Alice in Wonderland Not Being Shot in 3D?

Back in September, we posted the first set photos of Mia Wasikowska as Alice in Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland. I noticed that the camera filming Wasikowska didn’t appear to be a 3D rig. At the time I wrote it off as possibly being one of the non-3D scenes from the start of the film, before Alice enters Wonderland.

MarketSaw is now reporting that Tim Burton is not shooting any scenes from the film using 3D cameras. I’m not sure how much of the production will be shot using performance capture, but if they are filming on practical sets, I don’t understand why Burton would shoot in 2D. Some would argue that converting to 3D in post production gives you a lot more control over the depth and look of the 3D. But it is generally an expensive and exhausting process to convert live-action 2D to 3D, which leads me to believe that much of Alice is probably being shot on a green screen stages.

  • I actually prefer 2D to 3D. 2D has a more true art form to it. 3D is just for fun and looks. Plus it still hasn't been perfected.
  • A movie can still be great without 3D.
  • SiN13
    Maybe it isn't 3D until she is in wonderland.
  • Tim Burton sucks. and the movie is gonna be lame, too.
  • Johnnie
    Live-action 2D? Isn't real life already 3D, how could there be a real life 2D?
    I don't think a #D Alice in Wonderland is really necessary. None of Tim Burton's movies have been 3D before and he has had great success with them all. With a theme as capturing as Alice in Wonderland, I'm sure Tim Burton will deliver once again. Whether it be 3D or "live-action 2D".
  • Mag
    The casting for this movie is a JOKE
  • edward
    maybe because shooting in 3D is all gimmicky bullshit.
  • yeah probably. how totally predictable
  • Roberto
    I have to agree with broomstick. And mag. And edward. Tim Butron is a washed up hack. Hasn't made a decent movie since Ed Wood. He's a brand name for goth-lite movies *cough cough...remakes, cough*...
  • This is the first Tim Burton film I haven't been excited about. He needs to stop having Johnny Depp in his movies....it's getting redundant.
  • THAT won't happen.
  • What's the deal with that pic? looks like Burton is instructing the cameraman to get a close-up of her roots?
  • Funny, but I think it's
  • syborcatmovieman
    that is fine that it is not being shot in 3D. what happened to films that didn't need the 3D effect. i feel like the 3D effect is just a crutch. i have seen a few different versions of Alice in Wonderland, so i think seeing Depp in this will be sweet. and i don' t need to see him in 3D to think it is cool.
  • Jamie
    Another classic story for Tim Burton to poop on!
  • 3D came and went years ago. studios are grasping for a way to get more people into theaters. 3D is a gimmick they already have the tech for, all they have to do is provide the glasses and watch the audiences reel every time something flies towards the screen.

    better picture quality on a traditional movie screen with better sound is the only advancement films need to make, and most of that is being done digitally. film-makers arent pushing for 3D (save James Cameron); the studio presidents are.

    all that being said, we'll see how Avatar turns out. I for one think it will be a pretentious pile of post-Titanic Cameron crap.
  • I hate 3D anyway. Its just gimmicky. I'll never go see a film purely because its 3D.
  • I'm frankly surprised that the pornographic industry hasn't turned onto the technology. Meh, I'm sure eventually they'll rise up to the occasion and squeeze one out. It's only a matter of time.
  • I want to belive that this movie will be good... But something seays me: "No Aleko this movie its a shit" I don´t know who listent that voice or my hope in Tim Burton...
  • giantyoda
    Sweet! Traditional 2D would be a great way to go.
  • better picture quality on a traditional movie screen with better sound is the only advancement films need to make, and most of that is being done digitally. film-makers arent pushing for 3D (save James Cameron); the studio presidents are.
  • but what we today consider "3D" is largely just distracting and gimmicky a majority of the time.
  • Maybe when everything is holographic..................but what we today consider "3D" is largely just distracting and gimmicky a majority of the time. There are exceptions, but few.
  • Maybe it's only 3D in Wonderland, kind of like a Wizard of Oz thing...
  • Elissa
    I'd be pleased as punch if Burton decided to film this in traditional 2D. I'm just not sold on "motion capture." I'm excited about Avatar, but it seems that the technology isn't quite up to snuff yet for Alice.
  • Brendon Connelly
    In the future, making a film in 2D will be as conceited as making it silent, or on Super 8 b&w stock.
  • Funny !!!!!!!!!!!
    Style your statement and create a musical blog on at www.uploaded.tv with your short portfolio
blog comments powered by Disqus