Posted on Wednesday, January 13th, 2010 by Brendon Connelly
I’ll probably be waiting a long time to hear that Ken Loach or Joe Swanberg is looking into 3D for their next production, but it seems that stereography really has caught on with franchise-type pictures, genre films and so on. Over the last few weeks there’s been explicit discussion of an ‘Avatar effect’, a redoubled interest in the form from the studios looking, jaws dead on the floor, at the box-office receipts for Cameron’s latest.
Is this perceived effect real? It seems it will be, and I’m sure that seems to be no surprise if you think of Hollywood as cash grabbing. But is it really the money men driving the decision to go 3D? Might it not be the creatives?
Bryan Singer has reportedly requested New Line allow his next picture Jack the Giant Killer be shot in 3D. The discussion is apparently still ongoing. It’s the pen hovering over the checkbook that’s hesitating here, not the artist.
The New York Times say that their sources spoke “on condition of anonymity because of studio policy”. When it comes to Paramount, however, they are able to cite Katie Martin Kelley directly. She says that the final decision on whether or not Transformers 3 and/or Star Trek 2 will be shot in 3D had been made. Here’s the fullest statement on Trek given in the article:
Paramount executives have already begun debating whether to shoot the next film in 3-D, even if that increases the cost and production difficulty, according to one person who was briefed on the talks.
I reported yesterday that the debate over stereography for Transformers 3 was still ongoing. It seems to be that Michael Bay has already said he doesn’t like 3D and is now sticking to his guns, whether or not he’s changed his mind at all. My money is on him losing the fight and issuing some sort of back-pedal statement on his official site – and before long too.