Originally Posted by Cyrano
Same here. I haven't seen Dial M For Murder
in a long time. I kind of think it might look good, but I don't know. Perhaps somebody who sees this and has seen the 3D BR can chime in on its PQ.
DIAL M FOR MURDER has a fair number of detractors who have complained about excessive crosstalk on their displays. But it looked fine on my (DLP) set. HOUSE OF WAX and CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON are both fantastic.
I find it somewhat amusing that there are apparently two groups of 3D enthusiasts. (I'm not counting the rather vocal group of 3D-nonenthusiasts who can hardly wait for the demise of the format.)
Group 1, those who are old enough to remember the initial 3D titles and/or their occasional re-releases, seems convinced that these early 3D releases are superior to current releases (with respect to the 3D -- I'm not talking about the quality of the movies).
Group 2, those who are largely or wholly unfamiliar with the initial 1950s 3D releases, suspects that these early releases must be inferior in quality to more recent efforts. ("Crappy?")
I think that there are titles with excellent 3D in both categories. I see no reason whatsoever to prefer the quality of, say, HUGO to the quality of, say, HOUSE OF WAX (or vice versa). Great 3D is great 3D regardless of when the movie was filmed, and I don't think that there is anything about the early 3D technology that makes it inferior (or superior) to current 3D technology. I loved 3d fifty years ago and I love it still.
As far as conversions go, many are so-so, but a handful are excellent, and the technology is improving. I thought that JURASSIC PARK and (especially) TITANIC had wonderful 3D. Going the cheap route with largely automated conversions (I, ROBOT, JUMPER, the upcoming PREDATOR) is a depressing development that I fear will only serve to fuel the fire of the vociferous 3D critics out there.