3D, is it worth it? 750 Words Sunday, 24 July 2011.

Look, i'm in 3D. (Image processed after the fact)

I guess we should start with just what it is before we decide weather or not we actually what or need it in the film industry, personally i agree with Roger Eberts (posted on twitter 24th March 2010,

3-D is a distracting, annoying, anti-realistic, juvenile abomination to use as an excuse for a higher price

and on the same day Michael Bay said this about using it for Transformers 3

Studios might be willing to sacrifice the look and use the gimmick to make $3 more a ticket, but I’m not. Avatar took four years. You can’t just shit out a 3D movie. I’m saying, the jury is still out”

– He has since changed his mind –

This coming from Michael Bay, a man i don’t respect at all as a story teller, he makes jumped up fireworks displays, not compelling characters or engaging stories, but he has a very good point, at the time he said that the studios were testing a conversion process for Transformers 1 and 2, apparently it didn’t look good, maybe it just didn’t fit well with his style of film making, or maybe a conversion after the film is finished is just a bad idea, 3-D films need to be shot in 3-D with specific camera set-ups.

Okay down to business, what is 3-D film or S3D-Film, well its an illusion to enhance depth perception, or stereoscopic photography using two cameras to record images from two perspectives, you would also need a special projector to view the images on a screen, syncing the two reels of film together to get a single image on screen, also, you may or may not need to wear glasses in order to view it, this in my opinion would in fact ruin the illusion, in the past, viewing I-MAX 3-D documentaries, these glasses gave me a headache, and the added motion on screen made me feel a little motion sick, the illusion might have worked but i don’t want to feel like crap halfway through a film, oh and in case you wonder, i don’t leave theaters until the film is done.

Lets look at the techniques involved in producing a 3-D film.

The first was Anaglyph, this was the earliest method used to create the 3-D effect it was made popular because of it ease of use in production and exhibition, the images are superimposed though two filters, one red and the other cyan, the problem is the images were a little dim and had poor colour rendering, even with the best colour Anaglyphs the red components was either muted or desaturated, they could get around this by putting a slightly transparent cyan filter in the glasses.

The Polarization system, projected the images through two polarization filters with the viewer wearing polarization glasses, which wear cheap to manufacture, each lens passes only the light which is similarly polarized and blocks the light polarized in the other direction, these lens were tinted rather then being red and cyan as in the Anaglyph method, each eye then sees a slightly different image.

The Eclipse method is a mechanical shutter system which blocks the light from each eye in synchronization with the images on screen using LCD shutter glasses, the projector alternates between the left and right (eye) images, this method was the basis for the teleview system used for a short time in 1922.

The Interference filter uses differing wavelengths of Red, Green and Blue for each eye, eyeglasses were used to filter out the different wavelengths allowing the viewer to see a 3-D image.

The Pulfrich method is based on the human eye processing images more slowly when there is less light, the intensity of this effect is dependent on how fast the camera is moving, in relation to the distance of the objects in view, this effect only really works if the camera is constantly moving, as soon as if stops the effect is lost, when the image is moving and depending on which direction its moving in, one eye will be a fraction of a second behind the other, but if the image is static, both eye see the same thing at the same time and the 3-D effect is lost, using this method in cinema is a little useless if you ask me, but what do i know.

Spectral separation uses a holographic film in the glasses that creates an effect like a dispersive prism (i have no idea what that is), This causes redder images to be perceived as near and bluer images father away.

Lenticular or Barrier screens projects both images onto a corrugated screen which reflects the light in acute angles, like a holographic card, you know the card you tilt from side to side, both in order to see the 3-D image the view has to sit in a very narrow angle perpendicular to the screen, which means you limit the viewing audience, but with this method you don’t need to wear special glasses, used predominately in Russia between 1940 and 1949 for short films.

The Autostereoscopic display is a new technology not yet useable for theatrical application, but in 2009 Hitachi developed a mobile phone with an autostereoscopic screen, and China has a version coming out this year, also trials are underway for TV’s and LCD PC screens with the portable gamers likely to receive a portable gaming system.

Thats a run down of the varying systems to produces a 3-D image, i guess a little history is next.


A 3-D movie process was patented in 1890 by a British film pioneer, William Friese-Greene, but the obtrusive mechanics made it impractical for theatres, US inventor Frederick Eugene Ives patented a stereo camera rig in 1900, in June 1915 Edwin S. Porter displayed 3-D test reels at the Astor theatre in New York City using Red-Green Anaglyphs, nothing was produced using this method after the tests.

The earliest 3-D film shown to a paying audience was The Power of Love, played at the Ambassador Hotel in Las Angeles on September 27th 1922, and camera rig was a produce of Harry K Fairall and Robert F Elder, they used the Red-Green anaglyph format, making it the earliest film shown with “3-D” glasses, In December 1922, inventor William Van Doren Kelley cashed in on the growing interest of 3-D films, he shot film with a camera system of his own design, it seemed that back then the only you could make 3-D films was to make the camera systems yourself, so it seems like it was limited to inventor of the day who were interested in making films or moving images, he struck a deal with Samuel Rothafel to display his film series entitled “movies of the future” at the Rivoli Theatre in New York City, Kelley, who was an early producer of colour films used Prizma to print his films, his last film in 1923 called Through the Trees – Washington DC found no buyers. The late 20’s and early 30’s saw little or no interest in Stereoscopic picture or 3-D films, mostly due to the great depression, Louis Lumiere shot  footage with his stereoscopic camera in September 1933, then in March the following year he remade his film L’Arrivee du Train in anaglypgic 3-D, in 1936 Leventhal and John Norling were hired by MGM to film the Audioscoiks series and in 1938 The New Audioscopiks was nominated for an Oscar in the category Best Short Subject, Novelty. Many of these films were printed with colour systems but none of them were actually in colour, the colour printing was only used to achieve an anaglyph effect.

In 1936 Edwin H. Land gave the first demonstration of Polaroid filters in conjunction with 3-D photography at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel, the reaction was enthusiastic and he followed it up with an installation at the New York Museum of Science, Later that year, the feature, Nozze Vagabonde appeared in Italy, followed in Germany by Zum Greifen Nah (You Can Nearly Touch It), and again in 1939 with Germany’s Sechs Mädel Rollen Ins Wochenend (Six Girls Drive Into the Weekend). The Italian film was made with the Gualtierotti camera; the two German productions with the Zeiss camera and the Vierling shooting system. All of these films were the first exhibited using Polaroid filters. The Zeiss Company in Germany manufactured glasses on a commercial basis commencing in 1936; they were also independently made around the same time in Germany by E. Käsemann and by J. Mahler, the first commercial film using the polaroid system was In Tune With Tomorrow, premiered at the 1939 Worlds Fair in New York, a lot of 3-D going on in New York in the 20’s and 30’s, the last film before World War 2 broke out was in 1940, called Magic Movies: Thrills for you, produced by the Pennsylvania Railroad Co.

The Golden age of 3-D.

The first film produced was Bwana Devil, produced, Written and directed by Arch Oboler.

James Mage, a pioneer in the 3-D craze. Used his 16 mm 3-D Bolex system, and he premiered his Triorama program on February 10, 1953 with his four shorts: Sunday In StereoIndian SummerAmerican Life, and This is Bolex Stereo. This show is considered lost.

In April 1953 two groundbreaking features in 3-D:

Columbia’s Man in the Dark and Warner Bros. House of Wax, the first 3-D feature with stereophonic sound. House of Wax, outside of Cinerama, was the first time many American audiences heard recorded stereophonic sound. It was also the film that typecast Vincent Price as a horror star as well as the “King of 3-D” after he became the actor to star in the most 3-D features ( the others were The Mad MagicianDangerous Mission, and Son of Sinbad ). The success of these two films proved that major studios now had a method of getting moviegoers back into theaters and away from television sets, which were causing a steady decline in attendance. You see back then Television was anew thing for many people, typically the cinema goes, so the use of a “new thing” like 3-D, this new fangeled invention (which is obviously wasn’t) was a gimmic to put bums on sits because the studios could only get profits if people went to the cinema, television gave people a reason to stay in, nowadays Hollywood studios make just as much if not more revenue on DVD/Blu-ray sales as they do in theatres, so the use of 3-D now isn’t profit induced, its simply a gimmick, something over a century old, that hasn’t been used in mainstream cinema since the 1950’s, reintroducing it now only feels new to young cinema goes who think it new. Like Eberts Said it’s a distracting, annoying, anti-realistic, juvenile abomination.

Another famous entry in the golden era of 3-D was the 3 Dimensional Pictures production of Robot Monster. The film was allegedly scribed in an hour by screenwriter Wyott Ordung and filmed in a period of two weeks on a shoestring budget. Despite these shortcomings and the fact that the crew had no previous experience with the newly-built camera rig, luck was on the cinematographer’s side, as many find the 3-D photography in the film is well shot and aligned. Robot Monster also has a notable score by then up-and-coming composer Elmer Bernstein. The film was released June 24, 1953 and went out with the short Stardust in Your Eyes, which starred nightclub comedian, Slick Slavin.

The decline in the theatrical 3-D craze started in August and September 1953. The cause of this decline were;

• Two prints had to be projected simultaneously.

• The prints had to remain exactly alike after repair, or synchronization would be lost.

• It sometimes required two projectionists to keep sync working properly.

• When either prints or shutters became out of sync, the picture became virtually unwatchable and accounted for headaches and eyestrain.

• The necessary silver projection screen was very directional and caused sideline seating to be unusable with both 3-D and regular films, due to the angular darkening of these screens. Later films that opened in wider-seated venues often premiered flat for that reason (such at Kiss Me Kate at the Radio City Music Hall).

Although it was more expensive to install, the major competing realism process was anamorphic, first utilized by Fox with Cinemascope and its premiere in The Robe. Anamorphic features needed only a single print, so synchronization was not an issue. Cinerama was also a competitor from the start and had better quality control than 3-D because it was owned by one company that focused on quality control. However, most of the 3-D features past the summer of 1953 were released in the flat widescreen formats ranging from 1.66:1 to 1.85:1. In early studio advertisements and articles about widescreen and 3-D formats, widescreen systems were referred to as “3-D,” causing some confusion among scholars.

Several other features that helped put 3-D back on the map were the John Wayne feature Hondo (distributed by Warner Bros.), Columbia’s Miss Sadie Thompson with Rita Hayworth, and Paramount’s Money From Home with Dean Martin and Jerry Lewis. Paramount also released the cartoon shorts Boo Moon with Casper, the Friendly Ghost and Popeye, Ace of Space with Popeye the Sailor. Paramount Picturesreleased a 3-D Korean War film Cease Fire filmed on actual Korean locations in 1953

A string of successful 3-D movies followed the second wave. Some highlights are:

▪ The French Line, starring Jane Russell and Gilbert Roland, a Howard Hughes/RKO production. The film became notorious for being released without an MPAA seal of approval, after several suggestive lyrics were included, as well as one of Ms. Russell’s particularly revealing costumes. Playing up her sex appeal, one tagline for the film was, “It’ll knock both of your eyes out!” The film was later cut and approved by the MPAA for a general flat release, despite having a wide and profitable 3-D release.

▪ Taza, Son of Cochise, which starred Rock Hudson in the title role, Barbara Rush as the love interest, and Rex Reason (billed as Bart Roberts) as his renegade brother, released through Universal-International.

▪ Two ape films: Phantom of the Rue Morgue, featuring Karl Malden and Patricia Medina, and produced by Warner Bros. and based on Edgar Allan Poe’s “The Murders in the Rue Morgue,” and Gorilla At Large, a Panoramic Production starring Cameron Mitchell, distributed through Fox.

▪ Creature from the Black Lagoon, starring Richard Carlson and Julie Adams, directed by Jack Arnold. Arguably the most famous 3-D movie, and the only 3-D feature that spawned a sequel, Revenge of the Creature in 3-D (followed by another sequel, The Creature Walks Among Us, shot flat).

▪ Cat-Women of the Moon, an Astor Picture starring Victor Jory and Marie Windsor. Elmer Bernstein composed the score.

▪ Dial M for Murder, directed by Alfred Hitchcock and starring Ray Milland, Robert Cummings, and Grace Kelly, is considered by aficionados of 3-D to be one of the best examples of the process. Although available in 3-D in 1954, there are no known playdates in 3-D, since Warner Bros. had just instated a simultaneous 3-D/2-D release policy. The film’s screening in 3-D in February 1980 at the York Theater in San Francisco did so well that Warner Bros. re-released the film in 3-D in February 1982.

▪ Gog, an Ivan Tors production, dealing with realistic science fiction. The second film in Tors’ “Office of Scientific Investigation” trilogy of film, which included, The Magnetic Monster and Riders to the Stars.

▪ The Diamond Wizard, the only stereoscopic feature shot in Britain, released flat in both the UK and US. It starred and was directed byDennis O’Keefe.

▪ Irwin Allen’s Dangerous Mission released by RKO in 1954 featuring Allen’s trademarks of an all star cast facing a disaster (a forest fire).

▪ Son of Sinbad, another RKO/Howard Hughes production, starring Dale Robertson, Lili St. Cyr, and Vincent Price. The film was shelved after Hughes ran into difficulty with The French Line, and wasn’t released until 1955, at which time it went out flat, converted to the SuperScope process.

The final decline of 3-D was in the late spring of 1954, for the same reasons as the previous lull, as well as the further success of widescreen formats with theater operators. Even though Polaroid had created a well-designed “Tell-Tale Filter Kit” for the purpose of recognizing and adjusting out of sync and phase 3-D, exhibitors still felt uncomfortable with the system and turned their focus instead to processes such as CinemaScope. The last 3-D feature to be released in that format during the “Golden era” was Revenge of the Creature, on February 23, 1955. Ironically, the film had a wide release in 3-D and was well received at the box office.

The single strip format of the 60’s and 70’s.

Stereoscopic films largely remained dormant for the first part of the 1960s, with those that were released usually being anaglyph exploitation films. One film of notoriety was the Beaver-Champion/Warner Bros. production, The Mask (1961). The film was shot in 2-D, but to enhance the bizarre qualities of the dream-world that is induced when the main character puts on a cursed tribal mask, the film went to anaglyph 3-D. These scenes were printed by Technicolor on their first run in red/green anaglyph.

Although 3-D films appeared sparsely during the early 1960s, the true second wave of 3-D cinema was set into motion by Arch Oboler, the same producer who started the craze of the 1950s. Using a new technology called Space-Vision 3D, stereoscopic films were printed with two images, one above the other, in a single academy ratio frame, on a single strip, and needed only one projector fitted with a special lens. This so-called “over and under” technique eliminated the need for dual projector set-ups, and produced widescreen, but darker, less vivid, polarized 3-D images. Unlike earlier dual system, it could stay in perfect sync, unless improperly spliced in repair.

Arch Oboler once again had the vision for the system that no one else would touch, and put it to use on his film entitled The Bubble. As with Bwana Devil, the critics panned The Bubble, but audiences flocked to see it, and it became financially sound enough to promote the use of the system to other studios, particularly independents, who did not have the money for expensive dual-strip prints of their productions. Most likely people flocked to see it because they hadn’t seen 3-D films before, the last 3-D film that when to theatres was back in 1955, so it was all new again, maybe thats why so many people went to see it.

In 1970, Stereovision, a new entity founded by director/inventor Allan Silliphant and optical designer Chris Condon, developed a different 35mm single-strip format, which printed two images squeezed side-by-side and used an anamorphic lens to widen the pictures through polaroid filters. Louis K. Sher and Stereovision released the softcore sex comedy The Stewardesses (self-rated X, but later re-rated R by the MPAA) could this really be the first use of 3-D with a porn, softcore it might be, but you have to wonder what took them so damn long. The film cost $100,000 USD to produce, still more then pornography made today, and ran for up to a year in several markets. eventually earning $27 million in North America, alone ($114 million in constant-2007 dollars), and it seemed to earn far more then contemporary pornography, maybe there a lesson to be learned here, 3-D film is pointless in mainstream cinema but in the porn industry it could be a gold mine, in fewer than 800 theaters, becoming the most profitable 3-Dimensional film to date (see what i mean), and in purely relative terms, one of the most profitable films ever. It was later released in 70 mm 3-D. Some 36 films worldwide were made with Stereovision over 25 years, using either a widescreen (above-below), anamorphic (side by side) or 70 mm 3-D formats. In 2009The Stewardesses was remastered by Chris Condon and director Ed Meyer, releasing it in XpanD 3D, RealD Cinema and Dolby 3D. Could you imagine the type of “people” that would go to see a 3-D softcore porn film, “Tits you can reach out and touch”

The quality of the following 3-D films was not much more inventive, as many were either softcore and even hardcore adult films, horror films, or a combination of both. Paul Morrisey’s Flesh For Frankenstein (aka Andy Warhol’s Frankenstein) was a superlative example of such a combination.

▪ Amityville 3-D

▪ Comin’ at Ya!

▪ Friday the 13th Part III

▪ Jaws 3-D

▪ The Man Who Wasn’t There (1983)

▪ Metalstorm: The Destruction of Jared-Syn

▪ Parasite

▪ Silent Madness

▪ Spacehunter: Adventures in the Forbidden Zone

▪ Starchaser: The Legend of Orin

▪ Treasure of the Four Crowns

Only Comin’ At Ya!Parasite, and Friday the 13th Part III have been officially released on VHS and/or DVD in 3-D in the United States (althoughAmityville 3-D has seen a 3-D DVD release in the United Kingdom). Most of the 80s 3D movies and some of the classic 50s movies such asHouse of Wax were released on the now defunct Video Disc (VHD) format in Japan as part of a system that used shutter glasses. Most of these have been unofficially transferred to DVD and are available on the grey market through sites such as eBay.

3-D, a Rebirth 1985 – 2003.

In the mid 1980s, IMAX began producing non-fiction films for its nascent 3-D business, starting with “We Are Born of Stars” (Roman Kroitor, 1985). A key point was that this production, as with all subsequent IMAX productions, emphasized mathematical correctness of the 3D rendition and thus largely eliminated the eye fatigue and pain that resulted from the approximate geometries of previous 3D incarnations. In addition, and in contrast to previous 35mm based 3D presentations, the very large field of view provided by IMAX allowed a much broader 3D “stage”, arguably as important in 3D film as it is theatre, In my opinion for 3-D film to be effective it needs to cover your peripheral vision also, but then the slightest movement of your head will ruin the experience.

In 1986, Disney Theme Parks and Universal Studios began to use 3D films to impress audiences in special venues, Captain Eo (Francis Ford Coppola, 1986) starring Michael Jackson, being a very notable example. In the same year, the National Film Board of Canada production Transitions (Colin Low), created for Expo 86 in Vancouver, was the first IMAX presentation using polarized glasses. “Echos of the Sun” (Roman Kroitor, 1990) was the first IMAX film to be presented using alternate-eye shutterglass technology, a development required because the dome screen precluded the use of polarized technology.

From 1990 onward, numerous films were produced by all three parties to satisfy the demands of their various high-profile special attractions and IMAX’s expanding 3D network. Films of special note during this period include the extremely successful “Into The Deep” (Graeme Ferguson, 1995) and the first IMAX 3-D fiction film Wings of Courage (1996), by director Jean-Jacques Annaud, about the author and pilot Antoine de Saint-Exupéry.

Other stereoscopic films produced in this period include:

▪ The Last Buffalo (Stephen Low, 1990)

▪ Jim Henson’s Muppet*Vision 3D (Jim Henson, 1991)

▪ Imagine (John Weiley, 1993)

▪ Honey, I Shrunk the Audience (Daniel Rustuccio, 1994)

▪ Into the Deep (Graeme Ferguson, 1995)

▪ Across the Sea of Time (Stephen Low, 1995)

▪ Wings of Courage (Jean-Jacques Annaud, 1996)

▪ L5, First City in Space (Graeme Ferguson, 1996)

▪ T2 3-D: Battle Across Time (James Cameron, 1996)

▪ Paint Misbehavin’ (Roman Kroitor and Peter Stephenson, 1997)

▪ IMAX Nutcracker (1997)

▪ The Hidden Dimension (1997) This one made me feel ill and my eyes hurt like crazy.

▪ T-Rex – Back to the Cretaceous (Brett Leonard, 1998)

▪ Mark Twain’s America (Stephen Low, 1998)

▪ Siegfried & Roy: The Magic Box (Brett Leonard, 1999)

▪ Galapagos (Al Giddings and David Clark, 1999)

▪ Encounter in the Third Dimension (Ben Stassen, 1999)

▪ Alien Adventure (Ben Stassen, 1999)

▪ Ultimate G’s (2000)

▪ Cyberworld (Hugh Murray, 2000)

▪ Cirque du Soleil – Journey of Man (Keith Melton, 2000)

▪ Haunted Castle (Ben Stassen, 2001)

▪ Space Station 3D (Toni Myers, 2002)

▪ SOS Planet (Ben Stassen, 2002)

▪ Ocean Wonderland (2003)

▪ Falling in Love Again (Munro Ferguson, 2003)

▪ Misadventures in 3D (Ben Stassen, 2003)

By 2004, 54% (133 theaters of 248) of the IMAX community was 3D-capable.

Shortly thereafter, higher quality computer animation, competition from DVDs and other media, digital projection, digital video capture, and the use of sophisticated IMAX 70mm film projectors, created an opportunity for another wave of 3D films

But as we can see, the 3-D film comes and goes very quickly, and in the the 80’s to 2003 mostly factual films were being made, i still don’t see any real point to using 3-D in theatres.

Onwards we go, 3-D enters the mainstream, or does it?

In 2003, Ghosts of the Abyss (James Cameron) was released as the first full-length 3-D IMAX feature filmed with the Reality Camera System. This camera system used the latest HD video cameras, not film, and was built for Cameron by Vince Pace, to his specifications. The same camera system was used to film Spy Kids 3D: Game Over (2003), Aliens of the Deep IMAX (2005), and The Adventures of Sharkboy and Lavagirl in 3-D (2005).

Does anyone really remember any of these films, seriously.

In November 2004, The Polar Express was released as IMAX’s first full-length, animated 3-D feature. It was released in 3,584 theaters in 2D, and only 66 IMAX locations. The return from those few 3-D theaters was about 25% of the total. The 3-D version earned about 14 times as much per screen as the 2D version. This pattern continued and prompted a greatly intensified interest in 3-D and 3-D presentation of animated films.

Again were seeing the emergence of a new audience, young people who haven’t yet seen a 3-D film, and like it says the first full-lenght animated feature.

In June 2005, The Mann’s Chinese 6 theatre (now Grauman’s Chinese Theatre) in Hollywood became the first commercial movie theatre to be equipped with the Digital 3D format. Both Singin’ in the Rain and The Polar Express were tested in the Digital 3D format over the course of several months. In November 2005, Walt Disney Studio Entertainment released Chicken Little in digital 3-D format.

So we have an old classic and the new CGI 3-D feature, and then Chicken Little, its no wonder it took another 2 years to progress.

On May 19, 2007 Scar3D opened at the Cannes Film Market. It was the first US produced 3D full length feature film to be completed in Real D 3D. It has been the #1 film at the box office in several countries around the world, including Russia where it opened in 3D on 295 screens.

Critics who saw the movie didn’t think the 3-D aspect was worth it, and pointless to boot.

Other 2008 3-D films included Hannah Montana & Miley Cyrus: Best of Both Worlds ConcertJourney to the Center of the Earth, and Bolt.

3 unsuccessful films, i’m not sure 3-D was even enough to pull in the punters for these.

On January 16, 2009, Lionsgate released My Bloody Valentine 3D, the first horror film and first R-rated film to be projected in Real D 3D. It was released to 1,033 3D screens, the most ever for this format, and 1,501 regular screens.

Again this film wasn’t will received so the 3-D is again pointless.

On May 7, 2009 the British Film Institute commissioned a 3D film installation. The film Radio Mania: An Abandoned Work consists of two screens of stereoscopic 3D film with 3D Ambisonic sound. It stars Kevin Eldon and is by British artists Iain Forsyth and Jane Pollard.

I’ve never even heard of this, goes to show that its not advertised very well, so why bother with the 3-D.

The first 3-D Webisode series was Horrorween starting September 1, 2009.

Major 3-D films in 2009 included CoralineMonsters vs. AliensUpX Games 3D: The MovieThe Final Destination, and AvatarAvatar has gone on to be the most expensive film of all time, with a budget rumoured to be $500 million. The main presentation technologies were Real D 3D, Dolby 3D, XpanD 3D, MasterImage 3D, and IMAX 3D.

Avatar is about the only movie here that has made any real money, but do you think thats because of the 3-D, do you think it would have made less money if it had been simply a 2D affair, i think not, the film would have made just as much, and from the few first hand accounts of a 3-D viewing that i’ve heard, it didn’t deliver anything, if anything is was again pointless and distracting, most if not all of the people who saw the film and said the 3-D was great are most likely people who still act like children looking at fireworks for the first time and are in awe of its splendid yet destructive beauty, only to return the following November 5th, or if your American July 4th, to look up again and see for the first time the wonders of fireworks.

In my opinion, 3-D film offers nothing to the viewer, film needs to offer an emotional response, engaging characters and a well written story can do this, so if you have that why do you feel the need for 3-D, and if you don’t have the story or the characters 3-D isn’t going to help, a bad film is a bad film 3-D or not.

So, i’ve given you the methods of 3-D, a brief history of 3-D and my opinions and thoughts on the wonders of 3-D films, i for one won’t be seeing Tron Legacy in 3-D thats for damn sure, so with this make up your own mind on weather you think 3-D is worth the extra ticket money, or the extra “experience” because like many times before the fad that is 3-D, and yes its a fad, will fade like the Mini disc, because people like you will get bored of it, you’ll get bored of paying extra to see substandard films and eventually you’ll stop going to the 3-D showcase, and 3-D like it has in the past will disappear, only to rear its ugly extra dimensional head once again in the next decade, its ok as a fade but be under no illusion, 3-D films always fail, they always have and always will, until the technology is available to completely amerce yourself in a 3-D “world” something like the Holodeck in Star Trek, something that you are in rather then something you sit and watch.

Write Something

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: