March 31, 2009, 7:10 p.m. CST
April Fools suckers!
March 31, 2009, 7:11 p.m. CST
Has confirmation of the REAL Sarah Connor pic from The Terminator being used.
March 31, 2009, 7:13 p.m. CST
Really not interested,original was poor,despite being groundbreaking at the time.
March 31, 2009, 7:14 p.m. CST
March 31, 2009, 7:18 p.m. CST
There are some really bad signs about this movie. The poster looked like garbage, it's like they tried to make him look like a pimp or something. And also Guy Ritchie is directing...I don't know about this film yet. Avatar sounds great, but I need some footage now, words don't do anything anymore. Terminator, who gives a shit? Seriously, fuck it. Beauty and the Beast 3D. Fucking can't wait for that one. Also Alice in Wonderland in Imax 3D should fuck us all up. That will be fantastic, as long as it isn't like Charlie and the Shit factory remake, that was horrible.
March 31, 2009, 7:24 p.m. CST
"No, Buzz. I *am* your father!"<p>NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
March 31, 2009, 7:27 p.m. CST
It's hard to say without seeing any footage, but the pics from Alice didn't feel at all like the crappy Wonka remake. Thank God.
March 31, 2009, 7:32 p.m. CST
It's so unnecessary. That said, I can't wait for Beauty and the Beast to come back to the cinema, I saw that when I was young and it is still my favorite animation, now I can take my daughter. That rocks.
March 31, 2009, 7:37 p.m. CST
Very cool news. Can't wait to see what tomorrow holds.
March 31, 2009, 7:38 p.m. CST
No one wants it, no one fuckin asked for it.
March 31, 2009, 7:39 p.m. CST
"There are some really bad signs about this movie. The poster looked like garbage, it's like they tried to make him look like a pimp or something."<p>TRANSLATION: I judge all movies by their posters. That new Star Trek movie looks shit, doesn't it? Have you seen the poster? FUCK THE TRAILER! Have you seen the poster or not?!<p>"And also Guy Ritchie is directing..."<p>TRANSLATION: I hate Guy Ritchie because he married a famous pop star and made some moderately successful movies. What a douche!<p>"I don't know about this film yet."<p>TRANSLATION: It's the poster, man! The poster! It's really confused the hell out of me!<p>"Avatar sounds great, but I need some footage now, words don't do anything anymore."<p>TRANSLATION: Where's the fucking poster for Avatar, eh? How am I meant to judge the thing without a poster?<p>"Terminator, who gives a shit? Seriously, fuck it."<p>TRANSLATION: Everyone else is getting excited for Terminator but not me. I've seen the poster and didn't like it. It's all about the poster.<p>"Beauty and the Beast 3D. Fucking can't wait for that one."<p>TRANSLATION: I have no idea why people think I'm gay.<p>"Also Alice in Wonderland in Imax 3D should fuck us all up."<p>TRANSLATION: Yeah, fuck that Terminator movie with all the explosions and robots. Bring on Alice In Wonderland though. I like 3D things. They pop out of the screen at you which makes me giggle.<p>"That will be fantastic, as long as it isn't like Charlie and the Shit factory remake, that was horrible."<p>TRANSLATION: Man, I hated that Charlie And The Chocolate Factory movie. It wasn't in 3D and the poster was shit. It's all about the poster!
March 31, 2009, 7:40 p.m. CST
It's the 31st in the states.
March 31, 2009, 7:46 p.m. CST
If only for the simple fact that it makes movies harder to pirate...Get used to it, haters.
March 31, 2009, 8:06 p.m. CST
Nice one. You just stretched out one joke in a really long post. I hope it didn't take you too long to write that one up. Embarrassing.
March 31, 2009, 8:06 p.m. CST
Sounds really cool. Im a big fan of the first two.
March 31, 2009, 8:24 p.m. CST
this site is fucking slow. losers
March 31, 2009, 8:33 p.m. CST
SO EVERY SINGLE MOVIE SHOULD BE TOO!
March 31, 2009, 8:42 p.m. CST
thanks for the answer. All I can do is hope. Unlike Willy Wonka, Alice has potential to work well with a Tim Burton twist. And the Cat sounds awesome. I'm still kind of iffy about Depp's Mad Hatter look, but I'm sure he'll pull off the performance.
March 31, 2009, 8:43 p.m. CST
March 31, 2009, 9:13 p.m. CST
by Bass Ackwards
Re-making the movie in 3D, or rereleasing the old movie 3d?
March 31, 2009, 9:30 p.m. CST
March 31, 2009, 9:40 p.m. CST
<br><br>seriously, its a frakkin' gimmick, and it really doesn't add anything worthwhile to a good film. Only makes lesser films slightly more appealing to see.<br><br>And it DEFINITELY isnt worth the cost. That's why I just kept my glasses the first time I saw a 3D movie. Now I just buy a ticket to a cheaper film and walk into the 3D one - NO UPCHARGE!<br><br>but man, I'll really be happy when this fad dies... again.<br><br>
March 31, 2009, 9:41 p.m. CST
I doubt whatever title they are considering makes any more sense, plus the fact that Tron 2.0 was an awesome video game sequel to the original already.
March 31, 2009, 10:12 p.m. CST
Until they gain the ability to talk and beg for mercy. Cameron IS god
March 31, 2009, 10:13 p.m. CST
Can't wait for all the AVATAR wankers to begin posting heated talkbacks going "This is it?" "Thundercats Ho!" and "What the ****?" Soon. Soon.
March 31, 2009, 10:21 p.m. CST
its even going to get me to pay more money to see Toy Story 1&2 and Beauty/Beast. Also Coraline was a perfect film for 3D. Go see it if you still have a chance. Give me 3D all the time. Granted I've yet to see a non-animated film in 3D.
March 31, 2009, 10:40 p.m. CST
I hope glassless 3-D gets here soon, even the new glasses give me headaches.
March 31, 2009, 10:45 p.m. CST
by Quin the Eskimo
oh well, mild dissapointment
March 31, 2009, 11:19 p.m. CST
mention "fuck Cameron for not showing me everything now" and "THIS WILL BOMB!" ETC....You know...becos Cameron has no track record of taking big risks, and them paying off....*sarcasm mode deactivated*
March 31, 2009, 11:26 p.m. CST
poster and i think it could be entertaining due to RDJ, but like you i dont really like ritchies style, and i dont trust him with Holmes. Also unfortunatly the script is nt too great.
March 31, 2009, 11:26 p.m. CST
you cant judge a movie by its poster....
April 1, 2009, midnight CST
don't listen to him, that was funny. the talkbackers with the most time on their hands to call out others are universally either the funniest or the lamest.<p>you sir, are one of the former.
April 1, 2009, 12:01 a.m. CST
Not a first! Who can name the two movies Disney released in IMAX 3D? Hint: the director of both films is mentioned in this article.
April 1, 2009, 12:14 a.m. CST
Some of it was impressive, most of it made me feel cross-eyed, or as if something were blocking part of my periphery in the right eye. Does everyone experience this, or does one need perfect vision?<p> Anyhow, it seemed pretty much the same as the 3D I saw at Epcot back in 1986. It's really unnecessary.
April 1, 2009, 12:23 a.m. CST
by GibsonUSA Returns
In TS1 and TS2 you could kind of feel where things were headed...the toys becoming irrelevant. This should be really good as now Woody (and Buzz) confront the fact that their kid is now grown.<BR><BR> Glad to see this back in Pixars hands. I feared Disney would make a generic sequel with no hint of the heart of the first two and where the story was going in the series.
April 1, 2009, 12:36 a.m. CST
Midnight Cowboy and What About Bob?
April 1, 2009, 12:45 a.m. CST
complaining about 3d, if you dont like it or it affects you negatively, then you dont have to watch movies in 3d if you dont want. All the big 3d movies coming out will be shown in both 2d and 3d. Thus as a film goer you can have your pick.
April 1, 2009, 12:46 a.m. CST
April 1, 2009, 12:46 a.m. CST
Horror and Adventure and Comic related Action Figures, props and collectibles. It would be even sadder to see him spending most of his time online blogging, reading movie news review sites, going to youtube to watch people do dumbshit for attention, and playing online video games all day. Yeah were is the scene where Woody walks into the room and Andy is jerking off to some FlashPorn Movie Website. Toy Story 3: Andy and the Web Based Porn Machine of Doom!
April 1, 2009, 1:18 a.m. CST
When AICN was doing the Toy Stoey 2 thread 10 years ago. I said the story of Toy Story 3 is going to be that Andy grew up and abandons the toys, now they must find a new owner. Probably not hard to predict, but aw well. I said that and its in the AICN archives somewhere and I think I deserve a writing credit.
April 1, 2009, 1:19 a.m. CST
by Blood Simple
where is LCD technology going?
April 1, 2009, 1:23 a.m. CST
Whatever you call it, it's a gimmick, and it's a distraction. Cameron, Speilberg, Zemeckis, whoever, can tout it all they want. Modern-day PT barnum's, but without the cred. When I've seen a John Ford vista, I've never thought to myself, "You know, this really would be better if that cloud were puffier."<P> But, whatever. The young'uns love it, they say. And we're slaves to the tastes of malformed children.
April 1, 2009, 1:25 a.m. CST
Because I'm a fucktard.
April 1, 2009, 2:20 a.m. CST
Everybody can see that poster is just a quickly thrown together piece for conventions so they can show something. A child can see that is not final artwork.
April 1, 2009, 2:22 a.m. CST
there is a reason why all the top dirctors (you left out Peter Jackson and Ridly Scott on your list of directors touting 3d) are so excited by this tech and are now all getting on board and making 3D movies. I have no vested interest in 3D nor have I ever even seen a 3D movie for that matter. But im willing to concede that the most of the top directors in the world know something I dont.....just saying
April 1, 2009, 2:33 a.m. CST
Um, no, because I don't consider a single one of those to be "top directors." They're "commercial directors," so I expect them to tow the commercial line. If that were "black-n-white and sub-titled," I'll betcha Cameron would be remaking CITIZEN KANE in French and calling it ROSEBUD. I can't say it any better than Roger Ebert in his review of MONSTERS VS. ALIENS, so I'll just refer you to rogerebert.com.<P> When Scorsese or Bahrani or the Coens start pimping three-dimensional CGI, I'll issue a public "my bad."
April 1, 2009, 2:35 a.m. CST
April 1, 2009, 2:45 a.m. CST
April 1, 2009, 3:56 a.m. CST
April 1, 2009, 4:17 a.m. CST
A director makes "commercial" product doesn't mean he's inferior to directors of Oscar-grabbing "merit"; most of the previously mentioned directors have found a balance between artistry and blockbusters. <p><p>Now, if we wanna talk about Michael Bay, Rob Cohen, Brett Ratner... I'd say those types qualify as the shallow, studio-happy, "commercial"-only directors.
April 1, 2009, 5 a.m. CST
by Motoko Kusanagi
...I will cry. A whole year long.
April 1, 2009, 5:01 a.m. CST
by Motoko Kusanagi
As long as I have to wear fucking glasses over my glasses: FUCK 3D!!!!
April 1, 2009, 5:14 a.m. CST
with the projection and glasses = this is what studios are turing to it now.
April 1, 2009, 5:43 a.m. CST
Hathaway is indeed in the movie, but playing the White Queen, not the Queen of Hearts.
April 1, 2009, 5:51 a.m. CST
You're not on here enough anymore sirrah. Yes we know why. Still--the site suffers some w/you your Movie of the Day type contributions. You know I'm right.
April 1, 2009, 6:22 a.m. CST
by Bodenland Unbound
Let the classics be what they are! Don't bastardize them!
April 1, 2009, 7:09 a.m. CST
more, just becos a director is a genre director and makes populist movies does not make them any less artists than the directors you mentioned. That is just arty film arrogance. I would argue that its harder to make good genre movies that appeal to a mass audiance while having those movies maintain intelligence and quality. The ability to do this does indeed make directors like Jackson, Cameron, Spielberg, ridly Scott top directors (if you dont like their work or what they do then more power to you my friend, but that is strictly your personal opinion, within the industry and in fan boy circles these guys are certainly considered top directors) I think (and this is just my opinion) that its easierto be vauge and obtuse or arty with a movie, just like its far easier to make really dumb blockbusters (Bay, Sommers etc..) Its way more difficult to strike that perfect balance ala the dark knight, Aliens, jaws, aww the list just goes on.
April 1, 2009, 7:12 a.m. CST
saying that many of those directors only toe the commercial line. Did Jackson do that when he took a massive gamble with the LOTR trilogy? Or what Cameron's doing with Avatar (which is extremely risky) and those are just two examples off the top of my head dude.
April 1, 2009, 7:15 a.m. CST
directors you like so much, many of them highly respect guys like Spielberg and Cameron. Dont believe me? Just check around for quotes/stories from Tarantino, Soderbergh, Danny Boyle, Kubrick etc concerning said directors...
April 1, 2009, 7:24 a.m. CST
April 1, 2009, 7:36 a.m. CST
This is ""Alice In Wonderland" Title LOGO from Showest presentation. http://www.timburton.jp/movies/alice/090401awlogo.php
April 1, 2009, 8:59 a.m. CST
That could be pretty cool. Think about the crap you as a teenager are into, and envision it being alive....yeah.
April 1, 2009, 10:29 a.m. CST
by Cap'n Jack
bootleg of that tron footage now??? Please?
April 1, 2009, 11:48 a.m. CST
It has to be Tron 2 or TR2N.
April 1, 2009, noon CST
Assuming this isn't an April Fool's, how the hell is that going to work? Live action and CG in 3D - even where it was originally shown in 2D - I can understand. But isn't 2D in 3D going to look a little off? I swear that one day we're going to look back at 2D movies being transformed into 3D and see it as being as bad as colourising black and white movies.
April 1, 2009, 1:33 p.m. CST
that was the most hoplessly naive and downright ignorant nonsense I've read in quite a while. You dismiss Spielberg, Jackson, Cameron, et al. as 'commercial ' directors, and the 3D process as Barnum gimmickry. Newsflash for you pal; The Coens, Scorsese, etc. are 'commercial' directors as well - they make movies to be seen and make a profit from as well (Scorsese in particular has spent the last 10 years making glossy, oscar bait pictures, a trend which shows no sign of abating with this year's Shutter Island.) They ain't JD salinger types, son. The term 'commercial' director is one of the biggest misnomers out there, usually perpetuated by uppity snobs who have NO idea about working in the film industry whatsoever. So, it was some value judgment about the 'artistic' merit of these filmmakers, then, as 'commercial' equals bad in your book, eh? Spielberg, Cameron, etc. are all respected storytellers that happen to make big mass audience films - they also have a point of view, and are of a different order than hacks like Bay, Ratner, McG, etc.<p>Rant Part 2: The 3D process is decidely NOT a gimmick. If you'd bothered to educate yourself, instead of regressing to luddite ignorance, you'd realise that this could be something VERY significant indeed for the film industry. What Cameron and the top guys are attempting (ie. leaving aside hack work like journey to the center of the earth, my bloody valentine 3D, etc.) is a very studied and considered thing. Human beings process the world in 3 dimensions already, so a 3rd dimension for a visual art like cinema is entirely appropriate and in fact can help process visual data and facilitate involvement on a greater level. Even more significantly, films like Avatar are going to be game changers because they could even alter the entire language of cinema, as certain compositions and flow of images from shot to shot will be have to be re-evaluated in 3D. Cameron has talked up all this stuff endlessly - guess you thought it was just fucking flying crap poking you in the eye, eh? no, it points toward a further immersive experience. Would you be the type sitting in the early 20th century bemoaning the gimmickry of sound and then colour? I'll bet you would. And yes, if Ford were alive today, he may very well have filmed his landscapes in 3d. Film is a sensory experience and many filmmakers of all types will be following suit - this WILL become the norm, and people like you will continue to look very foolish indeed. Of course, you'd be interested if those starving artists types got into it wouldn't you? why, exactly? what's the difference between what they would be using it for, and people like Speilberg, Cameron? nothing at all - becuase, despite the pleasues of pure spectacle (not to be discounted except by tools who look down on The Great Unwashed), all of the above are using this tech as a storytelling device, not as fucking gimcrackery. Now away with you back to sightandsound.com - I've seen too many of your type online before.<p>p.s. invoking roger ebert is a very bad call. although an iconic critic, his thoughts are frequently muddled and inconsistent. I seem to recall he slated digital video (again, out of luddite ignorance like yourself), then recanted upon seeing a film properly presented in such a format. Expect him to say something completely the opposite about 3D when something like Avatar is released.
April 1, 2009, 2:38 p.m. CST
Andy hides under his bed. <P> Or the Mcfarlane 18 inch Army of Darkness Ash that's going to fuck Woodys sheep girl and that S-mart shotgun he'll use to blow Woody into chunky monkey clumps. <p> What if Ash reads from the book... Possessing all the horror props and toy with evil. Toy Story 3 is Pixar had nads... <P>Andy complusingly jerking it to internet porn, getting all fat from the non movement the computer and video games have caused him. Woody's girl getting shafted by the Chin. Mr. Potato head finding Andys weed stash and getting based, Toy Ash reading from the book of the dead turning everything evil.. <P> Also the whole outgrown his toys plot. <P> They made a movie about that staring a toaster, an electric blanket, and vacuum cleaner. <P> Maybe you heard of it. It's called The Brave Little Toaster. It came out in 1987
April 2, 2009, 4:30 a.m. CST
by The McPoyle Clan
What is going to replace it? Plasma is being dropped like a hot potato. OLED is still a high-cost wet dream that's been going on for at least 5 years.
April 2, 2009, 12:34 p.m. CST
I'm getting sick of Disney and their shenanigans. They shamelessly promote themselves all over ABC. it gets old real quick.
April 5, 2009, 10:42 p.m. CST
I was wondering when they were going to do the classics like Toy Story in 3D. It's just a matter of loading the archived scene files and re-rendering everything with 3D camera settings. Probably 50% of everything that comes out of Hollywood is re-cycled material anways. So it stands to reason they would re-cycle a 3D animated movie in 3D. I like 3D movies. It made Beowulf more enjoyable than it would be otherwise. If it's a good movie, I would consider seeing it again in 3D. But, if it's a crappy movie, 3D isn't going to open my wallet. Especially since they are likely to drown us in this stuff next year.
April 6, 2009, 1:16 p.m. CST
...that Alice in Wonderland was written by Lewis Carroll for his 10-year old girlfriend. "Why don't you have a seat over there." http://www.alice-in-wonderland.net/alice1a.html