3d_specs

You might well argue that 3D is nothing more than a gimmick but I would wholeheartedly disagree. You might as well say stereo sound over mono is a gimmick or that zoom lenses are a gimmick. The addition of a “second eye” opens up so many new expressive storytelling devices for filmmakers that this new dawn of digital 3D deserves to be taken as seriously as the advent of three-strip technicolor. It’s a popular claim that having seen a film in 2D you didn’t “miss anything”, but that would be equally true if you saw a film down-mixed to mono sound, on a laptop screen as opposed to in a huge auditorium or a color film when desaturated. These aren’t necessarily things you’d know you are missing out on.

The Venice film festival are taking 3D suitably seriously, it would seem with the announcement of a new prize for the best 3D picture of the year. Variety name nine films as eligible, two of which will be playing at the festival: Up and The Hole, which receives its world premiere in Venice.

The other seven are Journey to the Center of the Earth, Monsters vs. Aliens, My Bloody Valentine, Battle for Terra, Coraline, Jonas Brothers: The 3-D Concert Experience and Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs.

Not having seen The Hole I can only really tip on the basis of the others, and in that case it would be Coraline out front, head and shoulders.

The festival is also set to screen “3-D pics by local helmers David Zamagni (Daimon) and Nadia Ranocchi (Cock-Crow) in the new Orizzonti 3-D section” while Ranocchi will bring that personal experience of 3D to bear as one of the judges for the competition prize.

Looking at that list there’s a clear set of genre biases in place with family films and horror product taking up each and every one of the slots. It’s even starting to seem mandatory that animated family films are released in 3D (I hope this doesn’t hurt The Princess and the Frog).

Continuing the trend for horror pictures to be given a 3D style, Shock Till You Drop have announced that Sony are planning a fourth Underworld picture, this one in stereo vision. There’s no casting details on Underworld IV as yet with the only extra info being the planned release date of January 21, 2011. Gotta love these studios planning a release date before an actual film to go in the slot. No wonder so many of these franchise films are so wonderful.

Korea is about to get in on the 3D horror act too, with Kim Jhi-Woon directing the country’s first stereoscopic spooker. According to HanCinema, Soulmate will be produced to by the Korean FX house Macrograph on a budget of $2 million. It sounds like standard slasher fare with the noted twist being that the victims will be a “dream team of good-looking boys” rather than “the usual fare of (pretty young) girls”.

Courtesy of Premiere, French readers can already find out just where they’ll be able to join in with Avatar day, wherein cinemas across the world will be screening 15 minutes of Cameron’s upcoming epic for free. The day itself is August 21st, not so long away now, so keep an eye on the official site for your country’s roster of participators. Just don’t expect, as per a report on Marketsaw, for non-digital IMAX cinemas to be playing much of a part. They tell us:

Fox has confirmed to various theater owners that the special 15 minutes of Avatar material will only be screened in Digital IMAX locations, except for very large centers wicih will have a print version. What this means is that some small to medium size cities (like where I live) will NOT be able to see anything on Avatar Day because if they have an IMAX screen (typically only one), it could be an IMAX film location.

Storm in a teacup? Maybe - I don’t know how many small to medium size cities have only IMAX film set ups. Not many, perhaps? I would imagine those would be just the locations to get stuffed with a limp IMAX digital set up.

  • Poland626
    I'm still very confused about Avatar day. Is there a movie following it or before it because I'm not going to an IMAX 3D theater for 15 min of footage so I don't think I'm going unless they do an I Am Legend and show a movie afterwards
  • tenno
    Yeah I feel the same way. IMAX 3D theaters aren't everywhere and the most convenient to get to. Hard to make 15 minutes a destination. Plus I don't see how this is doing much to create new interest in the film. The people who are going to go to see the special feature are the ones who were going to see the movie anyways. I would rather wait to see the full film on opening day.
  • The fact that you need to address the gimmicky nature of 3D in the opening paragraph of this article says much about the trend, doesn't it? I can understand how technology is thrusting it forward, and how now, more than ever, it is closer to 'real' 3D experience... but still...

    The way films are shot now, using prime lenses, is exactly how our eye operates. We see things in 2D, accurately translated to 3D by the brain accordingly. The depth of field, the focus, are all achieved by lenses today.

    I heard The Hole director talk about 'putting us in the room with the characters' so we can feel like we're actually there and apart of it. Wow. Truly visionary stuff, that.

    I wonder, if awards were given out back in the day, would JAWS 3D have won?? I reckon so, personally.
  • filmbuffrich
    Nope, JAWS 3-D would have lost out to METALSTORM: THE DESTRUCTION OF JARED-SYN. :p
  • HAHA I think maybe you're right. Still, that win would have been labeled an 'upset', surely? ;o)
  • BrendonConnelly
    I believe my opening paragraph speaks to people's prejudices not the actuality.

    It isn't just about being closer to reality but having more ways in which to subtly manipulate through construction of that reality.
  • Hey, I'm all for it. I'm totally up for the subtle manipulations and the immersion experience. That's what 3D is all about, isn't it? Hell, I EXPECT that stuff when going to see a 3D film. How does this make it any less of a gimmick, though?
  • BrendonConnelly
    It puts it on the same "gimmick footing" as sound, colour film, dissolves or score music. If you would call of those gimmicks then I'd see where you are coming from. Would you?
  • Sound naturally progressed the way it did because we hear things in stereo (or 'surround'). In the same way footage progressed to colour and the widescreen format to suit our visual style. Those things weren't gimmick, technology simply reached what our eyes and ears were capable of.

    ... but 3D? That's already been and gone many times, and unfortunately, audiences are aware of the grubby intention behind most 3D efforts. It has a lot of ground to make up before it can shake its gimmick label.

    Lemme make it clear that *I* like 3D. It IS awesome. And I'm not against it. But -- Until the day every film and home theater system converts to 3D just like they have colour and surround sound, 3D will be nothing more than 'gimmick'. I just don't see it happening. And I'm yet to see a film that can convince me it is going to take off.

    Maybe I'll change my tune after Avatar...
  • I do concede on your score music example. I can find no argument there. We don't experience it naturally and it definitely completes and heightens every film experience. Hmmm...
  • eddymovies
    I think what you're arguing is that because 3D isn't a standard - like stereo sound - then it should be labeled as a gimmick.

    I don't know where I stand on this new format. I definitely do not want to see it set as the standard for every movie - God help us if it gets to that. But, My Bloody Valentine and Beowulf were pretty impressive. But the reason 3D worked for those was because it escalated the thrill ride factor.

    With that said, I think I'm more of a gimmick guy then 'the next step'. I think it'll benefit the summer movie crowd, which is fine.
  • filmbuffrich
    While I agree that 3D is not just a gimmick, I haven't really seen it being used as a legitimate storytelling tool all that much outside of throwing stuff at the audience in horror films and as a marketing technique to get kids into cartoons.

    I have yet to see a director use the process subtly, the way Hitchcock used it in DIAL M FOR MURDER, though I suspect that Cameron will be using it for more than just its exploitation value.
  • tenno
    I am curious and hopeful that perhaps with the festival taking an interest more attention to innovation and creative uses in 3D will come along because for the most part it has felt gimmicky and not added much to the experience for me.
  • Is a 3D movie really a genre in itself though? I agree it adds something to a film, but to have an award for films in the 3D format is like having an award for best surround sound film or best colour film when those 'gimmicks' have become standard now.
  • Scruffmcgruff
    Inglourious Basterds comes out the same day right? In that case, i may drive to the imax to see that and consider seeing avatar before/after.
    but then again i really dont want to see 10% of the movie out of context. i may let the trailer suffice. i also had a dream about avatar last night haha, i think the hype is getting too intense
  • It seems like Storm in a Teacup would be the American version and Tempest in a Teapot would be the British version. Did this not throw anyone else off?
  • djoser
    The main difference is that Stereo Surround Sound doesn't HURT YOUR EARS (re: eyes after 2 hrs of 3-D) after you've been listening to it for 2 hours.
  • This is just an effect of the tech in its infantcy. Newer 3D movies should have less of an effect on your eyes. Avatar is rumored to be 3 hours long, and Cameron is not worried about eye strain. The eye strain is caused when you use the technology wrong and quickly cut from one depth to another in fast cuts. There are easy ways around this.
  • BrendonConnelly
    Peter's exactly right. The leaps forward made in Coraline were huge, and we've come a little way since.
  • Oddly enough, it looks like Venice for me is going to be a way to play some catch-up on some films I haven't seen yet (but have been out in the States) that I've really wanted to check out.
  • Saladinho
    If you have to put on a special apparatus to experience it, it's a gimmick.
  • So augmented reality is a gimmick? Because many people believe it may be part of our future.
  • Saladinho
    In the case of film, yes.
  • sma
    Of course its a gimmick, with the unruly world of piracy there has to be some reason to get people off of their ass and into a movie theater.

    It just so happens that the gimmick is a lot of fun and very enjoyable and won't be leaving anytime soon. So you can either embrace it, or be like one of those people who refused to get a cellphone for years. Change is scary!
  • Saladinho
    I just said it was a gimmick. Why is everyone acting like I insulted their mothers or something? I didn't even say it was a bad gimmick, yet Sciretta's lecturing me about augmented reality, Connelly's talking about projectors and seats, and you-- Where do you get that I'm having some internal struggle about embracing it or fearing change? Jeez!
  • sma
    Dude, I agreed with you about it being a gimmick. I was just comparing the argument against 3D to another technology that took off, I think you are taking this more seriously then I.
  • Saladinho
    Out of exasperation rather than anger. I thought the second part of your comment was directed at me, and I was like "WTF?"
  • My point was to rebutt your ridiculous statement that having to wear something is indicative of it being a gimmick. Real life augmented reality is right around the corner. We're starting to see it with iPhone apps. Tomorrow it will be in wearable displays (probably in the form of sunglasses).

    I do agree that for 3D to become truly mainstream, they will need to get rid of the glasses. That technology is 10 years away realistically. But it is in the works. One day you will be able to watch a movie in a theater in 3D without glasses.
  • Saladinho
    Since we're speaking about 3D movies, I thought it would be easy to infer that I was talking about films and not real life. Defend the concept all you want, but until the films themselves demonstrate why we can't do without 3D, I remain unconvinced.
  • BrendonConnelly
    But we need a screen, projector, speakers... even seats are part of the equipment used to routinely see films in a cinema.

    Get over your hang up on the glasses, people.
  • Saladinho
    You're not wearing the screen, or the speakers, or the seats. Just the glasses. That isn't in and of itself a problem, I just haven't seen anything yet that's made me embrace this as the new wave.
  • sma
    Hilariously enough, it was the terrible "My Bloody Valentine 3D" that converted me. It was easily the most fun I've ever had in a theater, as soon as the first 3D imagery appeared, everyone took a collective gasp and sat back.
  • Saladinho
    Yeah, that's what I've heard. I just couldn't bring myself to go because of everything else.
  • quintushalls
    Actually, Philips has a television that is HD and is 3D without glasses. No glasses are needed. But because the market isn't switching to 3D television more rapidly, they have stopped production for now. http://marketsaw.blogspot.com/2009/03/philips-b...
  • For once Brendon Connelly, you and I are in total agreement.
  • quintushalls
    Here is a look at the WOWvx displays market by Philips that offer both 3D without glasses, and 2D + depth. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWgSQLnhWMw
  • truenerd
    The difference between stereo sound, color, zoom lenses, etc and stereoscopic 3D is that the former actually added something to the experience. To me, 3D takes away from the experience. I watched Up in both formats and greatly preferred my viewing in 2D. Your example of people saying "you don't miss anything in 2D" is true. You do, however, miss out on lots of visual detail/clarity and screen brightness in 3D. As for the added immersive qualities of 3D, it's not there yet. For now, it's definitely just a novelty.

    I'll wait until Avatar before judging the format completely, but I'm pretty sure I'll be sticking with 2D and their cheaper ticket prices regardless of how I feel about that movie's use of the format.
  • BrendonConnelly
    I'm lucky that I get to see 3D on a properly silvered screen so there's no loss of detail, clarity or brightness. It's just a simple tech issue and can be fixed quickly.
blog comments powered by Disqus