A Reel Opinion: The 3D Craze

With the third installment of Disney/Pixars TOY STORY franchise being offered in 3D, even more attention is being drawn to the latest trend in the movies. The questions surrounding 3D in this age are many: Is it worth the price of the overinflated ticket? Is it an art, or just flash? Does it add to the film, or detract from it? The debate is endless.

3D film has been around in one form another since the 1890’s, and really found a home in 1950’s and 1980’s with B-level movies. It was a gimmick; a flashy firework that had audiences ducking for cover as items seemed to come flying out of the screen at them.

What separates 3D Today from the 3D of Yesterday, is that filmmakers have taken 3D to the opposite direction; instead of things coming out at you (which they still do), they chose to use the technique to present massive depth of field. James Cameron’s AVATAR nailed this perfectly; the scene in the spaceship in the sleeping chamber had a corridor that seemed like it stretched out of the theatre and into the street.

Other films have done an okay job at the new technique as well. Robert Zemeckis’ BEOWULF and to a lesser extent, A CHRISTMAS CAROL, had eye-popping fly-arounds which offered great depth and perspective, while still throwing an object or two out into our laps.

Tim Burton’s ALICE IN WONDERLAND, as of this writing, is the most financially successful film of 2010, despite dismal reviews from critics everywhere. This blogger chose not to view the film in 3D, as I was determined on making a judgment on the film on its storytelling merits, without being wowed by teacups landing in my lap. I chose wisely. It’s not out of the question to be wowed by a film in 3D, only to purchase the DVD three months later and say “so what’s the big deal?”.

The gimmick of 3D fails miserably when it is applied in post-production to films that were not meant to be presented is such a way. This year’s CLASH OF THE TITANS suffered from this most, as the 3D picture was muddled and awful. Burton also fell for this, as his NIGHTMARE BEFORE CHRISTMAS comes across as barely visible on screen. Rumor has it Cameron and his pal George Lucas are also falling into this trap, as TITANIC and STAR WARS may be being prepped for 3D releases.

What it comes down to is: does 3D offer substance, or just flash? It depends on the execution. The massive depth and perception the technique can offer is indeed awesome to see. Filmmakers need to be careful to not let that imagery get in the way of their storytelling. AVATAR and BEOWULF are still great watches at home on (glorious) Blu-ray, as will be TOY STORY 3, I’m sure. These films were put together on-set with foreground, middle-ground, and background in mind. That sort of approach makes it an art and can add to your story. I’m a fan of 3D when it works. Because when it does, it’s important to the story. When it doesn’t, it’s just ribbons and lace around a turd.

This blogger will make it a point to view any film in 2D first, as the story must take priority over spectacle. If the story holds up, then hand me the glasses on the 2nd viewing.

Until STAR WARS comes out.

What say you?