Working at a movie theater, I've had a few customers ask when we're installing 3-D projectors. The answer is "probably never." When they ask why not, I tell them that it's a fad, which I truly believe. It's just the current iteration of Hollywood trying to give you a reason to go to the theater, and right now it's working. But it's not going to last. It never has before. At the advent of television, they brought out Smell-O-Vision, the Thriller and...3-D. And then in the 70s, as home video rental emerged, they brought out...3-D. Now that the home theater is so popular, and movie rentals are so cheap (not at Blockbuster, but that's another dying breed), they're feeling a little bit pinched and desperate. Save us, James Cameron!
Roger Ebert has a well-reasoned, intelligent rant over at Newsweek on the current version of 3-D. Definitely check it out. Here's a preview:
"3-D is a waste of a perfectly good dimension. Hollywood's current crazy stampede toward it is suicidal. It adds nothing essential to the moviegoing experience. For some, it is an annoying distraction. For others, it creates nausea and headaches. It is driven largely to sell expensive projection equipment and add a $5 to $7.50 surcharge on already expensive movie tickets. Its image is noticeably darker than standard 2-D. It is unsuitable for grown-up films of any seriousness. It limits the freedom of directors to make films as they choose. For moviegoers in the PG-13 and R ranges, it only rarely provides an experience worth paying a premium for."
1 comment:
yea i mean they're getting better at it, but its still kinda meh. i liked avatar in 3D a lot, but everything else i saw in 3D seemed gimmicky after 15 minutes.
Post a Comment