Gozoogle’s Tweet on the subject:

I don't even want to call it average in case people think 'Well, that's all I want', and waste 2 and a half hours, petrol, baby sitter or whatever lol.

Maybe you should text Mark before he commits money and time

Also, the 3D version brings nothing special. The film is incredibly flat, and even with spaceship and superman flying it still felt really flat.

That’s because it’s converted form 2D to 3D. That means that it will have been shot using traditional 2D techniques, and then some cubicle slaves will have added in depth mapping to make a 3D version.

Most 2D converted films I have seen have been pretty poor when it comes to the stereoscopic effect. This will be partly due to the very nature of using one lens instead of two slightly offset lenses to capture the picture. This will also be due to the speed of cutting, changes in focal points, and a whole lot of things your body needs to react to (both physically as in eyes focussing, as well as your brain processing) to make sense of the image.

I am feeling less and less inclined to watch this film the more I read about it.

I would definitely wait for the DVD to come out if I were you.
Also did anyone mention the wobbly image in close-ups?

Several times through the film I had to take my glasses off to check if it was still in 3D.

Didn't look it.

Well, it's only appropriate.

Saw the film a couple of hours ago.
Just read this thread.
I never saw the 3D version.

Some comments in this thread puzzle me. Regarding the image quality, I had no issue with this at all at any point through the film.
It's by no means a great film, and I'll have to live with it considerably longer to know how it sits with me overall.
It is a very different sort of Superman film. All the emotional elements of the character and the character backstory are still there.
Superman is still Superman.
It's a very 21st Century Superman film. I can only relate it to the new Star Trek film.
I didn't like the new Star Trek remake, not because it was a bad film, but because, in my opinion, it's just another generic space faring action film.

To some, this new Supes may be a lot like the new Star Trek is to me; just generic superhero action fodder.

Mark

A lot of reviews I've read have said the same thing about the colour, that it's all... a bit like this



I mean even in daylight the film still looked 'inky'. If I had to guess, it's to try and make the suit stand out, but that really backfires because of the way the film's laid out if nothing else. The fights with the machines were woeful and this didn't help.

On the emotional front, everything was there but it just came across as cold. The characters don't get enough 'proper' screentime together to say anything interesting IMO. Or when they do, it's usually stand-offish. I snorted at Pa Kent's bus comment!

In the cinema 3D is a waste of time for me. I still prefer 2D in the cinema.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

The whole film does have a desaturated palette, which I guess could be a problem for 3D viewing, but as I said, I never saw the 3D version.
I seriously never had any issue with the image on screen looking too dull or dark. *shrug*

I'm attempting to write a review of it now, I'll post back here with my full write-up shortly (hopefully).

Mark

My Man of Steel film review
I can't guarantee that it's spoiler-free.

Mark

When you consider that the Victoirians were doing stereoscopic photography in monochrome, which is about as desaturated as you can get, I’d say this is a red herring. The palette for Prometheus was desaturated, but the 3D worked well. That’s because it was shot in 3D by someone who cared enough about the new medium to learn about how it works and how best to approach it. A film shot in 2D without any planning for 3D will fail to satisfy.

Man of Steel was a post conversion, and in the films I have seen which have been converted, I think Star Trek Into Darkness was the one which seemed to have got away with it (but even then, it had problems in a few places). I think my policy for future 3D cinema visits will be only go to 3D films that have been shot in 3D. There is a craft to these that is in its infancy. You can’t just throw a depth map at any film and hope it works.

It is likely that there are portions of the film that were not 3D. I know Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland went down that route. So maybe the 3D was only done for portions of the film where it would be of most benefit. It could also be that the cinema’s projectors were not correctly focussed (NB both of them) which could really throw 3D out if one is off.

I may give this Superman outing a miss and wait for its inevitable appearance on ITV2.

I just watched it and, in some ways, I wished I hadn't. Will post more tonight.