The lights lower and the buzz of excited voices grow still and quiet. The smell of salt and butter fill the room, and the sounds of plastic wrappers crinkle as people dig into their tasty snacks echo in the silence. Then the large screen begins to throw colored light around the room, illuminating the expressions of the faces in the crowd. A deep voice swells from the speakers, “This winter witness a story never before told….” Tingles go through the crowd as they lean in to one another and exclaim how they don’t want to miss the up and coming film. Then the impressive preview ends with a thud as the voice over finishes, “this remarkable journey will sweep you off your feet in incredible 3D.” The crowd groans, “just what we need, another 3D movie!” The crowd sits and endures the next 4 of 6 previews that have this same effect.
It seems the once exciting and special treat of 3D has become the thorn in the flesh in the movie goer’s side in the year 2010. Many of us might be able to look past the high boost in 3D ticket charges if the 3D experience was truly 3D; and actually made us feel the experience was worthy of our money. But sadly most of these “3D” films turn out to be nothing more then 2D films slightly raised off the screen with the occasional gag of a cup or ball hurling into the crowd. This resulting in nothing more than burn holes in your pockets, sore eyes and a headache.
The problem with most modern 3D films is that they are not filmed with a 3D camera and are instead filmed with a regular cinema camera and then made into 3D after the fact. This allows producers to show their films on both a 3D and 2D platform gaining a larger audience and the extra money from the 3D fees. Not filming with a 3D camera also rakes in the cash for producers as it saves them the money of avoiding filming with the expensive equipment.
After box office hits like Avatar 3D we have seen an explosion of 3D at the cinema. All the movie companies vying for their piece of the 3D treasure pot. And from a logical point of view who can blame them? 3D = large crowds and lots of money. But the producers have taken the 3D phenomenon a step to far. Their need to create Box Office hits and justify higher ticket prices has gotten to the point of desperation.
A 3D camera films several different images from different perspectives and by compiling them, the movie goer experiences the film as if they were actually standing in the scene of the movie with the characters. But what defines 3D as true 3D? Well to put it simply there are three axis to dimension, hence the name 3D. “X” is all the depth behind a subject, “Z” all the depth in front of a subject and “Y” is all the depth or vision from either side of the subject. (So looking at the diagram below, if “O” is the character in a movie, “Y” would be everything from the right and left of him or her, “X” would be everything behind him or her and “Z” would be everything in front.) In essence it is creating a simulated perspective of real life. It is because of this that when a subject throws a punch, or an object comes hurling out at the audience, the fist or the object has moved in front of the subject (into the “Z” axis) and therefore interacts with the audience as would be the case in real life. This is what makes 3D so magical. The crowd becomes immersed in the film and can experience the depth of mountains far away or can feel the danger of arrows hurling through the sky straight at them.
Sadly modern 3D is not as effective. The mass majority of films now being shown in cinemas are filmed with regular 2D, or cinema cameras. These cameras only capture the “X” and “Y” axis of a picture. There is a sense of distance for far away objects, and the normal 3D depth of human beings and every day objects. But the difference is best explained in an analogy. 2D is like looking at a photograph. Proper 3D is like being where that photograph was taken. The mountains have not moved any further away, and the arrows are not any closer that they were in the picture; but once you add the “Z” axis then you are in the middle of the scene. This allows you to feel the proper proportions and realize how far things are away or how close they are; making objects seem closer or father away than they would seem in 2D. Phony 3D, uses 2D footage and brings it into the studio and then attempts to separate the “X” axis from the Y” axis and then layer them in normal 3D fashion therefore attempting to create a “Z” axis that does not really exist in their footage. This of course results in that eye straining effect where the image seems to be slightly raised off the screen. Producers know this won’t satisfy, so they digitally add proper 3D effects for that occasional gag of the cup or ball flinging into the crowd.
But why stop here? While Producers are certainly not shy to turn any 2D movie they make into 3D, know that this will not satisfy some moviegoers. In an attempt to rake in the cash and appease everyone, moviemakers produce another kind of 3D film, more authentic, but sadly short cuts are taken here too. Like I said earlier, 3D filming is very, very expensive. So many of the exclusively 3D films being shown are filmed partly with 3D cameras and partly with 2D cameras with the effects laid over them as mentioned above for 2D filming. The effect is much more crowd-pleasing and produces a cost effective result. While I am not a fan of this tactic, it is far better than the former option of filming a movie in its entirety in 2D to create a 3D movie.
But this absurd trend does not stop with Movie companies; the home entertainment market is now vying for their slice of the 3D pie. These 3D TV’s cost anywhere from £2,300 to over £4,000 just for the TV. The 3D glasses have to be charged for several hours after use and cost a whopping £99.99. All of this so that you can watch the one or two expensive channels provided that are more than likely just regular 2D TV reproduced to look like 3D.
Some might argue that 3D TV is not a marketing ploy to take advantage of those swept up in the 3D fad, but the next step in the development of high definition. I say that 3D could very well be the next step, but as long as film and Commercial TV companies continue to wrap the same old present (2D) with a new bow (3D) it will remain nothing but a gag to increase entertainment profits.
The entertainment business needs to decide what bandwagon they want to get on. If they want to be a part of technology advancement then they need to go for it and produce real 3D films and TV programs for the consumer. If they could care less about technology and innovation then they need to stop trying to stuff this phony 3D garbage down our throats. The cinema is supposed to be a place where you escape commercial TV and embark on an experience that only a cinema can provide. Sadly these fake 3D films are just another item on the long list of things that cinema is doing to kill the whole affair.
Theaters will ride this ludicrous faze out until there is nothing left. But for the moviegoer, who does not want to have a headache or feel the disappointment of a badly attempted 3D film, there are clues to help prevent this. The biggest thing is to look around and see if the film you want to see is available anywhere in 2D. If a film is available in 2D then this is your first red flag. The next thing to do is to look it up online. More than likely there will be information telling viewers if a film was filmed partly in 3D or not at all. Then lastly, it is really up to you if you want to take the chance that the money you are spending is worth the experience.
I for one will be happy when the day comes that I can sit down in the theater and watch the trailers and not see the initials 3D flash across the screen once.
"My belief is that no movie, nothing in life, leaves people neutral. You either leave them up or you leave them down."
-David Puttnam-
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sources:
No comments:
Post a Comment