The gimmick of 3D

I saw Bolt over the weekend, in 3D. And as a quick review I will say it was one of the best Disney films in ages (excluding the Pixar made ones). Great funny family flick. Highly recommend it. But was the 3D great? While it was cool, it didn't stand out as something that can't be missed.

3D is the newest craze crafted by the studios to get people back in the theater. Or realD, or Tru-D, or blast-yo-eyes-out-ya-head-D. If you didn't know that the movies are in trouble, you're living under a rock or you're one of the people killing the film industry by staying home.

People like DVDs, they like watching movies at home. Who doesn't? You can curl up comfortably in your own house and watch the latest flick in your comfypants (or no pants at all if it suits you). But because the window between initial theatrical release and the DVD release has gotten so small, many people have begun to get the mentality of "I'll just wait for the DVD."

So now that people aren't flocking to the theaters, the studios must come up with something that nobody can get at home. And as of right now that thing they are focusing on is 3D. I find it terribly ironic considering the same plan of attack was used against TV in the 50s. Granted today's tech allows for a much better viewing experience on today's 3D screens. Gone are the cardboard red and blue sunglasses. Now you get plastic, polarized ultra-cool 3D shades. And the difference is clearly noticeable.

However cool the tech is, today's 3D offerings are awful. They use the third dimension as a cheap gimmick, throwing things at the camera in an attempt to "draw" you in to the flick. I groan every time something jumps out at me. It is a sad and blatant attempt to show off the "cool factor" of the 3rd dimension. What filmmakers don't realize is that we live in 3d everyday. I walk around and I can have things pop out at me at anytime. I'm not looking for things to poke me in the eye, I'm just saying that no amount of 3D "coolness" is better than my own eyes in the real world. The movie doesn't need to show me I'm watching 3D, it just needs to let it be a part of the story. When you show me something that I wouldn't see in the real world, then it becomes truly interesting.

But the notion of taking you to places where you see things you haven't before, that's a theme that is as old as movies themselves, and it is what I feel is the true power of cinema. Simply slapping a third dimension onto crap doesn't make it any better. It is still crap. And sadly, every 3d movie I have seen so far just doesn't do it for me. Beowulf was a kick ass movie, but the third dimension didn't really do anything for me. It has a coolness factor, but it wasn't any different than had I seen it in 2d. The 3d drew way to much attention to itself. Too many times I could see the filmmakers say "Oooo, look out there, we just popped a dragon in your face, look you are impressed at our amazing new technology." And I'm not.

One day, when a filmmaker decides to not use 3d as a cheap little addition to a movie, and give me something that is genuinely compelling and thought-provoking that could never have been achieved without the use of 3D, THAT is when I think 3D will have a place.

As of right now, I don't think that film exists. Many people say it's James Cameron's upcoming Avatar, a sci-fi epic. Nerds are praising the film (mind you before a single frame of it is seen by anyone) as the greatest 3D film ever!!! I'm just not buying it. But I think if anybody has a shot at making 3D work, It would be him. If Cameron can't pull me into that world, impress me with the story and the characters, while simultaneously & seamlessly integrating that third dimension, he will have failed.

What I think studios ought to be doing, instead of trying to cram 3D crap down our throat, is focus on IMAX. This summer, The Dark Knight was released in IMAX. What made it different than other theatrical film released on IMAX, was that certain scenes were shot with IMAX cameras, giving the viewer an incredible amount of clarity and detail that isn't found in other movies. Chris Nolan had the right idea when he made the decision to do that, because 3D can be replicated in a home environment, a 5-story-tall screen sitting in your face can't. That is the true next-gen movie-going experience..

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is taking a page out of the Nolan book as certain action scenes were filmed in the large format. I can't wait. Avatar, not so much.

*Note: The 50s saw two main innovations to the cinema experience (as a response to tv), 3D and widescreen. Which do you think has had a bigger impact over the years? Here's a hint, it's the one with the bigger screen. Time will tell.

Sphere: Related Content