July 21, 2006, 4:44 a.m. CST
I wonder if this new edition will be re-released with the 3D effects. I would rebuy it.
July 21, 2006, 4:55 a.m. CST
...could you see other 3D shit with that, like real life?
July 21, 2006, 5:10 a.m. CST
they should make they live 3D and give you those cool sunglasses to take home, and then while they're at it make everything ever into 3D
July 21, 2006, 5:17 a.m. CST
3d comic books coming? That would be gay. But still.
July 21, 2006, 5:27 a.m. CST
by Just Plain Steve
It looks they are being forced to smile before they get shot by Mickey Mouse.
July 21, 2006, 5:40 a.m. CST
The guy does pretty much whatever the hell he wants, gets studios to pay for it, and brings a unique vision to the screen. How many directors can say that. None, you say? That's correct, none. Tim Burton Rocks. When it's all said and done, history will be very kind to Mr. Burton.
July 21, 2006, 5:45 a.m. CST
by Sam Raimi's Car
teh old red won wuz bettar. teh pumpken look liak poos. timothy burtan is ded to mi nows anywais.
July 21, 2006, 5:46 a.m. CST
I have my doubts on the 3D transfer of this flick
July 21, 2006, 6:02 a.m. CST
Must the Disney artists/designers work in a dick reference to everything? At least they tried to hide it in that Little Mermaid castle (was that an urban legend?). Well, no urban legend here - it's quite obvious what's going on. It looks as though Sally is giving ol' Jack Skellington a handy in the theater. What Art Director approved this? I refuse to believe this is an innocent placement of design elements. I mean ... just ... really. Am I the only one? Hello?
July 21, 2006, 6:07 a.m. CST
I liked the 3D in Chicken Little...it was the movie that sucked.
July 21, 2006, 6:10 a.m. CST
SOmebody at comiccon please help me out with this. http://tinyurl.com/ly7pv Does that say nightmare after christmas? A colmbus day themed tree? who knows...
July 21, 2006, 6:11 a.m. CST
This is the first full-length feature to get this treatment? What about Chicken Little? In reality, it got the same treatment. Now, you could say this is the first previously released full-length feature. Or since it's claymation (thus shot with a camera), it's a first non-CG movie to be released in 3D. I just wish I had a digital theatre around, so I don't have to drive 100 miles. I hope that story about Cinemark switching their theatres to digital comes true soon.
July 21, 2006, 6:12 a.m. CST
If it's not fat chicks wearing Jack hoodies, it's bound to be something else.
July 21, 2006, 6:14 a.m. CST
I'm almost blind on one eye, so most (not all!) 3D-Movies don't work for me.
July 21, 2006, 6:24 a.m. CST
But hey, let's be honest. You probably deserved it.
July 21, 2006, 6:37 a.m. CST
by Johnny Drama
They've got their Halloween store-front display taken care of and its not even August. Gothic love handles so white, its scary.
July 21, 2006, 6:53 a.m. CST
There's no way that they could get as good of an effect without reshooting Nightmare. I didn't see Chicken Little, so I have nothing to compare Monster House to. I'm sure that Chicken was rendered in 3D stereo, which is different than what Harry is saying - it's the first film that they've given this treatment to that wasn't shot that way.
July 21, 2006, 7:06 a.m. CST
...think it's a brand new big-screen spin-off from their Jack Hoodies/bags/wallets etc. "OMG! Disney hav totaly made 'Nitemare B4 Xms' in2 a movie?! Now EVERY1 will b in2 it, + i won't look individual anymore! I'm gonna go eat sum worms + lisin 2 my Fall Out Boy records! :( "
July 21, 2006, 7:12 a.m. CST
Is when Vanessa is being married to Eric. The priest moves his boney old knee and if you are not looking right it looks like he gets a boner. You have to watch it twice to see that it is his knee. I didn't think of it the first time but this poster is pretty "suggestive".
July 21, 2006, 7:26 a.m. CST
Hadn't heard a thing about the 3D release...count me in!
July 21, 2006, 7:40 a.m. CST
Funniest thing I've read all day!
July 21, 2006, 8 a.m. CST
by Shawn F.
...I want the poster.
July 21, 2006, 8:02 a.m. CST
Is it this site or everyone that has 3D fever? Have they improved the technology or something? Why every 10 years or so since 1956 is there suddenly a 3D craze? Anyone got answers? Seriously.
July 21, 2006, 8:07 a.m. CST
The originally released this under the Touchstone banner... I wonder if the 3-D presentation will have that fancy new Disney animation at the front?
July 21, 2006, 8:10 a.m. CST
If they Nightmared it all up, then I hope so
July 21, 2006, 8:14 a.m. CST
I didn't even consider Sally to be giving Jack a handy. I saw it as I am sure they meant to present it...Her holding her severed arm to steal popcorn from the Mayor. Your mind is warped when you are so quick to find subliminal sex innuendo in a children's cartoon. Seek Therapy.
July 21, 2006, 8:15 a.m. CST
Well, if I think about my porn-collection, I should be happy, that I'm not completely blind...
July 21, 2006, 8:17 a.m. CST
by Ricky Henderson
Who cares about 3D? It is a silly idea that is both annoying and distracting. It IS NOT the future of film. Anyone who saw Superman in 3D can attest to that fact.
July 21, 2006, 8:29 a.m. CST
but I remember when growing up as a kid and some 3D promotion would happen and everyone would freak out for it. Everyone would have those crappy glasses and everyone would talk about how 'cool' it was. And then we'd all forget about it and move on. Just saying.
July 21, 2006, 8:37 a.m. CST
Wasn't, thinking about your porncollection, the reason you injured your eye? Schwiing - ouch!
July 21, 2006, 8:48 a.m. CST
I got that shitty eye since I was born :P. But my other one is perfect and for any reason SOME 3D-things work for me!
July 21, 2006, 8:57 a.m. CST
July 21, 2006, 9:03 a.m. CST
the 3D process for digital films is far different from in the past. A) It's not red and blue, as I'm sure most of you already know. 2) The polarizers are different from IMAX, Digital uses a circular polarizer and IMAX uses a linear polarizer, the long and the short of that is you can tilt your head and not lose the effect. D) The polarizer is also shuttered to sync with the film so each frame is seen by the left and right eyes at slightly different times enhancing the effect. So long story long, Chicken little sucked, but the 3D was amazing, monster house is also amazing in 3D, it may not be the "future" but most CG films will go this route and we'll probably see alot more re-releases too.
July 21, 2006, 9:07 a.m. CST
it's good to learn something new every day.
July 21, 2006, 9:14 a.m. CST
by Big Bad Clone
Saw Superman in IMAX 3D and every 3D part looked sort of shitty. Saw Chicken Little with that Disney Digital 3D and it was as smooth as vanilla ice cream. The movie may have sucked but it at least looked good.
July 21, 2006, 9:16 a.m. CST
(Even though you listed your three points: A, 2, D)
July 21, 2006, 9:36 a.m. CST
Um...Shyamalan can say that, but at least Burton's got a better track record. I've liked all of his movies except for Planet of the Apes...which was okay until the bizarro ending.
July 21, 2006, 9:38 a.m. CST
It definitely looks like she's giving him a handjob that he's enjoying... but she could just be reaching for the popcorn. With posters, things like that are easier to slip by the boss... like The Little Mermaid towers of cock. However, the so-called SEX in The Lion King is total bullshit. It spells out SFX, the name of one of the animation companies. If you think about the painstaking process of animation, you know there's no way in hell some devious animators could've slipped that one by. Company name makes much more sense (sorry pervs).
July 21, 2006, 10:06 a.m. CST
If they do the same thing for this one, I'm all over it. Great movie, and seeing a 3d version will be a blast.
July 21, 2006, 10:22 a.m. CST
Let's be honest...the artist could have easily accomplished the same effect if Sally were to use her severed arm to reach "around" Jack to get to the popcorn...by going in front and considering the placement of the arm, as well as the looks on their respective faces, it's pretty clear the person(s) responsible are having a bit of naughty fun.
July 21, 2006, 10:31 a.m. CST
#1, the guy at ILM who was in charge of the stereoscopic version is a stereo photographer and knew what he was doing. He knew exactly how much 3d effect (sometimes referred to on film deviation) is comfortable to view, and knew the concept of the stereo window (I won't go into that here). Most 3D films take the more 3D is better approach and are painful to watch. Also a lot of newer 3D films forget what was learned in the past and do camera convergence (or virtual camera convergence for animated films). This is Bad and prevents your eyes from fusing parts of the image (James Cameron
July 21, 2006, 10:36 a.m. CST
by Lance Rock
It was a blast!
July 21, 2006, 10:56 a.m. CST
by R.C. the "Wise"
During the scene when the guys about to marry the fake Ariel, the priest presiding the wedding gets a boner. It's fucking hysterical. That scene cracks me up more than the subtle spelling of SEX in The Lion King (before Mufasa reappears).
July 21, 2006, 11:33 a.m. CST
I've got a hard on! I'm talking the Tokyo Games Show 05 Trailer that they included with Metal Gear Acid 2 for PSP that also includes videos of Snake Eater scenes as well as random Japanese supermodels viewable with the Solid Eye system... Anyway I think gaming itself could really benefit from 3D as soon as they get those glasses-less 3D-TVs rolled out once they've liquidated all the HD-TVs everyone is raving about to make their money back... Panasonic is apparently aiming for 2008. Anyway I'm really hoping to check out Superman Returns in 3D IMAX at some point this week, hope it's good!
July 21, 2006, 11:40 a.m. CST
by Shaner Jedi
He's now at Disney working on Meet the Robinsons 3D. I contacted him about a month ago and he told me that he went to Disney to work on that film. I don't know who ILM has on NBC though.
July 21, 2006, 12:07 p.m. CST
July 21, 2006, 12:11 p.m. CST
how do you GO BACK to original film and turn it into 3D??? anyone?
July 21, 2006, 12:35 p.m. CST
they take individual frames, digitally crop out "layers" of images, and shift them left/right to create a faux 3D image. You can do this at home w/ your own 2D photos in Photoshop. When done well it can be quite convincing. Google for "2d 3d conversion" or something..
July 21, 2006, 12:59 p.m. CST
Looks like In-Three has lost the battle of theater equipment with RealD, but In-Three major business is the conversion job, right?
July 21, 2006, 1:30 p.m. CST
by Darth Maui
"During the scene when the guys about to marry the fake Ariel, the priest presiding the wedding gets a boner." Can't believe people still believe that rumor. It's the priest's knees you see. Look it up at Snopes.
July 21, 2006, 1:40 p.m. CST
July 21, 2006, 2:23 p.m. CST
will make me soil myself.
July 21, 2006, 2:32 p.m. CST
Because the last time anyone gave us 3d was Robert Rodreiguez in spy kids 3-d and we rightly forget that monstrosity.What is the difference this time around?
July 21, 2006, 2:38 p.m. CST
Disney were going to re-do all their masterpieces in computer animation. Like Pinnochio etc. That was before Pixar took over the running of disney animation.
July 21, 2006, 2:46 p.m. CST
Disney was a tyrant as we all know and he strict laws that forbid men and women working together. He scruntised every scene individually. to make sure there was nothing inaprropriate and remember hearing one of the old guard saying that he had heard the rumours and said that he would have fired any animator who pulled that stunt immediatley.
July 21, 2006, 3:44 p.m. CST
That picture looks like Jack's pirate outfit from his cameo in James and the Giant Peach. They must be making an action figure of that. * * * I wish they would figure out one 3-D process so I could know whether it's going to be good or not. POLAR EXPRESS looked great, but it was a digital creation in Imax. SUPERMAN RETURNS wasn't as good, maybe because it was live action converted after-the-fact for Imax 3-D. NIGHTMARE is also live-action (sort of) converted later, but converted for this digital 3-D instead of for Imax. I never saw CHICKEN LITTLE because the movie looked terrible and the nearest theater playing it is pretty far away from me. I will be willing to make that journey for NIGHTMARE so hopefully it will look good. (The poster is terrible, though. Nobody involved in the actual movie would've made something that ugly.)
July 21, 2006, 3:47 p.m. CST
EMO KIDS REJOICE!
July 21, 2006, 3:50 p.m. CST
Now, that would kick ass, too. And in its original uncut form, too, perhaps....?
July 21, 2006, 3:53 p.m. CST
Disney was indeed planning on doing a shot-for-shot CGI remake of Pinocchio. It was one of Mike Eisner's last "brilliant ideas" before being given the boot, and it will never happen.
July 21, 2006, 3:57 p.m. CST
by Shaner Jedi
Rinse pretty much has it right. Even Chicken Little had to be taken apart by ILM like that. Real D is working on this one like with Chicken Little also. I just don't know who at ILM is now the stereographer now that Captain 3D is gone. And this process is different than the one they used on Spy Kids 3D. It involves the whole picture and scene in ways the older 3D process did not.
July 21, 2006, 4:02 p.m. CST
by Shaner Jedi
...as far as a basic understanding of what is involved. But this process is more involved.
July 21, 2006, 4:05 p.m. CST
by Shaner Jedi
and correction about exactly what's involved. They know more about it than I do. I just know who some of the players are.
So real..It's scary...like, so scary that you'll have a NIGHTMARE?!!?! BEFORE CHRISTMAS?!?!
July 22, 2006, 12:01 a.m. CST
Dorko... See also Home Alone (one of those things that stuck over the years. tack... I don't doubt that you know what you are talking about so I hope you don't take this wrong, but the shuttering is not only because of the single lens configuration, a number of IMAX houses use those bulky shuttered glasses/goggles because the shuttering reduces the ghost of the secondary image, this also helps because everyone has a dominant eye and watching a 3D film over the lengths of time we are talking about the dominant eye will take over thus reducing the effect. Shaner.... I think what tack was getting at about the convergence is that if not setup properly the 3D causes your eyes to focus in unnatural ways. Ghosts of the abyss would cause you to go cross eyed at points and others your eyes would try to look in opposite directions. The tech behind it all, while simple can be a bit complicated to explain because of the light polarizers and such. Basically in an IMAX setting and most other polarized 3D systems currently in use light is linearlly polarized. To take that to it's most simple level it means that one eye is polarized vertically and the other horizontally. The Real D system uses circular polarizers, which again simply, are clockwise and counter-clockwise. This allows your head to move during the presentation without negating the effect
July 22, 2006, 8:52 a.m. CST
by Sam Raimi's Car
http://www.necaonline.com/nbxnews24.html it appears the nightmare after xmas was just a toy slogan. pity its not another film. corpse bride was underwhelming.
July 26, 2006, 12:35 a.m. CST
by Droogie Alex
Adding 3D to a flat image after the fact seems problematic to me. When you have a digital project like Monster House, you have access to individual layer elements. That wouldn't be the case with Nightmare, even being stop motion, as it's one flat image, like any film.
July 27, 2006, 9:38 p.m. CST
Industrial Light and Magic did the transfer for this so i am sure it's gonna be incredible. I know quite a bit about stereoscopic imaging (3D) and I think what they want to achieve is quite possible. Someone earlier talked about the 3D window etc and hey are right, even monster house was very comfortable to watch and had great 3D, even without lots of off-the-screen gags and imagery, it's more about that sense of depth which will greatly enhance TNBC in my opinion. As much as I hate corperate marketing and such I think ti would be really kool if Disney capitalized on the "Disney Digital 3-D" name and created a "disney digital 3D home theater" system using LCD shutter glasses and the field sequential method. A few years ago an Imax 3-D package was released, came with a shutterglass system, and 3 imax 3D movies in field-sequential format, they are AMAZING, Disney should do the same thing, they could release TNBC, Chicken Little, and Meet the Robinsons or something, of coarse I'd only want it for TNBC, but still. i think we should all write to the studio requesting a field sequential 3D version on DVD, other studios have done it, spy kids 3D was released in this format (I know, bad example, but still it's a feature film released in an advanced form of 3D rather than anaglyph, AKAred and Blue, but the only place I know you can get it is amazon)it wouldn't be that hard, it's virtualy how the in theatre system works already, the shutter is just in front of the projector rather than in the glasses lenses. Anyway REQUEST THIS EVERYONE!!!!!