INDIANA JONES Saga to get 3D Re-Release?

by     Posted 2 years, 237 days ago

Hot on the heels of the long-gestating news that Lucasfilm intends to begin rereleasing all six Star Wars episodes in 3D starting in 2012 (covered here), the internet rumor bees went abuzz about the possibility that this could mean another threequel of Star Wars episodes, as it would mirror the announcement of The Phantom Menace and the digitally re-mastered releases of the original trilogy in the 90’s.

In much less dramatic fashion, it seems to have rather signaled the development of 3D post-conversions for the Indiana Jones films. Raiders of the Lost Ark is obviously 1st up in the queue, and it’s unclear whether the one-a-year strategy planned for Star Wars will be carried over for these or where the theatrical runs of the two series will fall with respect to one another. According to Blue Sky Disney, George Lucas is expected to make an official announcement next month, and if it all pans out as reported we’ll have more for you then.

Hit the jump for more on 3D post-conversion and why nostalgia should be held sacred.

The prospect of a 3D conversion for Indiana Jones is hardly a shock, what with Lucas’ outspoken, giddy reaction to James Cameron’s Avatar, but it still irks me. Since I’m skeptical that any filmmaker has yet to find an artistic recipe that calls for 3D to enhance more than the presentation and price of the dish they’re serving, at least native 3D films have lighting-correction for the picture and accurate depths of field. With the feasible exception of animation-heavy movies like Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland, 3D post-conversion has proven only to actively detract from one’s enjoyment of a film, as was the case with Louis Leterrier’s Clash of the Titans. However, with James Cameron overseeing Titanic in 3D and the unexpected decision by Warner Bros. to cancel the 3D treatment for Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows-Part 1’s initial run to avoid a rush job, perhaps I’m slamming the door on the technology a bit prematurely.

It’s no secret that George Lucas has always relished applying the latest digital technology in order to-according to his own perception-improve his past classics (Han shot first Mr. Lucas) or modernize his franchises, as was the case with the cartoonish Star Wars prequels and the CGI prairie dog-loaded Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. With remakes overtaking the market and childhood memories in jeopardy, it’s frustrating when the filmmaker behind the original films is the one who is tainting the legend. In my opinion, the beauty of Raiders relies as much on Ford’s one-liners as it does the dust and grain. What’s next? American Graffiti in 3D?

Sponsored Content



Please Like Collider on Facebook

Tags:
, ,

Related Links:
«
»
Comments:
  • Jay

    I’m sure that the likelihood of someone physically forcing you to sit there and watch the post conversion 3D versions is extremely slim, so you’re welcome to make your own decision on whether or not to buy a ticket. I’d say with your sceptical attitude that you’re better off staying at home and watching your preferred version of said films on your choice of either VHS, DVD or BluRay. Re-marketing the films in 3D to a new generation is hardly tainting any legacy, the various versions of the films in question will always continue to exist in their current forms, and I believe that between the original, digitally restored extended, and soon, 3D versions that new inductees into to the George Lucas fan base are self aware and intelligent enough to seek out the version that appeals most to their senses. In years to come it may take the existence of 3D cleaned up versions for the legacy to perpetuate and grow. I think we need to realise that despite these films playing a large part in our lives at an early age, that that does not give us any form of ownership over their future. Suck it up, George can do as he pleases.

    • Anonymous

      Hey Jay, thanks for the reply and I think we’re closer than you think to being on the same page (or not). I’m opposed to the concept of the 3D post conversion for the reasons I highlighted in the paragraph just after the jump. In terms of childhood memories and ownership, the comment was directed more at cash-in remakes, while my frustration with Lucas comes from the fact that he is now devoting his time to rehashing his two beloved properties with underdeveloped technology (or so the evidence has shown thus far) as opposed to creating. I’ve no doubt he has the right, just as I have the right to express disappointment and you have the right to disagree. But like you said, with so many versions on the market (vhs, dvd, remastered/not remastered) for the next generation to experience (these are not movies that will fade away because they didn’t get a 3D transfer), is it worth risking messing up? As movie fans we might not have any say in whether something like this goes forward, but I think it’s our obligation to be concerned with whether the film will actually benefit from 3D. Let me know what you think.

      • http://senzafineonline.net/ Yahzee

        I really do hate 3D, and its overuse nowadays. I’m really sick of it and I wouldn’t like to watch our beloved Indiana Jones or Star Wars in lame 3D (yes I love ALL of them).
        That being said, it’s true nobody is forcing us to watch. I’m not gonna. I rather watch my favorites movies on DVD or Blu-ray, in the versions that I like the most. In time I’m sure 3D will once again be a thing of the past, in the meantime I’m avoiding it as much as I can.

      • Jay

        Hey Kevin, I certainly feel that Lucas’ motivation stems from a desire to see his films to technologically “keep up with the Jones’ ” (No pun intended), and knowing that he has a tried and true product in the Star Wars and Indy franchises which he will modernise and re-market with advancing technology as long as he lives. By the time George’s 90th rolls around I’m sure we’ll have the 4D Extended-Extended Edition box sets on sale. I’m sure money is certainly a driving motivation (someone has to pay for all that coke getting used at Skywalker Ranch), though if as rumour has it that George is in fact feeding his creative juices into further instalments in the Star Wars franchise, most certainly to be shot in 3D, then the 3D post conversion of the previous six films will at least give the viewer some visual continuity. Lucas is well aware it seems of the wants fan base (possibly through collider :) ) and what will potentially hurt the reputation of the films as shown with the scaling back of the role of Jar Jar Binks in the prequels after the wrath of fanboys following Episode I. Let’s hope that the decision to go 3D with the existing films isn’t such a misfire and that he comes up with the “recipe” needed to deliver post conversion gold. I must say, if the results are good, the thought of what magic we could see in the pod race scenes alone would get me in the theatre. Hopefully it is a risk worth taking, after three comparatively underwhelming prequels I still have the same nostalgic feel for the original trilogy, and hopefully that feeling will remain regardless of what transformations they continue to under go. I think we’re very much on the same page in the hope that along with polishing his existing gems he will continue to produce future movie magic.

      • Anonymous

        Jay you make some excellent points, sir. I’m glad you mentioned money playing a key role when it comes to 3D post-conversion, because that is a point all too often lost amongst the passionate responses of fans to news like this. Lucasfilm is a company at the end of the day, and I wouldn’t dare insult George Lucas’s business sense. My intent was not even to decry Lucas’s post-conversion efforts so much as the technology he’ll be using to do so. Like you, if there HAS to be a 3D Indiana Jones Saga in place of a new creative effort, of course I want it to be the best it can be. The excitement of the boulder scene in Raiders will be ratcheted up tenfold I’m sure, assuming nothing else is lost of the picture. In terms of 3D, my thought process comes down to this (we’ll use Indiana Jones as an example): If a 3D camera as advanced as today’s had been available when Spielberg and Lucas made Raiders the first time around, was dirt cheap and the 3D addition wasn’t proven to affect gross one way or the other, would the filmmakers have seen it as a necessary, genuine artistic enhancement and filmed it in 3D all the same? If the answer is ‘no’ and putting points about good business practice aside for a moment, to me that is reason enough to be hesitant about the intentions of the production team and the finished product’s quality. Hypothetical questions are always tough, but it might be a fun discussion to get going. Thoughts from anyone?

  • Ryan

    I want Free Willy 3D, A Time to Kill 3D, Star Trek V 3D, and Mr. and Mrs. Smith 3D

  • Ryan

    I want Free Willy 3D, A Time to Kill 3D, Star Trek V 3D, and Mr. and Mrs. Smith 3D

Features

Demand Media Entertainment

Click Here