Originally I was really looking forward to the concept of 3D movies, I thought that by now technology would be able to pull off stunning 3D films. How wrong was I! I may get a lot of slack for this but ah well.
Working in a cinema I’ve been able to see a few 3D films and also see peoples reaction to them. Most like me go in to the movie excited and come out disappointed. I’ve seen the following in 3D Ice Age 3, A Christmas Carol, Avatar, and parts of others such as Alice In Wonderland, How to Train Your Dragon. The only one that I can say was worth it was A Christmas Carol, the picture was pretty clear throughout and presented the classic tale in a new and exciting way.
What I’m about to say will probably shock most, the worse film was by far Avatar, now before I get beaten to death by hoards of fans let me explain. The film itself was pretty awesome (and pretty), the story was simple but kept you gripped. What I felt made it bad was the 3D, it was fuzzy, blurry in parts and just made the film difficult to watch. All the money spent on the visual effects seemed wasted as I couldn’t see most of what went on.
Like I say I work in a cinema and about 85% of people who come out of the 3D films say that the picture was too dark, it was blurry and they just have a huge headache. If it was a minority that said this I could maybe let it slide, but because so many have said this it’s surely an indication that 3D isn’t yet what it should be.
Maybe the film industry need to jump off the 3D band wagon until they perfect the art of 3D.
Would like to know what anyone else thinks about 3D, let me know whether you love it or hate it
3D films have been hyped up ever since the concept was first developed. The idea itself is a good one: to feel like your in the movie itself is a fantastic idea. But I do agree that the technology is lacking and doesn’t seem to have come very far. Various movies have been said to be “specifically made for 3D” but that does not immediately make them good.
I too have seen A Christmas Carol and thought that it was spectacular. The animation was designed well and the 3D scenes were not too over whelming and didn’t try to be overly complicated. They also didn’t give me a headache or make my eyes spin in their sockets when I watched it. I can’t say the same for other so called 3D films, however.
3D technology dates back, believe it or not, to the early 50s with various failed concepts. It was revived again in the 70s with the likes of Amityville 3D and Jaws 3D. These were the kinds of films that employed the terrible paper glasses with one blue lense and the other red. IMAX was created in the mid 1980s and then in 2003 3D films went mainstream. This breakthrough, however, has not resulted in a bigger advancement in the technology.
Fair enough we are now past the flimsy paper glasses and cinemas are turning digital, but it feels like the effects design is lagging behind the technology. The most recent 3D films like Avatar and How to Train Your Dragon have both been made to cater for 3D effects, but may leave audiences disappointed. After seeing Avatar I was blown away by the film’s presentation, story and effects: with only the 3D really letting it down. The films is brillant. That I will not dispute. But in some, not all, scenes the 3D means that everything on screen is just one big blur. In scenes where there is no fast paced action the 3D is fine, but on the other hand this is meant to be an action film so fast motion is a given. Unfortunately, this means that about 85% of the film is let down by the attempts to have the action jump out at you.
There is too big of a gap between the technology in the cinema and its partner in the film production process. For 3D to become more successful this gap needs to be closed and both areas need to catch up to each other.
