Hugo 3D- Page 2

[best12bars]

Posted: 12/18/11 at 6:48am

They showed the Titanic 3D trailer when I saw Hugo as well, and it FAR exceeded my expectations of what was possible.

The technique they're using is called "projection mapping." It's where you take a 2D source and "project" the image onto a molded 3D wire frame. They did the same thing in Hugo for the Méliès films at the end. It's an incredibly time-consuming process (almost akin to cell animation, because you have to move and manipulate your wire frames by hand to match the motion on the 2D screen), plus you must have REALLY hi-rez source files (way beyond what is seen on screen, so that it can be "mapped" around the 3D objects), or it will look soft and/or pixelated.

That said, Titanic looks so damn good in the trailer, I was hard-pressed to tell it was originally shot in 2D. The FX shots are easy (relatively speaking since all it takes is the proper animation plug-in plus a LOT of render time), because they were generated in a computer anyway. That's why most (crappy) 3D movies that have come out lately contain 3D FX, but the rest looks "flat" or 2D, because it was shot that way. Then some studio executive says, "Hey, let's make this a 3D movie," AFTER the film footage has already been shot.

Hugo is a full 3D movie (like Avatar), except of course for the Méliès films from 1900. To make those into 3D films was an incredible process, and I'm sure it took a lot of hard work even for those few minutes of screen time ... but it is the exact same process that will be used on all the "live footage" (aka Leonardo, Kate, Kathy Bates, etc.) in Titanic. I was truly impressed with what they've been able to do and can't even imagine the time involved to get it to look that good.

It really is amazing ... and based on that trailer alone, I will be seeing Titanic again in 3D when it opens next spring.

Updated On: 12/18/11 at 06:48 AM

[SueleenGay]

Posted: 12/18/11 at 11:47am

For a movie about a man who realized film could tell a story it sure took forever to get to the story. 45 minutes into it we find out the kid LOVES movies? How about including the scene where the father tells Hugo the story of seeing A Trip to the Moon instead of Hugo telling Isabel about when his father told him the story?

Visually beautiful but man, that script is a mess.

[romantico]

Posted: 12/18/11 at 1:30pm

Everyone's taste is different. I HATED The Muppets. No magic. No real cameos (Jack Black? Really?) I was hoping for some cameos from the days of the Muppet show and First two muppet movies.Steve Martin. Bernadette Peters. Carol Burnett.Lily Tomlin. Paul Williams.Mark Hamill. Mel Brooks.Charles Durning.etc. Then some modern day cameos like Lady Gaga. Will Ferrell. Donald Trump. Simon Cowell.Ryan Seacrest.Kristin Wiig.Etc.I feel the Muppets have been catered to a new audience. Even The two old Geezers were reduced to a simple cameo. However, all my friends loved it.

Same goes with HUGO. The script was beautiful. Everything about this film was magic and why I love the movies. It had a lot of heart and depth to it. Like I mentioned in a previous post,it was nice seeing a family film where the kids were not annoying or delivering stupid one liners or being smart assess.

HUGO is winning a lot of awards and is getting high praise and the reviews are incredible. I think people are just happy to see a family film where the kids and adults can enjoy it.So, like I mentioned before. Everyone's taste is different. A masterpiece to one person is anothers Razzie Award Winner.

Updated On: 12/18/11 at 01:30 PM