The bittard section

[IdolEyes787]

Damn I forgot to factor in the l33tness, no wonder I could never get the thing to work.
Seeing some real progress now but still having a bit of trouble with the cuntry of origin and pretime factors.Maybe if I divide it by packs?

[j2k4]

I read the thread, and, having no "Bittorrent Section" experience, I have nothing on-point to say, however much I may empathize (and I do, I surely do).

I have noticed a slight intrusion of the Avatar/3D subject, though, and I don't understand the urge to re-introduce a technological feature which has so utterly failed to capture the movie-going public's imagination.

I note, with very mild interest, the availability of add-on hardware which (they say) will allow me to "do" 3D at home, using my existing equipment.

As a fan of all of this technological gimmickry, naturally I would want to be capable of 3-D, however:

Unless and until the additional hardware required becomes dirt- (and I mean DIRT-) cheap, I'd have a hard time justifying a significant outlay to enable a visual effect that might only be featured in one movie out of ten, unless those in charge of marketing have determined that action shoot-'em-ups are to become the order of the day, to the detriment of all other movie genres.

In any case, I'd think diving under the coffee table to avoid a realistically deployed 3-D object flying at me would marginalize the movie-watching experience after a short while, and - let's face it - ultimately, the projectile will (in order to satisfy continually-escalating expectations) have to actually cause damage or death in your viewing room in order to be "real", at which point we've gone beyond 3-D, IMAX, and all the rest:

"Answer the door, honey - it's eight o'clock, and the actors are here...it's movie time!"

[Quarterquack]

You know something Idol. I was never a fan of this thread's title. Always thought it labeled me as something I wasn't, while I was socializing in that section. Today I realized there was more truth to it than the fact that Justin Bieber has stolen hundreds of prison inmates' hearts.

[IdolEyes787]

I read the thread, and, having no "Bittorrent Section" experience, I have nothing on-point to say, however much I may empathize (and I do, I surely do).

I have noticed a slight intrusion of the Avatar/3D subject, though, and I don't understand the urge to re-introduce a technological feature which has so utterly failed to capture the movie-going public's imagination.

I note, with very mild interest, the availability of add-on hardware which (they say) will allow me to "do" 3D at home, using my existing equipment.

As a fan of all of this technological gimmickry, naturally I would want to be capable of 3-D, however:

Unless and until the additional hardware required becomes dirt- (and I mean DIRT-) cheap, I'd have a hard time justifying a significant outlay to enable a visual effect that might only be featured in one movie out of ten, unless those in charge of marketing have determined that action shoot-'em-ups are to become the order of the day, to the detriment of all other movie genres.

In any case, I'd think diving under the coffee table to avoid a realistically deployed 3-D object flying at me would marginalize the movie-watching experience after a short while, and - let's face it - ultimately, the projectile will (in order to satisfy continually-escalating expectations) have to actually cause damage or death in your viewing room in order to be "real", at which point we've gone beyond 3-D, IMAX, and all the rest:

"Answer the door, honey - it's eight o'clock, and the actors are here...it's movie time!"

The problem with the use of 3D in current movies is that the narrative is by necessity partly defined by it in much the same way it was 50 odd years ago.
Jim C speaking " Ok here's where we need a scene where they smurfs jump on big flying thingies so I can twirl the camera around to suitable gasps of awe from the audience".
Granted better than "Throw the axe at the fake head so we can have the eyeball pop out at the screen" but still not very organic as the action dictates the scene instead of the scene dictating the action.

All I'm really saying is that until the "fad" phase of 3D comes to an end and a movie is just filmed - as opposed to "filmed in 3D "- then it's likely always going to be about cheap tricks ( which apparently is enough for most people)instead of focusing on meaningful storytelling.

A good story is a good story, whether it is being told around a campfire or projected in a 3-D movie theater with wraparound sound. The greatest irony of all is that a great story will be just as great on a 20-inch TV in your bedroom. In other words, making movies in 3-D is just another way to distract audiences from Hollywood's inability to tell a good script from a bad one.