The new Darren Aronofsky film Noah is being post-converted into 3D - but only for certain territories. What does this say about the studio who are doing it and their attitude to the audience in those countries?

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments.

  • Comment number 33. Posted by Arntcatscute

    on 14 Jul 2014 17:55

    Mark, think you got it 180 degrees wrong here...

    Perhaps a better way of looking at the 3d conversion is this; the countries getting 2d are already, to a degree anyway, stupid enough to see this sectarian tripe as 'gods word', and believe it. The rest of the world are however more enlightened, and need some form of gimmick to make the self-satisfying smugness this film sits in more bearable!

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 33: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 33: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 32. Posted by horntooter

    on 1 Mar 2014 09:51

    The animals went in 2D by 2D... Hurrah, hurrah.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 32: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 32: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 31. Posted by Andy Panayiotou

    on 20 Feb 2014 06:33

    It won't make that much of a difference for Cyprus, to be honest. If a film is available in 3D, that is the only format that will be available. Unless the film is still shown after two weeks. Then, you might get a 2D screening on the earlier time-slots

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 31: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 31: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 30. Posted by Stevo the Magnificent

    on 14 Feb 2014 01:20

    Helen, I think some Christians will (rightly) point out inaccuracies and misinterpretations as they see it in Aronofsky's film, but it's not exactly prejudice or intolerance, no-one will be calling for it to be banned... unlike the utterly ridiculous situation with 'Life of Brian' in 1979 that made many of that film's critics look decidedly foolish once they saw it! And the main contention with 'The Passion of the Christ' came not from Christians but from Jewish lobby groups (mainly in the U.S.) and from left-wing secularists in the U.K. who spread the malicious and untrue assertions that it was somehow anti-semitic (forget the fact that the ADL said it wasn't and Mel Gibson's Jewish friends had no problem with it), but again, I get and acknowledge your made point.

    As to Aronofsky's upcoming film, he's not a Christian so he's not coming at it from that angle, he was raised a "not particularly spiritual" Jew so he's taking the four chapters of Genesis plus apocryphal books like the Book of Jubilee, the Book of Enoch, and the Book of Giants, plus centuries of Jewish rabbinical literature, and a good-sized dose of his own individual interpretation and ideas. This upcoming film will be the Noah story as told by Darren Aronofsky not by the Archbishop of Canterbury or by Pope Francis, it's HIS interpretation and his film, I'm fine with that... I may or may not ultimately disagree with some of his creative decisions, but I'm royally stoked to see it, it's gonna be one hell of an interesting work of art by a genuinely fascinating artist and auteur... roll on April 4th!

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 30: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 30: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 29. Posted by Helen W

    on 13 Feb 2014 07:25

    ref Stevo the magnificent - lets hope the christians arent prejudice and intolerant once the film is released. It seems Paramount worried about that possibility with all the test screening Noah has had, and we know how contentious films based on the bible or with biblical references can be from past experience - Passion of the Christ, Life of Brian etc etc

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 29: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 29: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 28. Posted by Airlock

    on 12 Feb 2014 10:06

    @messageboardnickname Yep, GRAVITY WAS POST-CONVERTED but I think the point is less about post-conversion but more that the film wasn't designed for 3D. There is no Stereographer listed in crew list on IMDB (an indicator that there was no consideration of 3D on set).

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 28: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 28: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 27. Posted by miss sophie

    on 11 Feb 2014 21:56

    So living in Germany I guess I won't be seeing Noah in the cinema.
    From watching the trailer I expected a loud, excessively action packed 3D film anyway and had not planned to see it.

    I generally like action/adventure/superhero movies very much. But nowadays the "action" always means endless fast cut CGI sequences and explosions. Awful! I feel so old although I am only 35 years old.
    I am looking forward to the new "Jack Ryan"...

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 27: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 27: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 26. Posted by Nat Segaloff

    on 11 Feb 2014 15:40

    Having coerced exhibitors to install 3D equipment, distributors are now compelled to supply them with a serviceable level of product. The trick is striking a balance between whether the local economies can support the usurious ticket prices attendant to 3D and keeping theatre owners from whining, "We told you so." What's yet to be determined is if the after-market can accommodate 3D (so far, no).

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 26: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 26: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 25. Posted by Simon Treves

    on 11 Feb 2014 12:08

    Titanic was a superlative 3-D post conversion. Retro-fitting a movie with 3-D needn't mean it stinks.

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 25: 1
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 25: 0
    Loading…
  • Comment number 24. Posted by Berba_Was_King

    on 10 Feb 2014 12:01

    Is this really the biggest or most interesting topic in film right now? Of course not, obvious to all this film is going to be poor regardless of whether it's in 3D or not. Is it yet another opportunity for Kermode to bash this format and seek agreement from his many sycophants and acolytes on this message board? Oh, absolutely!

    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of positive ratings for comment 24: 0
    • This entry is now closed for comments. Number of negative ratings for comment 24: 1
    Loading…
More comments

More Posts

Previous

Next