David Heyman Promises Deathly Hallows will be "Even More Epic" in 3-D
Heyman Interviews
Posted by: Melissa
March 29, 2010, 12:09 PM
MTV has posted a lengthy and informative interview with Potter films producer David Heyman today discussing the film to bring both parts of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows to 3-D. Heyman as usual is very frank about the decisions, the effect of films like Avatar and Up, and the economics of shooting the entire film with 3-D technology versus converting it in post-production. Highlights:
Clearly, the success of 3-D movies has had an impact on the economy and
making of films. We saw an opportunity and grabbed it. Also, "Harry
Potter" itself has so many exciting possibilities for 3-D, both in
things coming at you and also just in making that world seem even more
epic than it already is. "Harry Potter" is already an epic film, but
having that added dimension will make it even more epic, and that seemed
like an opportunity that was too hard to pass up.
One of the things I really loved about watching James Cameron's approach
to 3-D in "Avatar" was that it wasn't about things coming out at you
all the time. It was actually about adding great depth. You wouldn't
want to overuse stuff coming at you. We haven't begun the process of
converting it yet. We are doing some tests and looking at various
things, but we aren't done with any sequence yet.
I think that there's no question that shooting a film in 3-D is a great
thing. I think it was just impractical. It would have taken much, much
too long. Shooting in 3-D is slower. Some people say shooting in 3-D is
the only way to go, and some people are more open to the other. It'll be
interesting as it develops to see whether shooting in 3-D becomes the
norm or not, because clearly it's more expensive, partly because
shooting takes longer.
53 Comments
193 Points
I’m so excited!!!!
1420 Points
that will be grate
198 Points
Yeah. Retrofitted 3D is such a great idea. Why, it’s almost as awesome as, say, a coloured version of Casablanca. Because, cleary, we need not “waste all the money and time” to produce the base material in such a way that its application in this latest return of the 3D fad will actually work out nicely. Much better to slap it on later. Plus, I do love me some 30% of colour loss – luckily that is provided by the “modern” 3D glasses. And wearing them atop my regular glasses is always such a laugh. Boy, do we all laugh whenever they topple into my coke cup. Ever such good times.
Oh, look, I found a five pound note… BACK OFF, WB! Geez, some people and money, eh?
2168 Points
‘epic’ is such his word…
2400 Points
I don’t think i am interested in HP 3D. It sounds bad.
307 Points
Your complains are senseless, if you are not interested in 3D, you can always choose to watch the 2D version.
To say it sounds bad it’s senseless too, when you haven’t even seen a teaser trailer yet. I think it can be awesome, with all the creatures, dragons, spells, the castle… all of this magical stuff in 3D? It can be amazing.
271 Points
I am sorry ethan, but he just wrote it sounds bad. You wrote that it could be awesome. If it is senseless to write it sounds bad because we have yet to see a trailer, then it is equally senseless to write that it could be awesome.
Regardless, i won’t see it in 3D because i don’t want to.
1740 Points
I can’t wait till the movei actually comes out! All I know is that I have to watch the movie or else I’ll regret it all my life!
168 Points
I’m very skeptical about 3D Deathly Hallows, but It might work in 3D if it adds depth to the film, instead of having random things pop out at your face, as David Heyman said.
3271 Points
I liked Avatar but also liked how it wasn’t a 3D movie that had things pop out at you just because it was 3D. So I hope Harry in 3D will be based on depth as well. :)
510 Points
My cousin and I both aren’t crazy about HP being 3D, but as long as they’re still giving us the option to see it in 2D as well then we’re fine with it. We’re planning on seeing DH in 2D first then the second or third time we’ll go see it in 3D. I feel like the 3D effect will be way too distracting for the first time seeing the film. I want to be able to pay attention to the story itself and only the story the first time or two I see it. I know Part 1 will be released in both 2D and 3D, but I’m just really hoping they do the same with Part 2 as well and don’t decide to just do 3D only.
510 Points
My cousin and I both aren’t crazy about HP being 3D, but as long as they’re still giving us the option to see it in 2D as well then we’re fine with it. We’re planning on seeing DH in 2D first then the second or third time we’ll go see it in 3D. I feel like the 3D effect will be way too distracting for the first time seeing the film. I want to be able to pay attention to the story itself and only the story the first time or two I see it. I know Part 1 will be released in both 2D and 3D, but I’m just really hoping they do the same with Part 2 as well and don’t decide to just do 3D only.
433 Points
My problem with 3-D is I can’t see how it’s going to work in Part 1. Let’s be honest, most of that film will take place in the forest. Also, Yates said that he planned on using more hand-held cameras in this one. Can you imagine hand-held work in 3-D? People are going to puke all over the place. I plan on seeing it in 2-D, because I just can’t see how making it 3-D is really going to improve the film, unless the action scenes are so boring you need 3-D to spice it up (and if that’s a case, the film is in big trouble).
cant wait