Dario Argento's Dracula Anticipation Thread - Page 12

Nosferatu@Cult Labs · #**111** 18th January 2012, 01:37 PM

Good points. It probably won't matter if the name Dario Argento doesn't mean anything to your average cinema goer who, unless the director is Martin Scorsese, Michael Bay or Clint Eastwood, probably don't pay much attention of the 'man behind the camera'.

Demdike@Cult Labs · #**112** 18th January 2012, 02:23 PM

If Dracula 3D makes say, $100million worldwide it would easily be Argento's most profitable film and due to its small budget, $10million, would be considered a huge hit.

So what if the internet muppets (us) don't like it. If a studio takes a chance on it then bingo. Actually to have been filmed in 3D then surely it must have worldwide distribution rights already.

Prince_Vajda · #**113** 18th January 2012, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Demdike

If Dracula 3D makes say, $100million worldwide it would easily be Argento's most profitable film and due to its small budget, $10million, would be considered a huge hit.

And this would probably mean that we would have to watch even more 3D crap in the near future...

Greetings!

Nosferatu@Cult Labs · #**114** 18th January 2012, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prince_Vajda

And this would probably mean that we would have to watch even more 3D crap in the near future...

The very thought sends a shiver shiver up my spine! I thought Hugo would be the film which showed everyone how good 3D could be but, like Avatar, it didn't and gave me eyestrain.

Sargento · #**115** 18th January 2012, 07:20 PM

Does anyone know if the film was shot in native 3D or converted in post production? I am guessing the latter to keep production costs down. If it is the latter, the 3D will not be good at all.

Oh and someone pleeeeez explain the mantis!

sjconstable · #**116** 18th January 2012, 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nosferatu@Cult Labs

The very thought sends a shiver shiver up my spine! I thought Hugo would be the film which showed everyone how good 3D could be but, like Avatar, it didn't and gave me eyestrain.

Shame, I chose to see Hugo in 2D and it was beautiful. 3D sucks, it's like watching a dim film through a letterbox.

The Reaper Man@Cult Labs · #**117** 18th January 2012, 07:24 PM

Not holding much hope after Giallo,but as always I'll give the great man the benefit of the doubt.
I'll reserve judgement until I've seen it.

Nosferatu@Cult Labs · #**118** 18th January 2012, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reaper@Cult Labs

Not holding much hope after Giallo,but as always I'll give the great man the benefit of the doubt.
I'll reserve judgement until I've seen it.

I'm basically of the same mindset and just hope Cineworld will show it in both 3D and 2D, if at all.

Nordicdusk · #**119** 18th January 2012, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sargento

Does anyone know if the film was shot in native 3D or converted in post production? I am guessing the latter to keep production costs down. If it is the latter, the 3D will not be good at all.

Oh and someone pleeeeez explain the mantis!

AT 1.50 into the trailer BAM MANTIS i dont think anyone can explain it only Dario Argento himself.

Sargento · #**120** 18th January 2012, 07:34 PM

The mantis will put many people off ... including distributors unfortunately.

Just been looking at the official site, there is a clip called Morte Di Jarmilla. I found it hilarious how Dario was kicking the actress around the floor to get the best reaction out of her. And to think, people were criticising the acting! Talk about motivating your actors!!

Oh I shouldn't laugh.