Resident Evil Afterlife 3D

[Gae43]

Well guys, after watching this movie, unfortunately I have to say that the 3D is seriously underwhelming. The reason? The seperation is terribly low to the point where it's hard to differentiate between 3D and 2D. Hugely disappointed. I bought the Blu-ray 3D anticipating to see the latest awesome 3D release but it was poor. I think all modern film makers should take a course in the history of 3D, it's techniques and conventions etc and be made to watch classic 3D films like House of Wax in order to get training on how a good 3D movie should actually look. OK, I know that there is the argument that too much separation in a 3D movie can cause eye strain but I say that if you are going to go to the trouble of donning the 3D glasses at the expense of a slightly darkened image etc, then at least give us decent 3D. When I watch a 3D film I want no doubt, in any scene, that the film is in 3D. Come on, give it to us...we can handle it.

With regards to Resident Evil Afterlife 3D, sure there were a few scenes throughout the film where the 3D shone through but it was only slight and most of the film just seemed to give a slight roundness to the characters with no sense of space within the large rooms that they stood in. I just think the camera separation was set too low right from the start. You only need to take a look at one side by side screengrab from the film, compare each side and you can clearly see that the difference between each image is minute. Take a screengrab from House of Wax and both sides are so obviously different to the point where a background object that is partly visible in one eye, is hidden from view in the other. That's the sort of 3D I want. I'm not a fan of huge parallax but I'd always prefer more separation than too little. What's the point of watching a film in 3D if it's hardly noticeable? So come on film-makers, pull your fingers out and give us proper 3D.

OK...rant over.

Gae

http://2d23dconversions-carnivalofsouls3d.blogspot.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[cybereality]

This, like most recent 3D films, is conservative with the 3D. However, I saw it in theaters and it did look good. Watching at home on a 22" monitor was not as satisfying. I think this is because they optimize the movies for watching on a big-screen HDTV. I have seen some 3D Blu-Rays in the stores, and they look best on a 50-60" 3D HDTV, even better than the theater. Some movies I can personally vouch for are Avatar, Cloudy with a chance of Meatballs, and Alice in Wonderland. Meaning I saw them in theaters, on the 22" Zalman and also with a 50" 3D HDTV. They look much better on the 50" HDTV. I'm sure the same holds true for Res Evil.

But, at the same time, they could bump the depth up just a little more on movies. I know they are going for a comfortable experience, but they need to make the 3D worth something. I, too, find I will have to take the glasses off in the middle just to check if its really 3D. When I am playing a game, this has never happened. Not once.

[Gae43]

Hi Cybereality,
That's going to be a problem with the future of 3D I guess. Getting the separation right and satisfying all viewers is going to be a challenge. I guess the more experienced 3D viewers will expect a better depth than those viewers that are newer to 3D. I still think though that movie producers shouldn't hold back on the 3D. Give the audience what they want. My blueprint for 3D depth will always be that seen in House of Wax (1953). I'm always in awe whenever I see those spacious panning shots of the interior of Vincent Price's studio and I want that kind of 3D depth in all future 3D movies. Nothing else will be good enough. The effect on the brain is almost like a drug. If I get a bit of 3D depth, it's not enough and I always want more to feel totally immersed in the film.

Gae

[cybereality]

I recall Beowulf having some extreme shots, but I honestly had to take the glasses off at a few points because of discomfort.

[Gae43]

I recall Beowulf having some extreme shots, but I honestly had to take the glasses off at a few points because of discomfort.

I guess thats one of the arguments that movie producers will make...watching a 3D movie with a lot of depth for 2 hours will eventually tire the eyes out. It's a tricky one to call.

Just watching the beginning of Resident Evil properly now and in its defense, in the opening shootout and first 2o minutes of the film most of the 3D looks pretty good. After the first plane trip though the rest of the film is very uneven. It seems like there are some 2D shots thrown in from time to time e.g. some quick cutaway shots and recorded message shots where the 3D graphics seem to be hovering over a flat 2D image. The CGI effects seem to contain the best 3D shots. I think it's the inconsistency of the 3D that is the real annoyance.

Gae

[jsmorrison55]

^ i had that experience with Avatar. keeps bugging me, the way the plain is not balanced and very obtuse angles. i love 3d, but somehow, some movies aren't really that delivering enough experience in 3d.