Tuesday, October 4, 2011
LOOK AT THIS STUFF. ISN'T IT NEAT? Given the box-office success of The Lion King 3D, it's thoroughly unsurprising to see Disney announce today four more 3D releases over the next two years: Beauty and the Beast (1-13-2012); Finding Nemo (9-14-2012); Monsters, Inc. (1-18-2013); and The Little Mermaid (9-13-2013).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No no no no no, Disney, you're learning the wrong lesson here. (Well, artistically.)
ReplyDeleteI'd rather see these again on the big screen without the 3D. In fact I never saw Finding Nemo on the big screen (I was in college) and always wished I had. So I'll probably hit up that one even with the 3D.
ReplyDeleteBeauty and the Beast and Little Mermaid I better not go see in public unless it's officially sanctioned as a singalong event.
While it's not a decision I'm pleased with, I'm surprised The Incredibles aren't on the list.
ReplyDeleteSeems like that would be a no brainer.
Is Beauty and the Beast too scary for a just-two-year-old? I think we should be set for The Little Mermaid since she'll be almost 4.
ReplyDeleteI'm not a fan of 3D movies not named Avatar and I'm generally against the 3Dification of movies, whether released alongside a shot-in-2D version or upconverted well after. That being said, WALL-E 3D would be totally sweet and I would pay good money to see it, which I would have to, because those tix are expensive.
ReplyDeleteI don't mind the 3D as much for the Pixar flicks because they're native computer/digital, which makes the conversion easy, and Pixar has shown that it knows how to use 3D judiciously and smartly. For the traditionally animated ones? Yeah, don't get it--would prefer they do what they did for years before home video, which was release the core classics about once every 10-12 years. For instance, Snow White was re-released in 1944, 1952, 1958, 1967, 1975, 1983, 1987, and 1993.
ReplyDeleteI'm not a big fan of movies that add 3D after the fact, and I'm not even big on 3D in general. (Too dark, ticket prices too high, glasses on top of my own glasses annoy me, etc.) I'd much rather they just re-released the original movies as they were. However... I've always thought the door-factory chase sequence in Monsters Inc. would look great in 3D.
ReplyDeleteSince I think you are soliciting parenting advice, Shayera, I'm not going to hold back. While there may be some bright lines ("The Silence of the Lambs" is not appropriate for three-year-olds), I think you have to be familiar with your own child and make a determination of what they can handle. I know three year olds who aren't freaked out by much. I know seven year-olds who are can't handle on-screen tension of any kind. And here's some advice you didn't directly solicit: I err towards sheltering the kid a bit. Kids have a whole lifetime to become numb to scary and violent movies. They also have a whole lifetime to see Beauty and the Beast, and seeing it isn't exactly critical for development. As an adult, I figure I am already numb and likely to underestimate the scariness of things as perceived by young children.
ReplyDeleteWaiting for 5D Little Mermaid, the one where we watch while we sit in a fish tank while breathing through scuba gear or a snorkel. Appropriate fish swim by.
ReplyDeleteWouldn't "Finding Nemo" be super cool in 3D?
ReplyDeleteI meant Meghan, not Shayera. Sorry to both.
ReplyDeleteDunno, but like Little Mermaid, it would work well in 5D = full fish tank experience.
ReplyDeleteIronically, "Fish Tank" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1232776/) would not benefit from that experience. Good flick, though.
ReplyDeleteDisney's also releasing "The Nightmare Before Christmas" on 4D at the El Capitan here in L.A. this month. I am not going to go and see what the 4th D is.
ReplyDelete