San Fran, CA Clash of the Titans

This was brought up at the last meeting and since it opens on Friday I thought I would start a tread. I don't know if it's practical for us to try and see this during Wondercon but we can certainly plan a time to go see it as a group. We just need to find a time that works for the most people. What say you all?

 

Is there any chance for Sat night after the SFFF dinner? I know Sat evening is probably getting a bit packed for some people, but i do have the imprssion it is the night that the most people in the group will be there. I think.

 

I'll be cheering on a friend at the WonderCon Masquerade on Saturday, then going clubbing.

FYI, Metreon will NOT be carrying it in IMAX.

 

I'm kinda more curious to see 3D actually. I'm not stuck on seeing the movie this weekend, though.

 

Hey Alison, We can try to see it Saturday if people want to try. I am just concerned its going to be crowded with the convention and all. I agree with you that I would rather see it in 3d. I don't care if I see it in Imax. Considering how expensive it is, I try to save it for special occasions, like Harry Potter movies.

 

That's a good point - it will probably be very, very crowded Sat night due to the convention.

 

I bought the original on DVD at Best Buy the other day for $9.99, and it comes with a coupon for $7.50 off to see the new film. The catch? It's not valid until April 9th.

 

got one of those, did not even look at the date on it though. Just as well, I can wait a week.

Edit:
Looks like 2-D may be preferable to 3-D according to this http://scifiwire.com/2010/03/theres-bad-buzz-but-ccrea.php

 

The chances of the wife and I seeing this at the Metreon Sat. night after the convention are exactly 100%. Maybe more.

 

Unfortunately, it won't be at Metreon, but at the Century San Francisco Centre 9 across the nearby on Mission St.

 

This is the pertinent info on the 3-D quality (spoiler free) From AICN:

CLASH OF THE TITANS is a film that will no doubt cause countless discussions, few of them, sadly, about how good the actual film may be. It is a film that, in and of itself, is almost hard to review. Buried so deeply beneath a wealth of other problems, by the time you get around to taking in the ideas of the narrative, you are exhausted from all the other issues crushing it. Above all, this stands as THE defining moment we watched 3-D actually destroy a film and stand testament to the terrible, terrible idea of adding it in post-production. It is an effect so bad that it is all most of us can talk about. I know half a dozen critics who watched half of the film blurry rather than subject themselves to the torment of this bastardized hack job of a 3-D render; the rest of us suffered in silence, occasionally checking out the shot composition by lowering our glasses for a moment, repeatedly. How bad is it? See it in 2-D if at all possible. Do not, under any circumstances, watch the 3-D version of this film.

3-D is at a very tenuous point in its existence. Personally, I?m not a fan. When shot with 3-D in mind, it can be incredible, as in the case of Avatar. But then there are films like HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGON, in which I simply shrug the experience off. After all, there isn?t a single shot in HTTYD that does a thing better ? or even close ? to what they did a few years ago in BEOWULF. That dragon flying scene at the end? Mind-blowingly good in 3-D. But a cartoonish dragon and his dork rider? Wasn?t worth mentioning. 3-D. Not in 3-D. It?s a solid movie either way, and one in which the film carries it, not the 3-D.

But CLASH OF THE TITANS is a horse of a different color. It was not shot to be in 3-D. The decision to present it that way was made after the fact. The production designers decorated the set as if it were in 2-D. Cinematographer Peter Menzies Jr. framed his beautiful shots as if they would be presented in 2 glorious dimensions. And director Leterrier put everyone in front of the camera in positions to best compliment the work of his incredible team. The film looks awesome. Their view of ancient Greece is fresh, stunning and should be a pleasure to look at. But someone came along and decided that what would be best is if all that background stuff was pushed back and whatever character was the center of attention at the moment needed to be brought out to the forefront. After all, with all that 3-D AVATAR money out there, how could you go wrong?

How about hair that floats mysteriously behind its subject, as if there was someone with near identical hair standing behind them? How about trees that wobble in place as the camera moves and the rendering computer tries to figure out what the **** to do with it, or flat ground that appears convex as it mysteriously slopes up on all sides towards our sitting subjects? How about editing that breaks the PRINCIPAL RULE OF 3-D EDITING? As I understand it, the main thing one needs to consider while editing in 3-D is that no single shot can be shorter than 2 seconds. Any shorter than that and the brain doesn?t have time to adjust to the new 3-D surroundings and cannot properly process the information, leaving you confused and a little off balance if you cut away too soon.

One of the great things about AVATAR is that they went into the movie understanding this. You can have fast moving action, but it needs to be in sustained shots. Think back on the most stunning shots of that movie ? they are fluid, but not rapidly edited. Instead they are more classically edited. Now imagine if those action sequences were directed by Paul Greengrass in full on BOURNE SUPREMACY-mode and you begin to get an idea of what watching action sequences in CLASH is like. There is a real, honest to god reason people like Michael Bay are resistant to 3-D ? because it changes the way you are allowed to make movies. You have to frame them differently; color them differently; edit them differently. You cannot just take any old

 

Just saw the original on DVD last night and they STILL kept the glitch/jump cut that was on the previous release!

 

Gotta say it: "Let the clash begin!"

Like the 1981 version even though it's so campy.

 

And unfortunately the Blu-ray is not that much of an upgrade. It's plagued with a mediocre transfer. But it's the best this is gonna look short of a total restoration of the film masters or negatives.

 

I missed the nudity from the original.

 

I'm glad I used the movie cash coupon for the new Movie. I would have been disappointed if I had to spend over $10 on it. It was entertaining for what it was. Although it's not as horrible as some critics make it out to be -- it was not a great film -- but entertaining none the less.