DWA will convert old titles into stereo-viewing experiences:
The first three Shrek films are to be converted into 3D, Dreamworks studio has announced.
Ahead of the release of the fourth film in the series, Shrek Forever After, the studio said it was converting the first three for a 3D Blu-ray release.
"Our movies exist in digital files to begin with," [Jeffrey Katzenberg] told the annual National Association of Broadcasters convention. "To go back and rebuild to a quality 3D experience is not inexpensive, but we are about to achieve a pretty high quality result." ...
Three Dee is one thing, but Shrek's publicity turns out to be too risque for his home studio.
Dreamworks ... is having serious regrets about giving fashion magazine VMan permission to shoot the hit film’s characters alongside scantily clad hipster models. Surprisingly, they’re more upset about the “scantily clad” part than the “hipster” part.
But wait. What happened to "There's no bad publicity ..."??
In older news, Mr. Foxx enters AnimationLand:
Jamie Foxx is taking his first steps into the world of animation - the Oscar-winner has been given the go ahead for his latest project Welcome To The Jungle ...
Pixar is mid-point in putting up a big, new building.
The animated filmmaker is about half-way done building a $64 million, 150,000-square-foot structure on its 21-acre campus in Emeryville. ... The company ... has some employees in leased space in Emeryville ...
Finally, Mr. Kennedy's third installment of "Kick in the Head" (via Temple of the Seven Golden Camels.)
Ollie Johnston said "Draw clear, not clean". When a drawing isn't working it's always tempting to clean it up in an attempt to "fix it" when, really, you know that the drawing is flawed and you should just start over.
If a drawing is rough but the pose and expression reads clearly, then it's a successful drawing. A clean drawing that doesn't read isn't worth all that much, like a car that looks great on the outside but has no engine or working parts ...
And good luck to youwith the workweek ahead.
Posts
4 comments:
Katzenberg said he was hopeful extra box office revenue from 3D films could more than make up for the money lost from falling sales of DVDs.
Ah yes, remember when there any number of mysterious industry theories as to why nobody bought Shrek 2 on DVD?
Maybe it was releasing them on a Tuesday instead of a Sunday...Maybe the it was the download industry finally showing itself...Maybe (dun-dunn!) the DVD industry was DYING!
Jeff may be going on the 3D-disk bandwagon, but at least finally learning to take some mature responsibility and seems to be off the "alibi" kick for a while.
They're concerned about scantily clad pictures, and NOT concerned about creating such an UGLY and unappealing looking set of films with humor that lasts about a year?
SHOCKING!
I dont' get it... Dreamworks artists had to be involved in posing the characters for those shots... how did they NOT know what it was gong to be?
^Yeah, I'm not buying Dreamworks' angst. What, did they give the photographers stock images and just assume that VMan would use them tastefully, not bothering to demand a final okay on the finshed images? If so, Dreamworks is either naive or stupid. But I think the real truth is that Dreamworks got just the images they wanted and they're trying to cover their butts. Lame!
BTW, the pictures really suck. They're not clever or provocative or anything else remotely interesting. They're at best vaguely off-putting. But then, the characters from Shrek generally are.
Post a Comment