HOME TRAILERS 2023 SCHEDULE 2024 SCHEDULE SHORT FILMS REVIEWS PODCAST INTERVIEWS NEWS FEEDS ABOUT US

LATEST NEWS

Michael Bay Currently Testing 3D for Use in Transformers 3

by Alex Billington
February 26, 2010
Source: MTV

Don't get too excited (or angry) yet, nothing has been officially decided. In fact, this isn't even the first time we've heard this. Back in early February, it was stated in a trades story that Michael Bay has been debating with Paramount and ILM about going 3D for Transformers 3 (due in July of 2011). As we already know, Hollywood is going 3D crazy right now thanks to Avatar, but it looks like Bay is doing the smart thing and testing out 3D before deciding whether that's really the route they want to go with the sequel;. Bay himself has even said that he's not a big fan of 3D, which is why I'm actually surprised that this is what he's doing.

Bay appeared on Starz' "In the House" last night and MTV transcribed what he said about Transformers 3.

"It's a process we're testing with some 'Transformers' scenes," he said. "How successful it is with my movie in terms of a lot of real stuff coming out of the frame, real dirt, real complicated little particles coming towards the lens, because hopefully that process will work. I've seen some tests that look great on other movies. I just want to see how it looks on my footage."

Peter from SlashFilm brings up a good point - Bay uses the term "process" (multiple times), not something like "technology", which sounds like they're testing a post conversion process, not the idea of shooting it in 3D from the start. Unfortunately, we already know that's a very bad idea. I hope his tests show that it's not a good idea if that's what they're planning to do. I don't understand why studios won't just support shooting with 3D cameras? On Transformers, it may be that Bay's shooting style is too chaotic and crazy to actually use 3D cameras, since they're a bit bigger and require more equipment. As for what else to expect in this? "We're adding a lot of new elements. We're adding new characters. We're adding a lot of twists." Oh joy!

Find more posts: Hype, Movie News, Opinions

28 Comments

Michael Bay said that he does not like 3D. This is not Michael Bay talking...it's money talking.

var2apo on Feb 26, 2010

Bay should not use 3d if he shoots as he usually does. His movies are not suitable for 3d. To fit 3d he would have to change his way of filming. Thats just my point of view.

Loser on Feb 26, 2010

Same with paul Greengrass can you imagine The Bourne Ultimatum in 3d? Hollywood learn when to use 3d if you want us to pay for it. If you use it in every f ing movie just to make a buck how horrible it may be. We will just stop watching it. If you nurture and use it right it will go on and bring you the bucks a long time into the future

Loser on Feb 26, 2010

It's not a bad idea to shoot in 2D and convert if the film is designed and shot for 3D, with 3D compositions in mind from the start. The point in doing it that way is that it's cheaper and quicker to shoot 'traditionally,' apparently. And maybe Bay just prefers film grain to the digital look.

Mathieu on Feb 26, 2010

3D is good for Transformers 3. I best believe just two will be good.antobots premus,omega supreme and final decepticon unicron.this is must have for transformers who love the dept's off generation two 3d advance 3greatest 3d experiance. the next invasion know on that's meant the they eye. sinerely too you

Larue Wilson on Feb 26, 2010

Transformers 3 in 3D??? Possible awzome space scenes??? Unicorn?? what what??? lol

DaftPUNKFAN on Feb 27, 2010

Fuck 3-D. The true death of cinema.

whomever on Feb 27, 2010

Amen #7!

Sam Shadey on Feb 27, 2010

3-D is to cinema as American Idol is to music and reality TV is to televsion; a fad that people will tire of ... Nothing this gimicky last forever. Avatar was just a bandwagon that everyone jumped on through word of mouth the same way people did when Home Alone tore up the Christmas box office when it was in the cinemas.

Hattori Hanzo on Feb 27, 2010

Aw but explosions in 3d, how A-W-E-S-O-O-O-M-E!!! Then he could put 3-d on the 3-d and then make that 3-d. As if Transformers wasn't enough to mess up your eyes.

Crapola on Feb 27, 2010

I hope the movie is still great and better than ROTF.. I loved the first TF

Lincoln on Feb 27, 2010

No 3-D please. So sick of it already.

Jake the snake on Feb 27, 2010

So now he can assault our sense in 3 dimensions.

SlashBeast on Feb 27, 2010

Michael bay is a money whore. What happened to that "small" movie he wanted to make? Oh yeah, the box office receipts of Transformers 2 changed his mind. Now he's jumping on the 3D fad like everyone else to rake in as much cash as possible.

1-7 on Feb 27, 2010

100% this will be in 3D. 110% it'll be crap again

chad on Feb 27, 2010

The studio is pushing bay to go 3d, not bay himself. Get a clue.

Jake the snake on Feb 27, 2010

ah, if only the studios would listen to the people, and learn that 3-D is the aids of cinema.

Xerxex on Feb 27, 2010

I assume studio executives have forced to let Bay rethink about using 3D (they got to have...MONEY!), so it`s a good thing to try it out first.¨ It wouldn`t really matter what he chooses since 3D is a fad Hollywood uses to cram out more money out of our pockets (that includes you, Avatar!)

Mr.Cookie on Feb 27, 2010

This is amazing after the absolute negative comments of 3-d movies besides avatar of course...the studios are still shooting them out. This seriously is the death of cinema like come the fuck on JUST STOP PLEASE!!!!!

Cody on Feb 27, 2010

Hey I am not for 3d in every movie but done right it`s amazing. There seems to be a lot of hate towards 3d and I don`t know why the visuals in Avatar were amazing. If done right a movie could benefit from it if done wrong it`s crap but most of you seem to hate 3d for some reason WHY? As I see it it`s not the 3d it`s how it`s used that determine if it`s good in a movie

loser on Feb 27, 2010

#20 Were all for Avatar BECAUSE it was made for 3-d, it was filmed in 3-d and Cameron had the idea in mind for 3-d specifically. What these studios are doing is taking 2-d films that are already in Post production and going "o hey Avatar was 3-d so lets turn this 3-d automatically to cash in". These arent films that were filmed in 3-d for 3-d they are converted last minute to cash in on Avatar fame and its complete bullshit and testimony to the death of modern cinema.

Cody on Feb 27, 2010

#21 I understand what you are saying. I am just saying that it`s not the 3D thats wrong or the death to cinema it`s how and when it`s used thats crucial.

loser on Feb 27, 2010

Ok, it started off with the first Transformers, and he didn't screw it up - it was great fun. He then went on and made a crappy sequel. Now, we have to sit back and watch him royally screw up the whole thing!?!?! I, for one, say NO!

Brian on Feb 27, 2010

#21 As I said in my earlier post, as long as the film is shot with 3D compositions in mind from the start, shooting conventionally and converting is not necessarily a bad thing. This is what they did with Alice In Wonderland and apparently the results are stunning. It's only when the filmmaker has not considered 3D at all when designing his/her shots that problems arise. Originating in 3D is a very time-consuming way to shoot. But yes, I'd rather they do it 'properly' or not at all.

Mathieu on Feb 28, 2010

The 3D in Avatar was great. But nothing can make a Michael Bay Transformers movie any good.

... on Feb 28, 2010

There still a lot of people who suffer badly with eye strian watching 3D, they shoud sort this problem out first, has for Michael Bay doing test on 3D with ILM to see if some of the Scences will work in 3D there is nothing wrong with that, but i hope he sticks to is guns and films Transformers 3 without using 3D.

Cineprog on Feb 28, 2010

I'm willing to bet anyone's Salary or Job for that matter that neither the 'Dinobots' nor 'Unicron' will ever be in this film (maybe even any film for that matter). 'Unicron' is too big of an element to be in the sequel, and the 'Dinos' are too irrelevant in today’s world. I'm guessing that it will be based on the mythology of "Energon" and the “Life” of any 'Transformer' on Earth as we know it. How will the “Transformers” continue to live on Earth without an energy source to live off of? According to Hasbro's CEO, "You’re going to see that great core mythology brought to the fore, and Michael is hard at work at making this a reality and we’re very excited about it," Hasbro's head Brian Goldner also quoted Mr. Bay stating, "What we’re really doing is getting back to some of the core character development and storytelling. And I think there’s some elements of the core story that the filmmakers, Michael in particular wanted to tell..." With that said, this sequels cast includes Shia LaBeouf, Megan Fox, John Malkovich, Frances McDormand, John Turturro, Patrick Dempsey, Ken Jeong, Josh Duhamel, Tyrese Gibson, Ramon Rodriguez, Kevin Dunn, Julie White, and Kym Whitley, they really are focusing on character placement and development. It will be pretty difficult for Bay & Spielberg to come up with something historic as well as original. Possibly by now everyone has read the “Leaked Script” that was release immaturely late last year and everyone should know how that story was told, but everyone should also keep in mind that not everything presented from a “Leaked Script” is considered a complete fake; Nevertheless, that most of what is said is completely useless. This same leaked script does point out an issue that the humans are revolting against the same “Transformers” that have turned up here on Earth, which coincidently has been expressed and shown online with pictures depicting city walls and garbage cans spray-painted with crossed-out “Autobot” or “Decepticon” logos depicted in a circle with the words “Go Home” sprayed below. Many of you believe stories related to the comics and cartoons may seem too “Old,” while others may believe the stories that are original and/or new may not seem too “Traditional.” Either way, Hasbro, Paramount, Michael Bay, and Steven Spielberg can't make everyone happy at once. It will take several creative ideas to come together that will touch all generations. Basicly, from everything I've read (real or not) and stated here, Transformers 3 will be very simple (similar to Part 1) and less complex (similar to Part 2) where the storyline will be easy to follow, more understanding, over and above with dialog between the Humans and Robots; which will return with improvements and essentially become more in depth. By just adding a few newbie’s (Autobots / Decepticons) as well as bringing back all "survivors" from the last two films, I believe this film could be more epic than the other two combined; But, I believe that it will regrettably just resemble its predecessors and fail after its first opening weekend. The Transformers 3 story will suffer from dehydration while falling victim to an aging cast that will somehow bring some type of human emotion to the forefront.

Sylentwolf on May 13, 2010

I effing hate 3D, and the silly glasses that go with it. Aside from things jumping out at you its just silly. Make a normal flick and buck the current trend.

Mad Moo on Oct 19, 2010

New comments are no longer allowed on this post.