April 14th, 2010
12:40 PM ET

Martin Scorsese goes 3-D

Martin Scorsese appears to be the latest director embracing 3-D, according to Variety.

The filmmaker plans to experiment with the technology for the first time with his forthcoming project “The Invention of Hugo Cabret,” which is expected to start filming in the U.K. in June with a potential December 2011 release.

The movie, an adaptation of the young-adult novel by Brian Selznick, tells the story of 12-year-old Hugo, an orphan, clock keeper and thief who lives in the walls of a Paris train station in the 1930s. Ben Kingsley, Sacha Baron Cohen and “Kick-Ass” star Chloe Moretz are signed on to the film.

Filed under: movies

soundoff (75 Responses)
  1. Microsoft Windows

    ill for surebe bookmarking this page.

    December 14, 2011 at 7:18 pm | Report abuse |
  2. Conway

    I'm reading this article publish and yes it seems wonderful! Nice way with words plus you've got mentioned some great points about this issue.

    September 18, 2011 at 11:37 pm | Report abuse |
  3. Send gift to India

    You'll find undoubtedly a lot of details like that to take into consideration. That is a great point to bring up. I offer the thoughts above as general inspiration but clearly there are questions like the 1 you bring up where the most crucial thing will probably be working in honest excellent faith. I don?t know if greatest practices have emerged around points like that, but I'm confident that your job is clearly identified as a fair game. Both boys and girls feel the impact of just a moment’s pleasure, for the rest of their lives.

    September 9, 2011 at 10:02 am | Report abuse |
  4. ugg outlet wrentham

    It is advisable to do a tournament for among the best information sites over the internet. I am going to advise this web site!

    August 8, 2011 at 3:47 pm | Report abuse |
  5. Event Management Courses

    of course 3d movies are cool too watch that is why we are developing 3d tvs today `,.

    December 4, 2010 at 3:53 am | Report abuse |
  6. Finlay Richardson

    3d movies are so cool, i just wish that we could watch 3d movies on TV.,.

    August 22, 2010 at 3:54 pm | Report abuse |
  7. bobby

    The REAL challenge is 4D. 3D is so......yesterday. I want holographic actors IN the livingroom with me!

    April 18, 2010 at 7:18 am | Report abuse |
  8. cb

    If Martin Scorsese is involved, you should definitely care. This man makes great films.

    April 17, 2010 at 8:53 pm | Report abuse |
  9. Cal Ward Jr.

    Rock On, Marty! Think Young and Now! Live Young and Now! Film Young and Now! As always, I will be Front Row Center Day One!

    April 17, 2010 at 5:06 pm | Report abuse |
  10. Kurt Hultquist



    April 17, 2010 at 9:29 am | Report abuse |
  11. Crazy Uncle

    Wow, who knew there were so many Luddite movie fans? I bet some of you are still mad that Dylan went electric.

    April 16, 2010 at 6:31 pm | Report abuse |
  12. hecep

    So can anyone make even a semi-reasonable case for NOT making a film that combines a great plot, action, writing, direction, and acting with 3D presentation? Anyone? I'm curious.

    April 16, 2010 at 3:13 pm | Report abuse |
  13. Jay

    You thought the glasses he's wearing now were thick...

    April 16, 2010 at 2:23 pm | Report abuse |
  14. Billcy


    April 15, 2010 at 11:14 am | Report abuse |
  15. Mr. NineHundred

    3D makes me feel sick. 2D for ever!!!

    April 15, 2010 at 11:01 am | Report abuse |
  16. Adam Sanborne

    I don't care much for 3-D and it doesn't bother me that Scorcese is delving in it. The real story here is that Scorsese is going to be directing Sasha Baron Cohen! I can't wait to find out what sort of character he'll play and how the two will work together!

    April 15, 2010 at 10:47 am | Report abuse |
  17. pmurph

    Man , id pay big money to watch Pesci from "goodfellas" or casino in 3D.. "God forbid you forget to steal"

    April 15, 2010 at 10:47 am | Report abuse |
  18. Critical

    ZotQuix – 3D has nothing to do with "Depth of Field".

    For everyone else... 3D IS in fact a gimmick, and it will go away at some point, but right now the studios know that audiences well pay extra buck to see a movie in 3D. Why shouldn't they oblige? Offering 3D, knowing that an audience will pay for it, is just good business sense. All of you people just need to lay off of the "industry" and you need to realize that the movie industry is a BUSINESS.

    If all of you are really upset about the quality of stories being told at the movies, it's your fault for going to support those poor movies. The industry is providing with the general public wants to see. If you, as viewers, support the better movies rather than the popcorn crap that is made, then perhaps a more discerning audience would emerge.

    April 15, 2010 at 10:21 am | Report abuse |
  19. Steve-O

    Never mind the whole 3D thing. Scorsese's subject material sounds horrible to start with.

    April 15, 2010 at 10:13 am | Report abuse |
  20. Jack Meoff

    Hey Lorah all the 3-D movies can be seen in theaters as a 2-D movie for less money. FYI.

    April 15, 2010 at 9:49 am | Report abuse |
  21. Jack Meoff

    He needs to work with Robert Deniro again and get rid of Leo Decrapio. Taxi Driver, Mean Streets, Goodfellas, Raging Bull, The King of Comedy, Casino, etc. were great movies. Shutter Island, Gangs of New York, Aviator? Not so much. FAIL.

    April 15, 2010 at 9:47 am | Report abuse |
  22. Nick

    This is pathetic attempt on his part. He should have stopped after he stole The Departed partically line for line, shot for shot, from the amazing chinese thriller "Infernal Affairs". He should stop making movies.

    April 15, 2010 at 9:31 am | Report abuse |
  23. stormschmooper

    Once upon a time I would have had faith that some good could come of this, but after seeing Shutter Island...

    April 15, 2010 at 9:19 am | Report abuse |
  24. orbus

    martin scorsese + sacha baron cohen = awesome!
    sure 3-D is gimmicky, but I agree with eric, if it's done right, it'll just be part of the story. hopefully it wont be some cheesy beachball coming off the screen.

    April 15, 2010 at 8:52 am | Report abuse |
  25. Lorah

    3-D would be an awesome way to watch a movie if it didn't make me sick. Some people can just not watch it, so for those of us who would like to see a movie like this, cannot and will have to wait until it comes out on dvd.... it really sucks sometimes!

    April 15, 2010 at 8:09 am | Report abuse |
  26. Andrew Goldberg

    Most importantly, this is an underserved audience. If this is what it takes; I say let the D's have it!

    April 15, 2010 at 6:54 am | Report abuse |
  27. Ron Simon

    I love 3d in the movies if done well. Most movies need a better story line more than 3d just for effect. I've seen a lot of movies that had loads of special effects and they still sucked.

    April 15, 2010 at 6:39 am | Report abuse |
  28. John

    Finally, a great director making a 3D movie. The end of crap 3D! (OK, admittedly, Alice in Wonderland was made by a great director...but it isn't a great movie.)

    April 15, 2010 at 5:02 am | Report abuse |
  29. Jean

    Totally cool. What's wrong with 3D anyway, why is it synonymous with a bad movie..? I bet it was the same when movies switched to color, or introduced sound. As in 'Color is such a gimmick, it doesn't make the movie any better', or 'Do we really need to hear the train, can't we just imagine it'..?

    April 15, 2010 at 3:39 am | Report abuse |
  30. Michael

    Anything this man does is incredible especially with Leonardo, just look at Shudder Island....a masterpiece.

    April 15, 2010 at 1:15 am | Report abuse |
  31. Mark C

    He alternates between making the movies he wants to make, and making the movies the studios want him to make. This is obviously one of the latter.

    April 15, 2010 at 12:23 am | Report abuse |
  32. Jack

    You people are smoking rocks. This movie is gonna be dope as he11.

    April 14, 2010 at 11:57 pm | Report abuse |
  33. Mackenzie

    Creating a movie in 3D does not necessarily mean acting skill and plot line won't be used. Even though it can take away it can also immerse the audience and make the setting more intricate and life like. Scorsese is taking advantage of the new technology which has been made available to him and the industry and will (hopefully) put it to good use with this movie. People should wait before they judge him and his work.

    April 14, 2010 at 10:31 pm | Report abuse |
  34. jglugla

    This is just plain sad.

    April 14, 2010 at 9:57 pm | Report abuse |
  35. hal9thou

    The glasses will kill 3D like they always do. Let Mr. Scorsese have some fun for a bit. It won't last.

    April 14, 2010 at 7:47 pm | Report abuse |
  36. Diego

    whose Martin Scorcesee? I thought he died years ago!!

    April 14, 2010 at 6:53 pm | Report abuse |
  37. Disappointed

    Yes . . . WHAT KELLY SAID

    3D has been around for a many decades, and used by studios to draw people in.

    3D has been used to draw on people's most visceral sensibilities, rather than intellect and emotional sensibilities.

    This gimmicky style of filmmaking often introduces action for the simple sake of shocking the audience and contributing nothing to the story or character.

    Could 3D be used as a another tool in the filmmaker's tool kit, possibly. Has it happened, no. For the most part, it has taken way from the basics of good storytelling.

    April 14, 2010 at 6:41 pm | Report abuse |
  38. MarkM

    Wish he could have made "goodfellas" in 3-D, that would have been awesome!!!

    April 14, 2010 at 6:06 pm | Report abuse |
  39. Murfmeister

    doesn't seem like a good idea..we are used to his way of making movies...we all know his m.o.

    April 14, 2010 at 6:01 pm | Report abuse |
  40. cdw

    3D is just another step on the way to image holography. Someday in the future the film will happen seamlessly before us in the theater or our home.

    AVATAR, regardless of what you may have thought about the script or the message, viewed in 3D often made me forget I was watching a film. The IMAX 3D experience literally transported me to another world.

    April 14, 2010 at 5:41 pm | Report abuse |
  41. Marco

    Looking forward to this in 3D! Just so everyone knows, there is technology out there to make any film 3D. So it is possible to convert classics to 3D.

    April 14, 2010 at 5:29 pm | Report abuse |
  42. Tyler

    Scorsese will never "jump the shark." Mark my words.

    April 14, 2010 at 5:21 pm | Report abuse |
  43. Flmlvr

    Oh come on, Marty, why do you keep putting off "Silence"? Some of us ARE waiting for that one.......

    April 14, 2010 at 5:18 pm | Report abuse |
  44. Ross Garside

    3D is not really 3D – it is Stereo-vision. In true 3D, the viewer would be immersed within the image. If an immersed image occurs over time, then it is actually 4D. Stereo audio was not regarded as "3D sound" until SurroundSound came out, and neither should these films.

    April 14, 2010 at 5:11 pm | Report abuse |
  45. Kelly

    "It's sad that you have such a low opinion of Scorsese that you think him incapable of filming in 3D without using plot, character, and performance to tell the story."

    It's not Scorsese that's being commented on, I believe, but the industry itself. The film industry has been using 3D as a gimmick to draw people in, much like special effects did in the 90s (ala Independence Day, Armageddon, etc.) Does this mean that a film is automatically bad or destined to mediocrity because they use 3D? Absolutely not. But the industry has yet to create anything that can use 3D to such an effect that a film just isn't the same without it. (And before anyone says Avatar, I didn't feel the 3D was necessary; a Blu–ray player and high-end TV and sound system could suffice.) And though Scorsese is a talented director, this is not his shtick. This is along the lines of Michael Bay or McGee.

    April 14, 2010 at 5:09 pm | Report abuse |
  46. Nick

    There's nothing that can ruin a movie quicker than 3D, especially a movie made by such a quality director as martin. what a waste of what could have been a great film.

    April 14, 2010 at 4:54 pm | Report abuse |
  47. NoLimitFolda

    I really don't understand all the hate. I have yet to see a movie in 3D, yet I'm sure there will be innovative was to apply the technology, perhaps in an unexpected, non-conventional manner.

    April 14, 2010 at 4:51 pm | Report abuse |
  48. steeve o

    I hope Scorsese will cast himself in a cameo role in the movie so we can see his eyebrows in 3-D. That'd be riveting!!

    JK Marty, I'm a huge fan.

    April 14, 2010 at 4:45 pm | Report abuse |
  49. AshannaK

    3D? Why not? He's done just about everything else. And he knows what he's doing. I believe he'll use 3D as a means to enhance the story, not overtake it. 3D will be a tool and not the end-all or be-all of the movie. Give the man a chance....then grumble.

    April 14, 2010 at 4:36 pm | Report abuse |
  50. Eric

    Disappointed: I can guarantee that there were people in the past who bemoaned the "audio chicanery" of adding sound to movies, and the "visual chicanery" of adding color.

    Filming with audio instead of silent film does not prevent good storytelling. In fact, skillfully used, audio can contribute to the storytelling. Poorly used, of course, audio can cause permanent hearing loss and/or make the viewer feel uncomfortable.

    Filming in color instead of black-and-white does not prevent good storytelling. In fact, skillfully used, color can contribute to the storytelling. Poorly used, of course, color can simply offend the senses.

    The same is true of 3D. It can add, or detract. It can create a more immersive environment for the same good storytelling that was once done around a campfire, or it can be used for silly visual "look folks, it just jumped out at you!" tricks. It's sad that you have such a low opinion of Scorsese that you think him incapable of filming in 3D without using plot, character, and performance to tell the story. I'd rather wait to see what he does before assuming him to be incompetent.

    April 14, 2010 at 4:34 pm | Report abuse |
  51. travis

    What if a real rain came and the climax of Taxi Driver was redone in 3-D. You talkin' to me?

    April 14, 2010 at 4:34 pm | Report abuse |
  52. Eric

    I find some of the reactions to 3D amusing. I'd bet talkies were originally written off by some as a gimmick that distracted from storytelling. And I'll bet some early talkies used it as a gimmick, and distracted people from the storytelling. The same with color. Good storytelling is good storytelling. Technology can either be used to enhance the experience, or can be used as a gimmick. If Scorsese focuses as much on making good movies with 3D as he did on making good movies with 2D, this will be a positive thing.

    Most stories don't need 3D. But then most stories don't need color, or audio. And for that matter, they don't even need moving pictures at all. Like all of those (and CGI), 3D is another tool for visual story telling, which can be used skillfully or poorly. I look forward to when 3D is taken for granted as part of the movie-making experience just like color and sound. Then we'll truly get the benefits of the technology.

    April 14, 2010 at 4:24 pm | Report abuse |
  53. Disappointed

    A sad day for film lovers. I can't believe a filmmaker of Mr. Scorcese's caliber will rely on the visual chicanery of 3D for storytelling!? What happened to storytelling through plot, character, performance?

    April 14, 2010 at 4:23 pm | Report abuse |
  54. Shawn

    The Invention of Hugo Cabret is not a young adult novel...it's actually middle grade; although interestingly enough, it won the Caldecott, which is an award given to picture books.

    April 14, 2010 at 3:55 pm | Report abuse |
  55. Darrell

    Why Martha! Your Sunday chapel dress!

    April 14, 2010 at 3:52 pm | Report abuse |
  56. Ellen

    Joe, you stopped talking before you got a chance to say, "And you damned kids better get off my lawn!"

    April 14, 2010 at 3:43 pm | Report abuse |
  57. Darrell

    It rubs the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again.

    April 14, 2010 at 3:34 pm | Report abuse |
  58. patricia

    LOL, Henjhree Hill is spot on. Although I will add that Martin is so talented that his movies don't need the gimmick of 3D. I am a huge fan of his because he has style and substance which is almost becoming a "lost art" in the world of film making.

    April 14, 2010 at 3:17 pm | Report abuse |
  59. Alexander Bernal

    Raging Bull would have been neat in 3D – – landing those blows on our faces in the audience. I don't think Scoreses needs 3D but he is a boy in a candy shop. He will play with the latest gadgets.

    April 14, 2010 at 3:16 pm | Report abuse |
  60. Chucklehead

    I hope it's just for his films. Don't know if I could handle his eyebrows jumping out at me!

    April 14, 2010 at 3:07 pm | Report abuse |
  61. Henjhree Hill

    There was an early period of compuer animation where the movies didn't even have to be good. The general public would gawk at the latest technological wonder from something called CGI. Noone seemed to notice that the movies themselves were consistenly lame. I think we're in that same early phase for 3D movies. It is a little bit like the movie Spinal Tap when the character Nigel Tufnel explains that his special amps "Go to 11" instead of the standard "10". All I'm saying is that If Marty is going to bust loose and dive headlong in to the 3D, we expect more from him. He should at least make sure that his 3D movies "Go to 12".

    April 14, 2010 at 2:43 pm | Report abuse |
  62. Joe

    I just want theaters to have comfortable seats. In terms of leg room , seat position, and width. I don't really want to share my armrest with a stranger. I'd also like to buy a snack of a reasonable size for a reasonable price. Yes you can buy a tiny popcorn for the price of a DVD, but for $2 more you can get one big enough to feed an elephant.

    And could we improve the quality of the images we are shown, rather than bothering with 3D? Hi-def digital images are something I'd prefer over having to wear glasses to a theater.

    April 14, 2010 at 2:30 pm | Report abuse |
  63. joe

    soon all films will be in 3D, this isn't really news worthy.

    April 14, 2010 at 2:28 pm | Report abuse |
  64. Dave

    Seriously... Put the marijuana away... Okay what’s next? Imagine one hand clapping! How about doing something of substance and realateable to what is happening in our world!

    April 14, 2010 at 2:18 pm | Report abuse |
  65. ZotQuix

    I dunno, this sounds kind of cool. Using 3D to tell a different sort of story. More depth of field....

    April 14, 2010 at 2:13 pm | Report abuse |
  66. Yul B. Sorrie

    What next .... could we now strat putting the old classics in 3D.

    Gone With The Wind in 3D .. "Frankly Scarlett, I don't give a damne3D"

    April 14, 2010 at 2:07 pm | Report abuse |
  67. larry

    Can't wait to see his movies. Love his work. Keep them comming Martin.

    April 14, 2010 at 2:07 pm | Report abuse |
  68. john doe

    Who cares?

    April 14, 2010 at 2:01 pm | Report abuse |
  69. Christian

    Oh. My. God. Is this Scorsese's shark-jumping moment? Does he really need 3-D? His images already leap off the screen and burn themselves in our memories.

    April 14, 2010 at 1:58 pm | Report abuse |

Post a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.

About this blog

Our daily cheat-sheet for breaking celebrity news, Hollywood buzz and your pop-culture obsessions.