The new technology is already old again
Believe it or not, 3D films have been around for over a century, and the popularity of the format seems to come and go in waves. Avatar‘s successful use of the technology led to 25 films being released in 3D in 2010 alone. That’s more than the previous five years combined. At least 40 films are expected to come out this year in 3D, including at least one porno (yuck), and more than a dozen films are currently scheduled for 2012.
Meanwhile, companies like Panasonic have begun marketing 3D Cameras to “prosumers” and nearly every TV and game maker is rabidly trying to release their latest device with 3D tech. While there is almost certainly potential in gaming, I think most people who drop six grand a 3D TV are going to be kicking themselves in a year or two. There will always be technophiles who have to have the latest thing on the market, and 3D TV seem like a way to milk more money out of these people as TVs have reached their maximum practical sizes and 2K/4K remains years away from being consumer-friendly.
But as far as the movies themselves are concerned, I have a few issues with this new craze and it all starts at the theaters. While I still enjoy a good 3D movie, the problem is finding one. Major studios seem to be competing to see who can come up with the most gratuitous and absurd use of 3D to sell overpriced tickets to otherwise insignificant films. My vote currently goes to Touchstone for unleashing Step Up 3D upon the world. Then there are the movies that could be good on their own but, in an effort to join the trend, are converted to 3D in post-production. I have yet to see a film that was originally flat and then converted that made any decent use of 3D.
The real problem seems to be this prevalent idea that movies have to be in 3D now or they risk being considered outdated. This is complete bullshit of course. Good movies don’t need to pop off the screen to be enjoyable, but bad ones need it to be marketable. So as long as 3D remains the latest trend in Hollywood, we moviegoers will likely be forced to pay more to see good movies that don’t require gimmicks and bad ones that use them as a crutch.
I don’t expect 3D to go away anytime soon, but I expect in a few years it will once again be mostly relegated to children’s movies and documentaries shown only at science center IMAX theaters. In the meantime, if nothing else, the format has the benefit of highlighting many of the bad movies that are going to be put out in the next few years. I would suggest avoiding movies that have 3D in the title. The good ones don’t need it.
I was just talking about this 3D craze phenomena this morning.
Apparently there are big wigs who are suggesting/trying to have the next Batman movie be 3D. I’ve heard/read that Nolan is resisting (bless him).
Batman Begins and The Dark Knight were more than excellent in 2D. That said, there will be PLENTY of people who will race to theaters to see the next installment, but I have to believe there would be quite a few of those who would slow down or drop out of that race if it were in 3D. 3D, to me, is now the branding of a sell-out and I really want no part of it.
Jaws 3? Yes, please, re-make the hell out of that shit and have the 3D shark right in my face, I’m for it! That’s the kind of movie that SHOULD/WOULD need 3D to help it sell.
Nolan’s films sell themselves. Leave Batman out of it.
I agree completely. Nolan knows 3D is a gimmick and when you try to shoe-horn it into a film that doesn’t need it, the end product suffers. Inception, arguably, could have had some cool moments in 3D, but it didn’t need them to be an awesome film.