2D to 3D conversion looks like what it is. Phony. That's why Avatar, shot in 3D looked a lot better than Alice in Wonderland or Clash of the Titans which were shot using one lens then converted. It might be a little different for all-CG films that were originally done in 2D, as a second virtual camera can be easily created if the original data still exists. Scenes merely need to be re-rendered to correspond to the second "eye." That's why I think it's possible that the forthcoming re-release of the first two Toy Story films in 3D might actually look great, but for "real" elements originally shot in 2D on conventional film, subsequent conversion yields an effect that looks sort of like a bunch of flat props on a cyclorama. The original B.R. is a great movie that deserves its cult status but IMHO doesn't deserve this crass form of revival. I'm a little on the fence about the idea that a movie can be redone in perpetuity without losing something, because in some cases re-edits are an improvement. The final cut of Blade Runner is the best as I see it. However I don't see how 3D would improve B.R. It's just novelty to revive the franchise.
Haha, I was just thinking the only way to top this would be to do a US remake with a B-list Hollywood cast and a Mudvayne song playing over the end credits. Also, a horse should jump off a boat.
it should be a pale horse. a US remake?? really? oh brother.... i bet lindsey lohan will be in it the only way it could be reimaged properly is if its a Grindhouse re rub.
I thought there was some rule in the US about not being allowed to show school children killing each other and that's why the og was never officially released? Did something change, or will the US remake be adults instead of school kids?
