Monday, April 5, 2010

3-D v. 2-D

So... the 3-D on Clash of the Titans sucks. Apparently. You couldn't pay me to see it in 3-D. I actually wouldn't mind seeing it in 2-D (giant fucking scorpions! Release the giant fucking scorpions!) BUT - I am adamantly opposed to this half-assed conversion of blockbusters at the last minute to pull in extra money from 3-D screenings. Should you see Avatar or Coraline in 3-D? Absolutely. Those were filmed with special 3-D cameras and set up to be filmed in 3-D. Alice in Wonderland? No way. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows? NO. Post-production 3-D. How to Train Your Dragon? Yes - made for 3-D. A converted Voyage of the Dawn Treader? Well, you get the idea.

Michael Bay has said he is refusing to do Transformers 3 in 3-D. I never thought I'd say this, but mad props to him. (Now, could you make better movies in 2-D?) When studios insist on poor, last-second 3-D conversion, they are only hurting themselves. Audiences will eventually stop shelling out for such awful product and using 3-D as a legitimate film-making tool will halt.

More: Clash of the Titans director thinks it looks like crap

The debate rages on

The NYTimes take

Ah, hope

The real problem here is that it gets to the point where the movie-goer has to research their films to figure out the best format in which to see something. This applies not only to 3-D, but to IMAX as well. Something like the Dark Knight which had sequences shot specifically for IMAX should be seen on an IMAX screen, but if it's just the regular movie projected slightly larger? Why shell out more when it won't be much different from your local multiplex. One article I read actually suggested that any film converted to 3-D should be labeled as "converted" on marketing materials or else it would run the risk of false advertising.

On a separate note (well, he mentions commerce winning out over creativity or artistic vision): the hilarious review of Attack of the Clones. More pizza rolls!

An interesting look at Inception (non-spoilerish)

Oh, good. Another time-waster.

No comments: