3D) will help boost revenue. I also think the conversion will turn out fine.

Now if I can only convince my parents to drive me an hour to see it in 3D (hopefully I'll have my license by then)!

^that's true. But that's still not very many theatres all over America. I guess I'll just have to watch the movie twice in one week then, b/c I do so want to see it 2D first but I want to make sure I see it in 3D too

Also, does this mean they will have less time to finish the movie? They'll need to finish the movie and still have enough time to convert it to 3D.

I don't know how the whole process works so I could be wrong, but I know the decision to convert Clash of the Titans into 3D came in late January, the film was originally going to be released on March 26 and due to the 3D conversion, it was pushed to a week later on April 2.
Since they seemed to manage the converting quickly I don't think we will have to worry to much about the time frame of them converting the VDT.
But like I said I don't know how the process works and I think VDT will be longer then Clash of the Titans so it may take longer.

Also, I'm going next Friday to see Clash of the Titans in 3D, so I'll check out the quality of the 3D

Given how many 3D films there are now scheduled to come out at Christmas, how are cinemas going to find a sufficient number of 3D screens to accommodate them all?

I've been wondering about that, and I came to the same conclusion as you. They'll probably have to throw Narnia out when Tron comes in. It's kind of like if every theater in the world only had one screen, and you had to choose if you'd keep last week's movie or go ahead with a new one.

Well, most theaters only do have one screen with 3D capabilities, so they'll have to make that decision. The good news is that since Deathly Hallows will have already been out for two weeks we'll probably see most theaters changing over to VDT. But, after VDT, I'm pretty sure that most theaters will switch to Tron, since Tron was made with 3D in mind from the beginning and is sure to be a visual treat.

I am glad to be reminded that Anshutz owns Regal theatres though. Maybe VDT can hang on for one more week.

What I don't understand is why Fox decided to release another 3D fantasy film just two weeks after Dawn Treader. Why make it hard on themselves? Do we really need Gulliver's Travels to be a December film?