Comments on: Roger Ebert Floats First Review Of ‘Titanic 3D,’ Says 3D Conversion “A Shabby Way To Treat A Masterpiece”

By: Jim Cameron is the man with a hollywood plan

Jim Cameron is the man with a hollywood plan — Fri, 13 May 2016 12:58:18 +0000

3d is such a great tool when used right like hugo that movie i saw in 3d and 2d and i was much more imerssed with the 3D even though in 2D it was still great. 3d is not the same as 2.8D or 1.5D. i just think hollywood is abusing it so hardcore that people watch amazing 3d movies like avatar, how to train your dragon, etc.. then watch 2.8D or 1.5D(clash of the titans). that they feel cheated I UNDERSTAND IVE BEEN THERE!! it is not 3D's fault damnit its the studios james cameron is retrofitting this but me being a great admirer of him i know he wont mess up the conversion even though it is 2.8D. So dont hate him because of the ambition he has too changing the way we look at films for the first time in 50 years bcause of the studios protest against them. And like jim Cameron said 5 to 10percent of the worlds population cant see 3D there brains just dont work with the filters. And dimness is never an issue for me people who say that either wear glasses or have bad eye site once again not 3ds fault its your eyes and brain. so whatever James Cameron has in store for us im sure is great riger ebert is just an old man who cant see and calls all 3d dim which is a personal problem so dont blame 3d! damnit!

By: Alex

Alex — Fri, 13 May 2016 12:58:18 +0000

3-D Conversion is to 2012 what colorization of classic Hollywood films was to 1986. Except for a few DVDs here and there marketed to morons who don't know any better, that trend stopped and is only used for occasional archival TV and films shot in color which need their color restored. If someone wants to go make a "proper" 3-D conversion of Gorilla at Large and Creature from the Black Lagoon (two famous early 3-D films) they're welcome to it. Me, I have no interest in 3-D conversions or films shot in 3-D. They're dim, the effects distract from the story (or, as happened with me when watching Avatar, highlight the flaws), and leave me with a blinding headache.

By: Tryon

Tryon — Fri, 13 May 2016 12:58:18 +0000

I'm more scandalized by the notion that Ebert considers Titanic a "masterpiece".

By: Glass

Glass — Fri, 13 May 2016 12:58:18 +0000

James is in film school. Good for James.

By: Toby

Toby — Fri, 13 May 2016 12:58:18 +0000

I am indifferent to Jim.

By: Tony R

Tony R — Fri, 13 May 2016 12:58:18 +0000

Even if it had been the best 3d ever done in 100 years, blowing the minds of millions and millions of people, Ebert would have given this 3d conversion the exact same review. No one should be surprised, so why even write this article.

By: Jacques DeMolay

Jacques DeMolay — Fri, 13 May 2016 12:58:18 +0000

LOL @ Ebert calling Titanic a "masterpeice". It wasn't attrocious or anything, but a masterpeice? Ha.

By: Jim

Jim — Fri, 13 May 2016 12:58:18 +0000

I like Fred and Tom.

By: Fred

Fred — Fri, 13 May 2016 12:58:18 +0000

I like Tom.

By: Tom

Tom — Fri, 13 May 2016 12:58:18 +0000

Fuck James Cameron.

Fuck him.