J.J Abrams Shares His Thoughts On The 3D Conversion Of STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS

Unsurprisingly, it turns out that it was the studio who forced 3D on J.J. Abrams for his highly anticipated Star Trek sequel, but the director talks here about using the format along with the scenes shot in IMAX to great effect. Hit the jump to read his comments in full!

Follow Josh:
By Josh Wilding - 12/16/2012

Talking about the 3D conversion of Star Trek Into Darkness, director J.J. Abrams has assured fans that despite him not being a fan of the format, it is being put to good use in the sequel. "3D was something that, frankly, I was not a big fan of to begin with. Essentially in order for us to make this movie, the studio said 'You gotta do this in 3D'. So we said, well, we can do a 2D version that we love that can also be converted to 3D," he revealed, before adding: "And the truth is that I've actually been having a lot of fun with it." So, it sounds as if he still believes that 2D is the optimal way to view the film. However, while he was clearly forced to convert the film, Abrams is putting it to very good use so those who DO want to view Star Trek Into Darkness in 3D won't be disappointed. "We have an amazing amount of creative freedom, doing the 3D in post[-production]. This is kind of the myth, that it only looks good if you shoot the movie in 3D, which is completely not true. In fact, we're doing a bunch of things with the 3D in this movie that have not been done before, using techniques that have not been seen. All the exterior shots, including the shots in space, are all either shot or rendered in IMAX format. It's the first time a movie has been shot in IMAX to this scale and converted to 3D." Will you consider checking out Star Trek Into Darkness in 3D? Sound off with your thoughts in the usual place!






When the crew of the Enterprise is called back home, they find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization has detonated the fleet and everything it stands for, leaving our world in a state of crisis. With a personal score to settle, Captain Kirk leads a manhunt to a war-zone world to capture a one man weapon of mass destruction. As our heroes are propelled into an epic chess game of life and death, love will be challenged, friendships will be torn apart, and sacrifices must be made for the only family Kirk has left: his crew.


STARRING:

Chris Pine as Captain James T. Kirk
Zachary Quinto as Spock
Benedict Cumberbatch as John Harrison
Alice Eve as Dr. Carol Marcus
Karl Urban as Dr. Leonard "Bones" McCoy
Zoe Saldana as Nyota Uhura
Anton Yelchin as Pavel Chekov
John Cho as Hikaru Sulu
Simon Pegg as Montgomery "Scotty" Scott
Bruce Greenwood as Admiral Christopher Pike

RELEASE DATE: May 17th, 2013


Source: Digital Spy
DISCLAIMER: This article was submitted by a volunteer contributor who has agreed to our code of conduct. ComicBookMovie.com is protected from liability under "safe harbor" provisions and will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. For expeditious removal, contact us HERE.
2
LIKE!
29 Comments
Maximillion - 12/16/2012, 5:54 AM
Having the choice to see it in 3D is actually a good thing for profit :)
Happy11 - 12/16/2012, 5:55 AM
I hate 3d it's off putting.
Shamo - 12/16/2012, 5:59 AM
i hate 3d too. its less engaging.
Jolt17 - 12/16/2012, 5:59 AM
Nah, I'll stick with 2D.
Nomis1800 - 12/16/2012, 6:02 AM
Well.. I can only see it in 3D once it is released in 3D. So I have no choice.
Spideyguy94 - 12/16/2012, 6:05 AM
I don't get why some people are all up in arms over 3D, if you don't like it then go watch it in 2D. I'm not a huge fan of 3D myself but I'm kinda take or leave it. But If 3D is the only option I can kind of see were you are coming from.
Magnus66 - 12/16/2012, 6:21 AM
I'm really looking forward to this movie... but it's the 2D version for me.

I'm really not a big fan of 3D films.
SuperDude001 - 12/16/2012, 6:24 AM
Thing is some 3D I enjoy, like if it's worth the much higher ticket price (e.g Avatar), but some conversions just don't look good.
Hopefully this will be different, although I generally will hope to just see it 2D, I only get pissed when every 2D showing is full and I'll have to pay extra to see a bad 3D version for more money.
ricko8687 - 12/16/2012, 6:42 AM
Depending on how good it is I'll see it in both formats
PirateOpossum - 12/16/2012, 6:49 AM
Every movie/game/entertainment should have a 3D option. IMO. it is one step closer to Virtual Reality Entertainment. Then we can all be like Lawnmower Man .. LOL ... [Singularity]
GUNSMITH - 12/16/2012, 7:43 AM
3D RESURGENCE STARTED STARTED WITH AVATAR...THEN IT JUST GOT BASTARDIZED INTO A WAY TO GET MORE MONEY...CONVERTED MOVIES SUCK BECAUSE IF THEY WERENT MEANT TO BE 3D..THEY JUST SUCK.
daveB - 12/16/2012, 7:44 AM
I would love to see ST:TWOK converted to 3D. The space scenes would by awesome.
batbro - 12/16/2012, 7:56 AM
not all of us have a choice. where i am - austria - there's no choice than to watch the movie in 3d. if it was shot in 3d it's getting showed in 3D - no cinema here which is playing the 2D version.
Deadshot - 12/16/2012, 8:03 AM
[frick] 3D
dantheman432 - 12/16/2012, 8:38 AM
actually the 9 minutes of footage in imax looked great in 3D. Changed my mind about conversions. Comparing it to the hobbit 3D (which was pretty much mediocre at best) Star Trek Into Darkness had more depth and things coming at you.
Tainted87 - 12/16/2012, 9:05 AM
Kind of off-topic, but I really can't understand why critics base their reviews of films on their 3D value (if applicable).

I mean you can always NOT see it in 3D... or is 3D the default screening for critics?

Just curious, it annoys me.

I don't really HATE 3D, but I really haven't seen enough to have much of an opinion. Dark of the Moon looked AWESOME in 3D, Dredd looked pretty good but nothing amazing... I think that's about it. 2D is the way to go.
Maximus101 - 12/16/2012, 9:12 AM
The 9 minute prologue was amazing, far better than that long boring hobbit movie I seen afterward.
jimpinto24 - 12/16/2012, 9:29 AM
I'm not a big fan of 3-D. However, Star Treck Into Darkness looks badass. So I will go see it in 3-D. Just this once though.
Niklander - 12/16/2012, 9:56 AM
Okay 3D or 2D I don't care I am looking forward for this movie
2gold - 12/16/2012, 10:34 AM
I'd probably watch 3D more if it didn't cause my head extreme pain. Just not an option and when the theater has limited theater space, it really sucks when they can only show the 3D version. And yeah, the overuse of 3D is what is causing the backlash. Some movies it makes sense while others, it makes you scratch your head.
Mecury1 - 12/16/2012, 10:44 AM
REVOLUTION!!!!~ Mother Earth Kick these guys off the planet!!..
Those darn guys in Suits are something else aren't they!.
Silentman - 12/16/2012, 11:38 AM
so see it in 2D than? alright, thanks jj.
gmckoy - 12/16/2012, 11:40 AM
i thought that trailer was great, anyone who said it was boring, knows nothing about movies
Ha1frican - 12/16/2012, 12:27 PM
I will see anything made by Pixar, Dreamworks, or anything made with stop motion animation (Coraline and Paranorman are fantastic in 3D) in 3D but for sandard films i fnd it annoying. IMAX is the way to go for th future of cinema not 3d
jj2112 - 12/16/2012, 12:54 PM
Another great production by Jar Jar Abrams
zachshivey - 12/16/2012, 2:03 PM
I can't see 3D....it doesn't stand out to me
Maximus101 - 12/16/2012, 8:21 PM
@ha1frican I agree with you on the 3D IMAX thing. 3D is dumbin my opinion and they should get rid of it, the only movie that looked amazing in 3D was avatar. IMAX is the only way to go for sure.
pepe - 12/17/2012, 1:42 AM
3D gives me stiffy...
DrDoom - 12/17/2012, 6:28 AM
We live in an age of gimmicks.

Please log in to post comments.

Don't have an account?
Please Register.