Public Enemy No. 1 -- Phil Hinton of AV/Forms - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 24 Old 01-23-2012, 10:32 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Deja Vu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: great white north
Posts: 4,357
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 68 Post(s)
Liked: 103
So Phil Hinton has now become public enemy no. 1 in my books. Over at AV/Forms he spends a lot of time rubbing in the fact that 3D didn't take off as manufacturers had hoped and he can't wait for it to die. If he wants to alienate some of his AV members this guy couldn't do a better job. I don't push my particular proclivities on others -- if I don't like certain clothing styles or particular foods I don't call or hope for them to be banned or just go away. If some like these things I'm happy for them even though I don't wish to partake. Not Phil Hinton -- this guy IMO is a real jerk. He doesn't have to watch 3D if he doesn't want to, but he'd like it to go away anyway, which would leave a real hole for those of us who love it. Who is this guy?
Deja Vu is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 24 Old 01-23-2012, 11:18 AM
Member
 
FronzDan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 152
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
He was probably saying the same thing about blu-rays and DVDs and VHS. He probably has a collection of Beta tapes.
FronzDan is offline  
post #3 of 24 Old 01-23-2012, 11:19 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Rudy1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Posts: 3,092
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Liked: 99
He's just a tubby little fellow from across the pond. I doubt the money-hungry powers-that-be in Hollywood who are converting every movie they can find to 3D are going to listen to this bloke. TV manufacturers as well are making way too much money from 3D to abandon it overnight, so I think we're okay for now.
Rudy1 is offline  
post #4 of 24 Old 01-23-2012, 01:43 PM
Senior Member
 
BleedOrange11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 390
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
It seems like most professional movie critics have this attitude. It bugs me too when reading reviews. I really don't understand all the animosity and smart-alec jabs directed at 3D. Well-done stereography adds so much to movies!

I suppose that most of it could be the result of poorly-done conversions like The Last Airbender and Clash of the Titans that made bad first impressions. Still, lumping native 3D movies into the same category as those is a rather jaded and close-minded way of thinking.
BleedOrange11 is offline  
post #5 of 24 Old 01-23-2012, 03:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Rudy1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Posts: 3,092
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 32 Post(s)
Liked: 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by BleedOrange11 View Post

It seems like most professional movie critics have this attitude. It bugs me too when reading reviews. I really don't understand all the animosity and smart-alec jabs directed at 3D. Well-done stereography adds so much to movies!

I suppose that most of it could be the result of poorly-done conversions like The Last Airbender and Clash of the Titans that made bad first impressions. Still, lumping native 3D movies into the same category as those is a rather jaded and close-minded way of thinking.

Perhaps it is because many of today's "professional movie critics" are nothing more than glorified bloggers. Like fashion designers, they tend to jump on a trend and pretend to make it their own, writing reviews they know will get widely read without really taking the time to be objective. And it doesn't help that most movies coming out these days (2D as well as 3D) are so poor that it is really difficult to find one that gets it all right (such as "Avatar"). The studios that spend millions to convert 2D movies to 3D would be better off to just fund films that are planned, written, and shot for 3D. They excel at rehashing hits from the past, so all they really have to do is find a few classics that would gain something from a "third dimension" and remake them. I'm not going to mention any names, but anyone who can royally screw up a film based on Greek mythology should probably seek employment in another industry.
Rudy1 is offline  
post #6 of 24 Old 01-23-2012, 03:56 PM
Super Moderator
 
teachsac's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Elk Grove, CA
Posts: 4,258
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 45 Post(s)
Liked: 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by FronzDan View Post

He was probably saying the same thing about blu-rays and DVDs and VHS. He probably has a collection of Beta tapes.

8-tracks

S~

Please use the report post button to alert staff to problematic posts. Never quote or respond to them yourself
teachsac is online now  
post #7 of 24 Old 01-23-2012, 05:35 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Deja Vu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: great white north
Posts: 4,357
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 68 Post(s)
Liked: 103
What bothers me is that he sounds like he's speaking for all consumers -- the fact is he isn't speaking for us. He seems extremely egocentric to me. What's true for him isn't necessarily true for others. I enjoy 3D and it looks like those who do will have to stand up and defend 3D.
Deja Vu is online now  
post #8 of 24 Old 01-23-2012, 06:46 PM
 
RedOctober205's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 436
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deja Vu View Post

So Phil Hinton has now become public enemy no. 1 in my books. Over at AV/Forms he spends a lot of time rubbing in the fact that 3D didn't take off as manufacturers had hoped and he can't wait for it to die. If he wants to alienate some of his AV members this guy couldn't do a better job. I don't push my particular proclivities on others -- if I don't like certain clothing styles or particular foods I don't call or hope for them to be banned or just go away. If some like these things I'm happy for them even though I don't wish to partake. Not Phil Hinton -- this guy IMO is a real jerk. He doesn't have to watch 3D if he doesn't want to, but he'd like it to go away anyway, which would leave a real hole for those of us who love it. Who is this guy?

Link? I'd like to read this.
RedOctober205 is offline  
post #9 of 24 Old 01-23-2012, 06:56 PM
Advanced Member
 
dan webster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: western mass.
Posts: 797
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Could you post a link. I love 3d on my acer 9500. It is here to stay and will only get better.

Dan Webster
Never stop upgrading!

Updated Theater Pictures

dan webster is online now  
post #10 of 24 Old 01-24-2012, 04:57 AM
Advanced Member
 
ferl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Illinois
Posts: 687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by BleedOrange11 View Post

It seems like most professional movie critics have this attitude.

Exactly. As far as "professional movie critic", should I have been aware that this person exists? As far as "attitude", every wanker that critiques movies thinks that people anxiously await their opinions.
This thread did little more than give this "OPINION " a bit of notoriety.
Being a critic on Amazon or Blu-Def Digest and the like, can't exactly be worn as a badge of honor.

ferl is offline  
post #11 of 24 Old 01-24-2012, 06:14 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
Deja Vu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: great white north
Posts: 4,357
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 68 Post(s)
Liked: 103
Deja Vu is online now  
post #12 of 24 Old 01-24-2012, 06:54 AM
Advanced Member
 
Airion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Japan
Posts: 787
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deja Vu View Post

Here's the link.

http://www.avforums.com/tv/index.php?videoid=338

He doesn't sound too terribly negative here. It is funny how he talks about how little the public has been interested in 3DTVs while going on to say how all high end TVs at the show were 3D despite little content. A few minutes later, he talked about how slowly HDTVs were adopted with high prices and zero content at first, but which of course eventually succeeded. He makes it clear that he personally doesn't want 3D but does want 4k. So he applies the example of HDTV's slow success to 4k but conveniently, not 3D. So the future of 4k is hopeful despite high prices and zero native content, versus 3D which has a fair selection of content right now and will be a standard feature in TVs to come.

On second thought, the logic is pretty darn negative. I've seen worse though, it's a typically shallow analysis of 3D.
Airion is offline  
post #13 of 24 Old 01-24-2012, 08:51 AM
Member
 
xiaNaix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 139
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
He's obviously out of touch with reality. All you have to do is pick up any industry magazine and you'll see that Hollywood is definitely making a shift toward 3D production. If he wants to watch all those forthcoming 3D movies in 2D then let him.
xiaNaix is online now  
post #14 of 24 Old 01-25-2012, 11:42 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 20,043
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
Liked: 343
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudy1 View Post

Perhaps it is because many of today's "professional movie critics" are nothing more than glorified bloggers. Like fashion designers, they tend to jump on a trend and pretend to make it their own, writing reviews they know will get widely read without really taking the time to be objective.

Your mind is making connections and forming conspiracy theories where none really exist.

Roger Ebert has been one of the most vocal opponents of 3D. In every single review of a 3D movie he writes, he makes it a point to say that he thinks the 3D is worthless. Love or hate the man, he is far from a "glorified blogger." He has a Pulitzer for film criticsm, and is not known as someone who will "jump on a trend and pretend to make it his own."

The simple fact of the matter is that some people just don't like 3D and never will.

Quote:


And it doesn't help that most movies coming out these days (2D as well as 3D) are so poor that it is really difficult to find one that gets it all right (such as "Avatar"). The studios that spend millions to convert 2D movies to 3D would be better off to just fund films that are planned, written, and shot for 3D.

This is the real heart of the matter, isn't it?

If you perceive film critics in general to have a bias against 3D, you need to keep in mind that a professional critic is obligated to see every new movie that comes out. They see every 3D movie, including all the crappy ones. Given that the majority of 3D movies released today are lousy, half-assed conversions from 2D, it's no wonder that critics get burned out on the format quickly.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
post #15 of 24 Old 01-25-2012, 01:47 PM
Senior Member
 
BleedOrange11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 390
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by ferl View Post

Exactly. As far as "professional movie critic", should I have been aware that this person exists?

No. I didn't know who he was either. I wasn't specifically referring to him as a professional movie critic although I figured he probably helps run that other AV blu-ray site. I just meant that if you go to Rotten Tomatoes and read some linked reviews about a native 3D movie like Underworld: Awakening, 14/15 "professional" critics that bother to mention 3D only do so to tell you something like:

- 3D is a gimmick
- 3D is the flavor of the month
- The 3D was worthless
- The 3D added nothing
- Apparently it was in 3D but I didn't notice
- Glad I watched it in 2D

The best compliment 3D usually gets is:
- It didn't add or detract from the story

Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

If you perceive film critics in general to have a bias against 3D, you need to keep in mind that a professional critic is obligated to see every new movie that comes out. They see every 3D movie, including all the crappy ones. Given that the majority of 3D movies released today are lousy, half-assed conversions from 2D, it's no wonder that critics get burned out on the format quickly.

If they actually do see every 3D movie in 3D, then you would think that they would have some appreciation for the ~33% that are shot with 3D cameras and use the medium effectively to show depth, extend a couple of pop-outs, and immerse the viewer. Do these people who get paid to watch and critique movies actually not see the cinematic beauty that good 3D adds? It opens up the visual space so much. I really just don't understand. Maybe most of them just care about the story and not the audio/visual experience (which is half the fun!).
BleedOrange11 is offline  
post #16 of 24 Old 01-25-2012, 03:28 PM
Advanced Member
 
ferl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Illinois
Posts: 687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by BleedOrange11 View Post

No. I didn't know who he was either. I wasn't specifically referring to him as a professional movie critic although I figured he probably helps run that other AV blu-ray site.

I wasn't referring to Phil as a professional movie critic either. I referred to Phil as a "professional movie critic". The quotation marks differentiate an individual with credentials, from sarcasm intended to identify Phil as an Internet website blogger

Agree with him or not, Ebert is generally accepted as a credible professional movie critic. I do see his point in reference to 3D, but I still enjoy 3D movies.
I can appreciate Eberts dislike of 3D, but would disregard the opinions of the "professional movie critics". If I wanted a movie review I would not seek out Amazon, Phil, Rotten Tomatoes or Blu-Ray Digest.

ferl is offline  
post #17 of 24 Old 01-26-2012, 04:58 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Grubert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 7,892
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by ferl View Post

I wasn't referring to Phil as a professional movie critic either. I referred to Phil as a "professional movie critic". The quotation marks differentiate an individual with credentials, from sarcasm intended to identify Phil as an Internet website blogger

Except that Phil Hinton doesn't review movies at all. He's a reviewer of AV equipment for avforums. So your comment is totally off the mark, quotation marks or not.

Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four
Grubert is offline  
post #18 of 24 Old 01-26-2012, 05:04 AM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudy1 View Post

Perhaps it is because many of today's "professional movie critics" are nothing more than glorified bloggers. Like fashion designers, they tend to jump on a trend and pretend to make it their own, writing reviews they know will get widely read without really taking the time to be objective. And it doesn't help that most movies coming out these days (2D as well as 3D) are so poor that it is really difficult to find one that gets it all right (such as "Avatar"). The studios that spend millions to convert 2D movies to 3D would be better off to just fund films that are planned, written, and shot for 3D. They excel at rehashing hits from the past, so all they really have to do is find a few classics that would gain something from a "third dimension" and remake them. I'm not going to mention any names, but anyone who can royally screw up a film based on Greek mythology should probably seek employment in another industry.

Those that can . . . do.

Those that can't do . . . teach.

Those that can't teach . . . critique
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #19 of 24 Old 01-26-2012, 07:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
adpayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Camp Lake,WI
Posts: 1,505
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

If you perceive film critics in general to have a bias against 3D, you need to keep in mind that a professional critic is obligated to see every new movie that comes out. They see every 3D movie, including all the crappy ones. Given that the majority of 3D movies released today are lousy, half-assed conversions from 2D, it's no wonder that critics get burned out on the format quickly.

This is my major beef with film criticism in general.

If I had to see every movie, I would probably find fewer and fewer things to like about them. It seems that if a film is quirky, or different, it will be better received by most critics. I understand that, but it may not translate as well to the common movie goer.

Regarding Ebert's disdain for all things 3D. Since he personally doesn't like it, he should NOT review films in 3D. It is a conflict of interest, in my view.

Art
adpayne is offline  
post #20 of 24 Old 01-26-2012, 08:47 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 20,043
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
Liked: 343
Quote:
Originally Posted by BleedOrange11 View Post

If they actually do see every 3D movie in 3D, then you would think that they would have some appreciation for the ~33% that are shot with 3D cameras and use the medium effectively to show depth, extend a couple of pop-outs, and immerse the viewer. Do these people who get paid to watch and critique movies actually not see the cinematic beauty that good 3D adds? It opens up the visual space so much. I really just don't understand. Maybe most of them just care about the story and not the audio/visual experience (which is half the fun!).

Even among movies natively shot in 3D, a good number of them aren't shot very well. I enjoy 3D, but when I saw Fright Night last year (a native 3D production), I felt that it added absolutely nothing to the movie.

There are only so many qualified stereographers in Hollywood, and the most talented of those are spread thin over a small number of productions (Avatar, Hugo, maybe Transformers 3 and a few others). The rest of the people shooting 3D are either novices who haven't quite gotten the hang of the format yet, or outright hacks.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
post #21 of 24 Old 01-26-2012, 08:51 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 20,043
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
Liked: 343
Quote:
Originally Posted by adpayne View Post

Regarding Ebert's disdain for all things 3D. Since he personally doesn't like it, he should NOT review films in 3D. It is a conflict of interest, in my view.

He usually doesn't have a choice. Critics go to whatever preview screenings the studios set up for them. Ebert has said on a few occasions that he requests 2D screenings when they're available, but he's often forced to watch in 3D, even for crummy conversions like The Last Airbender.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

Those that can . . . do.

Those that can't do . . . teach.

Those that can't teach . . . critique

Those who can't do any of the above... whine about them on the internet.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (Blog updated daily!)
Curator, Laserdisc Forever

My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
post #22 of 24 Old 01-26-2012, 11:05 AM
Senior Member
 
BleedOrange11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 390
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

Even among movies natively shot in 3D, a good number of them aren't shot very well. I enjoy 3D, but when I saw Fright Night last year (a native 3D production), I felt that it added absolutely nothing to the movie.

There are only so many qualified stereographers in Hollywood, and the most talented of those are spread thin over a small number of productions (Avatar, Hugo, maybe Transformers 3 and a few others). The rest of the people shooting 3D are either novices who haven't quite gotten the hang of the format yet, or outright hacks.

Fair enough. I would certainly agree with the sentiment that careful planning and scene setup make a huge difference. Well-done stereography can even add to the emotional tone of a scene. However, I still find most of the S3D movies by less experienced directors to be much more visually engrossing than 2D and 2D-3D.

I actually watched Fright Night on BD3D last night and really enjoyed the 3D. I did have to customize my backlight and dynamic luma settings first though because the movie is so dark. That really helped, but the lack of lighting still squashed depth a bit. I noticed lots of shots were set up with either prominent foreground objects or long hallways that recessed back into the screen, and that kept mundane indoor and darker nighttime scenes from ever looking like 2D. The depth in one shot where two characters were sneaking around a corner and hiding from the vampire really made me feel tense like I was in the room with them.

It also had some really fun pop-out. They threw CG items right at the camera a lot, which I imagine would look really stupid in 2D. Plus, the particle effects when vampires died looked awesome floating around in my living room. And then, I suppose some little things like nasty vampire hands and fangs looked a bit more menacing poking out of the screen than they would in 2D, adding to the "Surprise! Look at me!" effect. The 3D certainly wasn't necessary to tell the story, but the visual experience made it much more entertaining and immersive for me than it would be in 2D. I could tell 3D was definitely the way the director intended the movie to be seen.
BleedOrange11 is offline  
post #23 of 24 Old 01-26-2012, 11:53 AM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Z View Post

Those who can't do any of the above... whine about them on the internet.

Speaking from experience?
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #24 of 24 Old 01-26-2012, 01:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
cakefoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 1,830
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 32
Public enemy #1 should be someone who people actually listen to. And they should have a long track record of bashing 3D. Does Phil Hinton fit this description? I have yet to hear a strong argument.

My Videos

A movie with good 3D does not necessarily equal a good 3D movie!

cakefoo is offline  
Reply 3D Content

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off