Click to Skip Ad
Closing in...

'Mad Max: Fury Road' Won't Shoot In 3D, But Will Be Post-Converted

by Edward Davis
June 29, 2012 11:16 AM
  • |
'Mad Max: Fury Road' , 3D

Minor news out of Namibia today which may upset some slightly, but all in all, it shouldn't be much of a concern. George Miller's long-gestating "Mad Max: Fury Road," which had been in the works for a few years now, but was delayed for almost 24 months due to innapropriate weather conditions (Australian deserts that were too lush and green instead of barren), won't be shooting in 3D as originally planned.

Presumably to scale down on the budget (which was rumored to be the reason why Warner Bros. delayed in giving the film a green light up until now), instead of shooting with 3D cameras, 'Fury Road,' will instead now employ a blend of Alexa digital cameras with Canon and Olympus DSLRs according to Australian tech site If.Com.Au (via Twitch).

“We are doing 3D on Fury Road – we are shooting with real 3D cameras,” Miller said in July of 2010. “Seven years ago we were going to shoot in 3D but the technology in cinemas wasn’t geared for it then but I always loved 3D or stereo.” Evidently there was doubt that the 3D cameras developed specifically for the film could "withstand the tough desert conditions and extensive stunt work the film requires." After all, a lot of cars are going to be crashed.

And so the film will shoot in digital 2D and then post-convert into 3D. Problem? Not so much. While post-conversion 3D was routinely mocked initially ("Clash Of The Titans" being one of the worst), it's become an almost imperceptible problem of the past. Just look at "The Avengers" that was not shot in 3D and looked fine. So nothing to see here and please disperse?

"Mad Max: Fury Road" is shooting in Namibia now and stars Tom Hardy and Charlize Theron in a sort-of reboot where Hardy will play the Mad Max character, but in a seemingly somewhat reconstitued version -- i.e., he's the same character, but not quite and the films likely won't tie into the previous Mad Max film, but they'll share the same post-apocalyptic landscape and universe. Confused? Welcome to the party. While the original plan was for two 'Mad Max' films, 'Fury Road' and "Mad Max: Furiosa" that would shoot back-to-back, it remains unclear (and honestly doubtful) that's happening now. The more likely scenario: if 'Fury Road' does what Warner Bros. hopes, it will kick off a sequel and new franchise.

Free Indie Movies and Documentaries    


  • Max | June 29, 2012 3:06 PMReply

    Please kill 3D for another 20 years or so. The gimmick doesn't add anything to 90% of the movies that tout it. Take all that time, effort and money currently being wasted with 3D and put it into good story development and execution. Wouldn't that be better than trying to fool audiences into spending more for thinking the current dreck is better just because it uses the 3D gimmick? Just think what Prometheus could have been if more effort were devoted to the story. Very nicely shot, 3D wasn't necessary and didn't add any value, weak on the story.

  • [A] | June 29, 2012 12:07 PMReply

    I like that photoshop work -- reminds me of a toy from the 80s..

  • Chris | June 29, 2012 11:32 AMReply

    "Just look at 'The Avengers' that was not shot in 3D and looked fine." Are you kidding? The 3D in "The Avengers" looked awful.

  • Olli | July 2, 2012 2:34 AM

    Well, I wouldn`t say awful but it didn`t add anything to the film. To me the only movies making really good use of 3D were Camerons Avatar, Scorseses Hugo and both Paul W.S. Andersons Resident Evil Afterlife and The three musketeers. On every other 3D movie that gimmick added only on the price of my admission but nothing on the experience itself.

Email Updates