Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows to Cast Spells in 3-D
by Ethan Anderton
January 26, 2010
It's getting to the point that we can pretty much assume every big blockbuster will fill an IMAX screen, go digital 3-D, or even be dashing enough to combine the two. Add another big franchise into the 3-D pile as Heat Vision reports Warner Bros will release both parts of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows in 3-D. There hasn't been an official announcement from WB, but coming from THR, this seems legitimate. It's important to note that unlike Avatar, Deathly Hallows was not shot for 3-D, but much like the select sequences from Order of the Phoenix and Half-Blood Prince, the entire film will be converted into 3-D.
While I'll admit that some of this 3-D business is getting out of hand, when I saw the 3-D sequences on an IMAX screen during the climactic moments in the Department of Mysteries in Order of the Phoenix, I was quite impressed. The world of Harry Potter is one that I absolutely love to be immersed in, and if 3-D can help that, then I'm all for it. While I don't think it will have quite the impact as seeing the world of Pandora in 3-D, it should be quite a fun theater experience, especially if an IMAX 3-D release manifests itself as well (and that's more than likely going to happen). Are you guys up for watching Harry Potter in 3-D?
Hattori Hanzo on Jan 26, 2010
my question is, when are we going to get to the point, where we can just purchase a pair of glasses and not pay the extra charge to see each movie? Because if that doesnt happen, 3-d's not gonna last, people get sick of paying more.
troy on Jan 26, 2010
It's like complaining that a movie is going to be converted to color. And complaining that instead of just being able to see the movie in Black and White, you will have two options. It's amusing to see people upset with this ahahaha
Darunia on Jan 26, 2010
Im confused with the complaints. First of all, cant you choose to see it in 3D or not. Secondly, i dont know where u go, but the theater i went to gave you the glasses for free. The only theater that charges more money around me is the IMAX. Why dont you complaing about other things that needs attention, like rebooting spiderman
Franzen93 on Jan 26, 2010
But dimensionalised 3D looks terrible, it has horrid focus plane warping artifacts and if not done right you get people appearing to have concave chests etc. Boo hiss, shoot it in stereo, or at least have the full CGI sequences rendered in stereo. If anyone saw the Pirannah 3D trailer you'll know what I'm talking about. Yuck!
Dogson on Jan 26, 2010
If it was shot in 3D then i'd say awesome. why not. but to have it converted to 3d... not a good idea.
vold on Jan 26, 2010
#2 You can't keep your glasses in the States? In Australia you pay a dollar extra and you get your glasses to kkep. Next time you go to see a 3D film, you don't have to pay for the glasses. I would be royally pissed if I had to keep buying those stupid things (3D is way too expensive already). #5 Agreed. Shoot it in 3D if you want to show it in 3D. No distorted films please.
Mark on Jan 26, 2010
The thing that scares me about 3D is that the 'normal' folks (h.p. fans especially) will pay more just to see a movie that has been converted, not shot specifically for 3D. Therefore, why would any director actually go through the trouble to shoot in 3D when he can just convert in post? I'd fathom that most people now will go see 3D not because it is enhancing the story in any way, but for the simple fact that they think they are missing something if they watch in 2D. I cringe at the idea that five years from now there won't be a single 2D movie out there.
germs on Jan 26, 2010
Honestly, I am so fed up with 3D. Not only does it give me a headache, but the whole thing has never really appealed to me, and I can very much do without things popping out of the screen at me. Also, I'd much rather watch a movie without having to wear another set of glasses over my already existing ones. It's annoying. I think Avatar was really the only movie I ever enjoyed watching in 3D and that was because I found that the 3D enhanced the video to such an amazing quality, and I completely forgot that it was in 3D as I was watching it. If they were able to achieve that level with every 3D movie, maybe I wouldn't mind it that much, but they can't. Especially when it wasn't shot for 3D, but converted. So to this news I say, no thank you. There is absolutely no point in HP being 3D other than the fact that 3D is the "hot-new-trend". And yeah, it cost $3 more to see a movie in 3D here than it does in 2.
Lizzie on Jan 26, 2010
I will go see this.
daniel f on Jan 27, 2010
New comments are no longer allowed on this post.