Transformers 3 IS not Being Shot in 3D [Updated]

Published 5 years ago by , Updated October 21st, 2010 at 1:45 pm,

Transformers 3 not shot in 3D Transformers 3 IS <del>not</del> Being Shot in 3D [Updated]

UPDATE: After digging deeper, it appears 3D cameras were used throughout production.

Once we contacted sources closer to production, it appears Michael Bay did not ditch the 3D cameras for Transformers 3. If anything, the 3D technicians likely found alternative ways to effectively use the 3D rigs while filming in Chicago. The information from our source was apparently four to five weeks old and very well may have changed between then and when we spoke.

Further discussions reveal that while 3D cameras were used throughout production, not every camera shot is native 3D. While some of the footage may be converted in post-production, there were always 3D cameras somewhere on set. Rest assured, Michael Bay’s Transformers 3 will still be a 3D movie.

I apologize for running with information that was not fully formed, as the intention was to simply present a newsworthy topic for discussion. Nothing was fabricated, but rather information from the source was outdated. We can admit we were wrong in this post (me especially), but know that we always approach stories with good intentions to deliver timely news as accurately as possible.

Since the start of production a few months ago, Michael Bay’s Transformers 3 has made a number of unfortunate headlines. Now, we have learned from a source close to Bay that the movie is not being shot in 3D as originally believed.

Instead, next summer you will see yet another product guilty of a post-production 3D conversion. Apparently, filming did begin in 3D, but Bay opted out when the production moved to Chicago.

Considering how open the Chicago sets were to the viewing public, it’s surprising there haven’t already been more definitive answers regarding the lack of 3D camera rigs on set. I took some photos and video of the downtown shoots and each time I scoured the set for a 3D rig – but there were none to be found. Today’s news would explain the absence of the mammoth cameras.

It was revealed two months back that Transformers 3 would be shot in 3D but it’s sounding as though nobody followed-up on that report. The film’s rushed production should have been fair warning that a full 3D shoot would be extremely difficult to pull off.

The misdirection should come as no surprise – considering Bay’s penchant for releasing false information. We’ve already been thrown for a loop regarding the appearance of the infamous twin Autobots in Transformers 3. In case you need to be caught up to speed on that rumor, the Twins are definitely in the movie. Couple that news with the Megan Fox fallout and Transformers 3 has been one confusing shoot.

Michael Bay Shia LaBeouf Transformers 3 Transformers 3 IS <del>not</del> Being Shot in 3D [Updated]

It’s unfortunate that Bay changed his mind during production. Shooting using stereoscopic cameras is about the only way to create a truly immersive 3D final product. I might argue that the only truly effective mainstream 3D film to date is Avatar. Of course, accountants would say otherwise, since the last three films to gross $1 billion each were 3D. That said, we’ve yet to see really great post-production 3D – and it’s doubtful that Transformers 3 will be the first.

If you are wondering why Bay would cut 3D cameras (a drastic decision), it’s probably related to his aggressive filming style. Bay has never been shy about throwing a car through a building or running a camera alongside his actors. The intensity of his filming style requires a lot of handheld camerawork and multiple angles. Those multiple angles may have been the deciding factor, as filming using a 3D rig is very restrictive.

Transformers 3 Optimus Prime Transformers 3 IS <del>not</del> Being Shot in 3D [Updated]

While money may be a non-issue considering the massive budget of Transformers 3, it still costs a lot to shoot using five 3D cameras at once. Bay’s shots are constantly moving and require multiple rigging systems. Add everything together and it seems it just wasn’t worth the price and trouble. In addition, Bay is known for his on-the-spot directing and 3D rigs are less maneuverable and could have slowed production.

To be fair, it is possible that Bay shot certain scenes in 3D and the rest in 2D, with a post-production conversion. Even if that is the case, Transformers 3 just isn’t going to be the 3D robot action movie we hoped for.

What do you think about a post-production 3D retro-fit for Transformers 3?

Transformers 3 hits theaters July 1st, 2011.

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. It’s great you all set things right and things are happy again. But next time GO TO OPRAH!! (joking)

  2. Vic

    I went through the archives (being a bartender I stay up late) and I found your review on tfrotf very fair. Though I didn’t find the mom to be as annoying as you, I feel the screenrant crew to be honest and less harsh than most critics. BTW I lo e both films cause i’m a product of the 80s and kit transformers. That’s is all :)

    • Thanks, Sully. :)


  3. I actually admire most of Bay’s work. The Rock is fantastic. I also really like Armageddon and Pearl Harbor. I know, I know – no one admits to liking Pearl Harbor, but there you go.
    Bad Boys was ok – but Bad Boys 2 was one of the most destructive and senseless action movies of all time. I love it!

    The Island was flawed, but I saw Bay stretching as a director.
    As for Transformers -I wanted to love it, so much. I really did, and the early stuff reminded me a lot of 80′s Amblin. But I just thought there was too much CGI. That’s my personal opinion – I mean, it entertained a lot of people, and if I was a kid I’d have been mind blown. However, I grew up in the 80′s and it wasn’t for me. I haven’t seen T2 yet.

    So, I’m no Bay hater either – there’s a section of my DVD collection devoted to him.


    • I’ll admit it!

      Critics can say whatever they want to say about Pearl Harbor, but I love that movie. Always have. The attack sequence is in my opinion, one of best action scenes of all time. Of all time!

      Yeah sure, the love story was something we’ve seen many, many times before, but overall it was a truly spectacular production. And it’s pretty remarkable that Mr. Bay made that movie for $135 million.

      Because when I saw it for the first time I thought the budget was at least $250 million. It was a huge movie.

      So Parker and Stone can sing their crappy song all they want. They’re not changing the fact that a lot of people actually like that movie.

    • You, my friend, have serious issues. Michael Bay sucks, yes. How about you? Can you show us what a great film maker you are? Yah, exactly what I thought. People look at things they enjoy. Maybe that’s the reason you hate Michael Bay too much. Because, in your mind, he’s receiving attention from your family and friends more than you do. Maybe a girl you like watched The Rock instead of going out with you?

      Another thing, if you want a life lesson, go to a church. If you want to have a good time and look at awesome pictures, go watch a movie.

      You may hate M. Bay but you sure do keep track of his works.

  4. Well let’s be honest, with how most of the cast are CGI robots, what are we losing in not filming on location with 3-D? I mean, you can’t shoot Optimus Prime on set with a 3-D camera, he’s going to be post converted. So what’s the big deal if the background is too?

    Plus Bay takes a lot of time on CGI so one can assume he’ll take a lot of time on the 3-D conversion too, to make it good.

  5. Wow. I guess you and Megan Fox now have a lot in common, Mike. Each publicly boned by one of the biggest directors in town. Cheers!

  6. The ending should be satisfiying unlike transformers since it is the last installment in series i dont like to see intense action in 3D.i get headache when i see it i dont know how is he showing cold war and space race in in 21st century