3D was originally used as a gimmick to draw audiences away from their new television sets, not as a means of increasing the artistic value of a film. The extent of audience interaction was the occasional cheap shock of a hand popping out of the screen.
Well, 3D's actually really great when you've got an entirely different world a la Avatar, complete with freaky blue feline/humanoid thingys, sparkly plants, massive floaty mountains and DRAGONS. But I've got a feeling that when "3D" becomes the buzzword for "lots of bums on seats", then I'm not going to be so happy. Once the studios cotton on to the fact that people will see basically anything in 3D (and I think they are already have) we'll be seeing a lot more crappy movies literally thrown in our faces and probably some pretty good movies with 3D hastily added in simply because its the obligatory visual "bonus".
So far we've been seeing some pretty good 3D movies- Avatar, Up, Coraline, Monsters vs Aliens, How to Train your Dragon (a lot of animation...) and the visual treat Alice in Wonderland. However, crap-a-thons like Clash of the Titans will become increasingly popular, I predict, and even some lower-budget productions are likely to get the 3D treatment for no good reason.
I like 3D cause it can make you feel more involved in the movie, or it can just make it more exciting or beautiful to watch. I do not, however, appreciate random appendages or projectiles flying out of the screen as if to remind the brainless audience they are watching a 3D movie (see the beginning of Monsters vs Aliens for a nice visual gag making my point).
Perhaps I'm just bitter and paranoid and have too little faith in the film industry, but I'll be saying "I told you so" when we see Sex and the City 4- IN 3D!!
So where do you think 3D movies are headed? Have a rant in the comments section.
Hey KK,
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with your above post - 3D is becoming the new Harry Potter of the movies (heck, even Harry Potter is going into 3D!). Frankly, I have seen some 3D movies that exist simply because the producers think it would get more profit and that viewers like wearing huge glasses for 2 hours, frying their eyes out.
But I've also thought about it this way; as more 3D movies emerge (yes, even bad quality ones) and more experimenting with effects occurs, we will be having excellent 3D experiences in probably a couple years time.
Imagine-a snake leaping OFF the screen and circling around the entire theatre! And how about 4D movies? I saw a great one in Orlando's Disneyland, but of course, Disney will always be one of the best!
Hm...I think I'm out of rant material now. Anyway, excellent posts KK and keep it coming!
Oh, and sorry for my poor comment...
Franny M
I agree, all this 3D stuff is annoying espescially for my mother who feels violently ill when she watches something in 3D. But I do say that even though Avatar was basically Pocahontas but with blue people, the effects and how it took me to another world was what caused it to be revolutionary in my view. Apparently Breaking Dawn will be in 3D, I'm not looking forward to that......
ReplyDeleteThank you God!!!!!!!!!!!!! Finally someone intelligent and sensible who pointed out the stupid associations with 3D films. As you correctly pointed out, 3D films are now starting to be used as a tagline for : OOH THIS film must be good because it's 3D (Gasp). I thought using 3D in 'Alice in Wonderland' is starting to push it a bit. I mean it's a great movie that doesn't need to be a 3D film to be well rated and liked. I had a feeling that the directors did it as a marketing attempt after the Avatars fiasco.
ReplyDeleteKatherine S.