The Third Dimension Is No More

By January 29, 2013Nat-news

This is possibly good news for Star Wars fans…although fans who are also Natalie fans might want not be too thrilled. Lucasfilm was planning to re-release the prequel trilogy into theatres with the draw being that the films would now be post converted to 3D. The Phantom Menaces already came out last year and underperformed while still making a decent chunk of change, and the second two films were due later this year.

Well, with JJ Abrams now on board for Star Wars 7, it seems Lucasfilm (or Disney) would prefer to focus on that new film, which means that Attack Of The Clones and Revenge Of The Sith will no longer be receiving their 3D re-release.

Personally I couldn’t care less, but how about you guys?


Author Dazza

More posts by Dazza

Join the discussion 20 Comments

  • Pat's mom is awesome says:

    I wanted the special 3D glasses.

  • AMSSERME says:

    Neither do I.I didn’t see Episode 1 on 3D.I have all Star Wars movies on Blu-Ray so no need to see them in 3D.That was the reason it underperformed,Why pay more to see it in 3D when you can see the film relaxed and in the comfort of your home.

  • omgzrachel says:

    Doncurr about 3D or Star Wars in 3D.

    I don’t think Abrams could do worse than Lucas’s joyless prequels. Oblig. comment about lens flare.

  • Amy says:

    I am a Star Wars and a Nat fan, but really don’t care for 3D. So makes no difference to me.

  • jesslv74 says:

    I’m glad. I abhor 3D. I didn’t see Phantom Menace when it came out in 3D either, nor would I have gone to see the other two.

  • MaeXtaSiA says:

    As a real fan it’s a disaster for me ! I just saw Phantom Menace in 3D version Three times on movie theater and and wanted to do the same for the others …

  • AMSSERME says:

    @MaeXtaSia-Maybe LucasFilm or Disney will release the 3D prequels in 3D Blu-Ray and you will have the chance to see it,although it won’t be the same as if seen in a movie theater.

    The question is will it be worth the purchase if you already have the complete Star Wars collection in Blu-Ray?

  • Mel_M says:

    Something I’d like to see tried with 3D is to shoot a 3D film but without the 3D glitz. When you’re noticing the glitz, it’s a distraction from the movie. (If a beefed up 3D scene is used, the audience shouldn’t notice it directly. For example, a fight on the edge of a cliff.) If this were to make an enhanced movie experience, then I think they’d be on to something. But, if people are there to see stuff coming out of the screen at them, I don’t suppose they’d like such a movie.

    • Dazza says:

      Mel M – Run to the cinema and watch Life Of Pi. Not only is the 3D incredibly subtle but the usage of depth is breathtaking at times. The most visually jaw dropping experience that I’ve had at the cinema in years.

      • Mel_M says:


        Don’t know whether I can get to it or not, but Life of Pi 3D is playing just a few blocks away; thanks for the tip. I watched the 2D trailer, and, IMO, there’s plenty in it that 3D would surely enhance without resorting to glitz.

        What I’m thinking of, too, is using 3D for just a normal scene in a room or city street, for example. Film in 3D but don’t think 3D and see how it works out. It might be satisfying in a way that’d be hard to pin down. If 3D were ever to become the norm, I think this is how it would have to work: pleasing but not distracting. But, maybe the 3D market is only for those who want the glitz.

        I’m happy that someone agreed, to some extent at least, with my comment; I didn’t expect it.

        • Dazza says:

          No problem. Go watch it and report back 🙂

          There are maybe only 1 or 2 moments in the whole film where something comes out at you like the usual shit. For the rest of the time it’s just an exhilarating use of depth that enhances a film that’s already very beautiful to look at.

  • Lee Bartholomew says:

    As someone with double vision I rarely can see 3D unless it’s on a laptop. further away the screen is the more pointless 3D in shades is. besides. Skyfall proved 3D is a fad. Albeit considering what JJ did to Star Trek. odds are I’m gonna hate Star Wars 7. Although not as much as the Star Trek remake in a third parallel universe. zzzz I find Star Trek’s remake to be like well if nothing existed before it it’d be a great movie. Similar to Highlander 4. Which is a great movie. Alas 2 and 3 were more cohesive than 4. 4 on it’s own had the same emotion as the first movie.. Although I think Natalie has had her head removed just once too many

  • lunatic0 says:

    SW keeps going downhill, yippee! I don’t really like 3D but I wanted to see the Original Trilogy in theaters at last.

  • goferable says:

    I’m a huge Star Wars fan and a Natalie fan too. And I must say I rwally enjoyed the I ep. in 3D (maybe because I’ve seen the film a thousand times but never in the cinema). Come on, it’s Natalie in three dimensions! You’ll probably never get closer to her!

  • Dazza says:

    I’ve always maintained that there was a use for 3D when used right and Life Of Pi certainly proves that point. However one can’t escape the fact that 95% of 3D films use the technology poorly. That goes double for films who post convert. That said, I didn’t see TPM in 3D.

    As for Episode 7, I’m totally on board. I never loathed the universe, I loathe what Lucas did with it. Abrams isn’t the most exciting of choices but he makes really good big spectacle films. I felt about Star Trek like I feel about Star Wars, yet his reboot made me actually excited about the series for the first time since I was a kid. And when I saw the film on TV a year later it actually held up really well. That first hour is kinda perfect.

  • awiseone says:

    Moving away from the 3D for these movies is because of the fact that FOX has distribution rights for them until 2020…They are not a factor in the new Star Wars world order…

  • jesslv74 says:

    I agree with Mel. Aside from my having issues with my eyesight as well that prevent me from seeing 3D clearly, the gimmicky stuff is what puts me off…it is very distracting. What’s bad is when you see it in 2D and can tell what was put in just for show…like something flying at the screen. I saw “The Hobbit” in that 48fps 3D that was supposed to be so great and I didn’t find it any better than regular 3D. I then saw it again in 2D and was so much more into the story. I realized that there was tons of STORY stuff that I missed because I was trying to 1. Focus on the picture that was often blurry and made me dizzy, and 2. Focus on the characters, story and generally what was going on rather than having my eyes darting all over the place, trying to take in the whole view. Having said that, I think that Peter Jackson wasn’t too terribly flashy with the glitz of it all and that he went more for depth of field than flying objects, but I still didn’t really get as much out of the movie in 3D as I did in 2D.

    I don’t think “Life of Pi” is out here anymore but if it was I’d consider checking it out to see how the 3D was used.

    As for Episode 7 being written by J.J. Abrams…I love his work, mostly in television (Alias, Felicity, Fringe, Lost…though I was unhappy with the finale of Lost). I didn’t much care for his “Star Trek.” I’m not a “Star Trek” fan to begin with (though I have been watching some TNG episodes with my husband…some are pretty good) but I put that aside and just watched it as a movie unto itself. It just didn’t grab me. I have only seen it once…I was never interested in seeing it after I saw it in the theater, so maybe I should give it a second viewing.

    Anyway, I’ve read some of the comments that J.J. has made about making the new “Star Wars” movie, and even read some stuff he said about “Star Wars” back in 2006 and 2008. It sounds like he has a clear vision of what he wants to do with it and of course way back then he had no idea that there would be any more movies, so I like the fact that his thoughts about the movies were so in-depth and he sounded like he would be very character-focused. He said that he’s even based some of his work around themes of “Star Wars,” like relationships between characters as well as characters’ internal struggles (that was all stuff he said in the past). He said he doesn’t just see it as Sci-Fi, but a story about humanity as well. Overall, he sounds like he’s been a HUGE fan from the very first time he saw the movie and wants to do it justice. I just hope he gets some good actors on board…I think with his reputation he can. Still, a bad script and bad director with good actors can still make the movie crap.

    Okay, I don’t know why I wrote an essay. I’m a VERY big “Star Wars” fan so it was a huge deal when I heard about the new movies and was actually unhappy about it. With J.J. on board…hmm, I don’t know, I’m still on the fence, still feeling a little skeptical, and probably won’t make up my mind until after I see it, haha.

  • jesslv74 says:

    It’s here at one our theaters but not in 3D.