I’ve resisted blogging about anything related to stereoscopy for fear that the subject has been done to death. But as my two most recent visits to the cinema were to see Thor and Kung Fu Panda 2, both in 3D, I couldn’t help but comment on how it affected my viewing experience. As someone really looking forward to both movies, neither of them quite lived up to my expectations. Thor was certainly one of the better comic book movies of recent times, but I think I prefer my heroes to be a little more grounded in reality. Kung Fu Panda 2 really upped the stakes in terms of the quality of animation and visuals, but felt like it lacked the simplicity of the original.
That said neither movie was really helped by being in 3D. It seems strange that I should be saying my experience of the film was hindered by 3D, when really 3D should always be something that enhances the viewing pleasure, taking the film into new exciting territories. However, to be honest, I really couldn’t tell that either movie had been shot in 3D, except for a couple of sparse moments. Add to this the fact that I have to wear the glasses over my normal specs, which means they keep slipping off, and it becomes very irritating! I think a second viewing of Kung Fu panda 2 on DVD, might yield a more favorable review.
However, I’m not just raising this point so I can moan about 3D movies. It seems from recent research that I am not the only consumer who is starting to switch back to good old fashioned 2D. From recent surveys it appears that only 47% of those who went to see Pirates of the Caribbean 4 (which probably wasn’t many) actually viewed the film in 3D. That’s a significant drop from the average 60% plus who usually view a film in 3D. Combine this with the very high prices, and the lack of spectacle from 3D films, and it appears that the buzz is fizzing out.
I certainly don’t want to bash the stereo revolution, especially as it is providing a great deal of jobs for visual effects artists and others in the industry, but with the news that projects such as The Hobbit will be filmed at 48fps and in 3D, does it feel like the wrong gimmicks are being used to encourage viewers back into the cinema? I’d love to know what you think about your recent 3D movie experiences, and if the 3D overshadows the great visual effects work? Is it an excuse for studios to charge more, and have people already begun to get bored with stereo?
Sign up to our RSS feed and get the latest news from Escape Studios
Comments (3)
I think that stereoscopic is something that can work very well or it can wreck the whole thing. For example, Avatar as cliche as it sounds really came into its own with 3D; it enhanced the feel of the movie, and the whole thing was jaw-droppingly beautiful. I recall crying.
Likewise, How to Train your Dragon had some really good 3D parts as well; it never detracted from the film and in some cases it made things more dramatic and added punch.
Of the two films, the second held up best when viewed without 3D while the first did crash and burn a little (in my opinion).
On the flip side, we had Clash of the Titans - effects were ruined and made muddy in 3D but worked very well in 2D. My boyfriend who can't view things in 3D at all (he sees three images transposed over each other) saw it in 2D and raved about it, I saw it in 3D and was disappointed. When I watched it later on DVD I understood what he'd been talking about.
So... here's a theory. 3D should have its own filming language and conventions; traditional techniques (especially soft lighting!) don't work very well, subtle effects leave us wondering what the difference was and all out objects flying at you encourages eye-rolling. Done well it's beautiful, tacked on at the end it sucks, and not properly thought out or utilised is almost as bad as slapping it on after the fact.
Don't hate it, isn't worth the fuss, and was wrecked a bit by a number of films that got it wrong. Also you alienate the parts of the population that Cannot view it for whatever optical reason (this isn't rare). Not the next step forward, but interesting.
Hi Heather
Thanks very much for your comments.
I would certainly agree with a film like Avatar, that the 3D really enhanced the experience and I remember being completely blown away when watching it on Imax. But in a weird way, it felt like we were just watching the film for the spectacular, not the actual film itself, and therefore when it's not seen in 3D you realize the movie itself isn't as engrossing.
Really, you could argue that the fully CG animations, like how to Train Your Dragon or Kung FU Panda, have got the easier task as they can set the whole project up specifically for 3D with little added cost. When you take a movie like Thor, it's hard to imagine that the shots were set up specifically with 3D in mind. Instead 3D is used to enhance depth and perspective, but after a short time the eye becomes accustom and then it feels very similar to watching a standard movie. Without those shots where the hammer flies out the screen at you, it loses it's wow factor (I can't remember too any moments where I ducked to avoid something that wasn't real). This may cause eye rolling, but at least it justifies the added cost and the idea that you are going to see something out of the ordinary.
I think you make a great point in suggesting that 3D needs it's own set of filming conventions. I also feel it's very important that we start thinking about what projects are suitable for 3D and how they should be shoot in order to make the most out of the medium. Perhaps that's the way it will go, once we get over the current fad of making everything in 3D.
I'm just glad we are still getting the 2D versions, so we can opt out if we want :)
Just as a point of interest I thought I'd list all the 3D movies still to be released this year:
- Cars 2
- Transformers: the Dark of the Moon
- Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2
- Captain America: the First Avenger
- The Smurfs
- Final Destination 5
- Fright Night
- Conan the Barbarian
- Spy Kids 4: All the Time in the World
- Shark Night 3D
- Dolphin Tale 3D
- The Three Musketeers 3D
- Contagion
- Puss in Boots
- A Very Harold & Kumar Christmas
- Immortals
- Happy Feet Two
- Hugo Cabret
- Arthur Christmas
- Piranha 3DD
- Alvin and the Chipmunks: Chip-Wrecked
- The Darkest Hour in 3-D
- The Adventures of Tintin: Secret of the Unicorn
3D Movies...
IMHO I feel Avatar and Tron were worth seeing in 3D. I also think the new Transformers will do 3D justice. This is probably worth a watch. A talk on the pros and cons of 3D: http://www.michaelbay.com/blog/files/746cc18f8d4f2d6381d29cfb7788fb37-678.php
Add a comment