With the summer blockbuster season gone, Everest is here to remind us that just because it’s about to get a lot more serious and/or kid friendly in the months to come, it doesn’t mean you have to stash away your 3D glasses just yet. As such, it’s time for us to dust off our old friend, To 3D Or Not To 3D - the column where we help you decide if you should spend the extra money on some polarized thrills, or if a standard showing is just as good.

If you’re looking for more of an assessment of Everest as a movie, you’ll want to read our theatrical review, otherwise it’s time to climb to the summit, and see if the view is as beautiful in three dimensions as hoped.

Fit Score
4/5
A run of the mill film about Mount Everest wouldn’t exactly be screaming for the 3D treatment. While the scenery is beautiful, the footage that a normal documentary would obtain isn’t exactly the most exciting in terms of the third dimension. However, with Everest’s narrative approach, and the visual effects budget they put into this film, it looked like a 3D presentation wasn’t that big of a stretch.

Planning & Effort Score
3/5
Stereo D was involved in the conversion efforts on Everest, and while the conversion was announced around the time the film was pushed into a 2015 release date, there’s nothing stating that this was supposed to be a 3D film in the first place. Still, the conversion was announced at least a year in advance, so a good deal of effort must have been expended in its execution.

Before the Window Score
3/5
Save for a couple of key sequences involving avalanches and weather related chaos, there wasn’t a lot popping out of the screen for Everest. This is especially weird because when the 3D really decided to throw things at the camera, it was indeed flinch inducing. There just wasn’t all that much of it in the entire picture, and it’s a real shame because more of this could have been thrilling.

Beyond the Window Score
5/5
The true stand out element of Everest’s 3D conversion is the depth of field it plays around with throughout the course of the entire movie. Most impressively, close ups where two different characters are on screen come to life with depth so crisp that you can tell they’re at two different parts of the frame. Even wide shots of climbers standing around in a group maintain the illusion of actual 3D sight.

Brightness Score
2/5
Between sequences that are colored with darker hues, and the stormy sequences with very little light in them; Everest is a somber looking picture. It’s even more so when you put on the 3D glasses, which naturally dim and wash out part of the color of any film that’s presented in the format. Unfortunately, the coloring isn’t bumped up too impressively on the film, leaving it rather dull looking.

Glasses Off Score
4/5
While the "Glasses Off" test will vary depending on your local theater, and how well they calibrate their projector, it looks like Everest has a good mix of blurred fields of vision. While close ups put more focus on the characters on screen, the backgrounds are blurred enough to pull them apart from the actors in front of us. Also, a lot of the wide to mid-range shots of the film have a good range of blur that help execute the stunning depth of picture Everest possesses.

Audience Health Score
5/5
For a film that looked like it would induce vertigo from frame one, Everest was a smooth visual ride. The camera work and the 3D are both very smooth; with clean cuts and pans serving the extra-dimensional elements perfectly.

Blended From Around The Web

Related

Hot Topics

Features

Gateway Blend ©copyright 2017