Paul W. S. Anderson Quotes

Big, big movies are in 3D, but we haven't reached a point yet where that's just what a movie is.

The learning curve is 'The Hobbit' is being shot in 3D.

I'm not a massive fan of 3D. I've seen some good 3D, and I've seen quite a lot of bad 3D. I think if a film is created for the shock effect of 3D, then it's a certain type of film that I'm not massively bothered about.

The difference between a regular camera and a 3D camera, for an actor, is really no different except that the turn-arounds are longer. It takes a lot longer to set up a shot because the cinematographer is really trying to set up a whole world, so it can't be more intricate and more beautiful to the viewers, in 3D.

Filmmakers have to commit to making 3-D films properly like Jim Cameron did and not do cheap conversions at the tail end of the process.

Not every movie, in my opinion, should be in 3D. There are a lot of stories I wouldn't shoot in 3D. But, you know, there are movies that are perfect in 3D.

My own idea about 3D is that it is there to enhance the viewing experience but I don't think that you have to use it in a tricky way, I think that the minute you sacrifice story and character for something coming out of the screen, I think you've lost it.

Depending on the budget [whether to use 3D on future movies]. I think I prefer 3D to 2D now. Also, because of 3D I have to use a digital camera, which is the way it's going anyway. That still confuses me, a digital camera versus film.

People ask me, 'Is 3D a good medium for horror movies?' I think it's the perfect thing for horror movies because it really puts you into it.

It might sound odd, but I want to thank Michael Bay because he's been saying how important it is to show 3D with the right luminescence. And that's very important for this film, a lot of which was shot at night or with very low illumination.

And I feel that filmmakers ought to be careful with the use of 3D. Because if you look back over the decades, you see that 3D has come and gone for I don't know how many years now.

The only movie that I would ever even consider retrofitting is the first 'Jurassic Park,' which I think would look pretty spectacular in 3D. That's the only one of my films that I would consider doing in 3D.

I have no opinion on 48 frames a second at all. I'd be completely unsuitable to talk about that.

We didn't shoot in 3-D. They've talked about doing a conversion and there's been a lot of talk about us doing 'Sucker Punch' in 3-D, but I'm still waiting to see.

I don't enjoy movies in 3D. I find I can't engage with the story as well.

I don't particularly enjoy watching films in 3D because I think that a well-shot and well-projected film has a very three-dimensional quality to it, so I'm somewhat sceptical of the technology.

It's quite amazing what 3D is doing to movies. Just simple things like a paper plane flying at you or flower petals fluttering about are wonderful.

Oftentimes, when we think of 3D, we think of things coming out of the screen, but actually, you've got this zero, this negative space, what they call the negative space, which is the scene, what's being filmed in the positive space of the audience. As you can have things come out, you can have all of this depth.

I was on record before I did 'The Hobbit,' saying I don't care at all about 3D. And I suppose I should now say I care a lot about 3D. I've always loved 3D, I think everything should be 3D, and I think it's just a shame 'The Godfather' wasn't in 3D.

I believe in 3D for certain kinds of films. I certainly believe in using 3D for all things in animation because animation has such clarity and so much depth of focus. It worked great with 'Avatar' because 70 percent of that film is animated.

But I do believe that there's going to be a time where all movies are going to be made in 3D and it's just going to be a given, and that is going to be an exciting time.

I don't hold much of care for 3D. I think it's a passing fad. It came and went in the '60s. I don't see what it adds to the story.

3D is quite a lot more advanced in animated movies; for live-action movies we're just taking baby steps, we're just in the beginning.

I've always loved 3D. In fact, as a kid, I was exposed to 3D at an early age because my grandfather was a specialist of 3D in cinematheques. And then my cousin put it in 'Science of Sleep' with toilet paper tube cities. But he was a specialist and I always wanted to do something in 3D.

I can't wait for them to convert old movies to 3D. I am 100% confident I want them to convert 'Terminator 2' to 3D more than I want anything in the world.