Hamilton Herald Masthead

Editorial


Front Page - Friday, April 16, 2010

The Critic's Corner




I’ve always wanted to write one of those “For Dummies” books, and now I have a topic: “How to Not Ruin 3D Movies For Dummies.” My idea might not fly with the publishers of the series, though, because the readership would be limited to the blockheads in Hollywood who are going to ruin a good thing.
Until recently, there was no reason to see a 3D film. Not only did the flimsy red and blue glasses cramp your style on date night, but using them to watch a movie was analogous to crossing your eyes while looking through a murky fog. While you were able to watch a 3D film in standard 2D if you covered one of your
eyes, more often than not, you wanted to cover both of them because the rest of the movie was just as bad.
That changed with “Avatar.” Not only did James Cameron develop new 3D technology specifically for his science fiction epic, he shot and edited the movie to maximize the experience of seeing it in three-dimensions: Shots last longer to give viewers time to adjust to changes in the depth of field; the camera moves slowly, with none of the herky jerky whipping around that’s become prevalent in action films; and the sets enhance the 3D experience.
Even before “Avatar,” Pixar had already figured out the right way to use 3D. “Up,” for example, contains a scene in which the protagonist feels as though the world is closing in on him – his wife has died, the bank is about to evict him and he doesn’t have anyone to whom he can turn. To emphasize their point, the creators of the movie show the old man slumped over in a small room. If they’d enlarged the space to show off the 3D, they would’ve failed to convey the idea behind the scene.
When “Avatar” grossed over $2.5 billion, Hollywood began to scramble. Now, I don’t blame anyone for trying to cash in on a good idea; however, I do have a problem with a studio rushing an inferior product to market in order to make a quick buck off of unsuspecting viewers.
Enter “Clash of the Titans,” a new action epic that opened in 3D on April 2. I intended this week’s column to be a review of that film, but the eyestrain and nausea I experienced while watching the movie kept me from enjoying the story and the visuals, both of which look promising in the trailers.
The 3D in “Titans” is horrendous, primarily because its creators never intended the film to be seen in three dimensions. Rather than using 3D equipment to make the movie, like Cameron did with “Avatar,” Warner Bros. used a postproduction process that turns a traditional 2D film into a 3D movie.
Disney did the same thing with “Alice in Wonderland,” but the studio decided to use the process in advance of filming, allowing director Tim Burton to shoot and edit the movie appropriately. Warner Bros. decided to convert “Titans” after the film was already in the can. Not only that, they reached this decision in January, giving them only eight weeks to pull off the conversion.
The resulting movie commits a vicious ocular assault on viewers. Hair appears to float several feet behind the head to which it’s attached, mountains and trees morph inexplicably and characters are sometimes framed by a double of themselves. Not only that, the shots are too brief to allow one’s eyes to adjust and see the 3D effect. There’s not one shot in “Titans” that makes it worth paying an extra 50 percent to see it in three dimensions.
Audiences were unaware Warner Bros. had duped them, however, and shelled out $64 million dollars to see “Titan” during its opening weekend, with most of the revenues coming from 3D ticket sales. (Some theaters are also showing the 2D version.)
This is only going to encourage more bad behavior from Hollywood. Indeed, the Majestic in Chattanooga previewed several 3D films before showing “Titans,” with some, like “Piranha 3D,” looking horrendous. The unfortunate consequence could be that so many bad 3D movies will come out that audiences will wisen up and stop paying to see them altogether, including the good ones.
To keep this from happening, I urge you to do a little research before seeing a 3D film, and see only movies made from the ground up using 3D technology or filmed in 2D with an eye on producing a quality product. If a studio hurries a movie through a clunky post-production process so it can advertise the film as being in 3D, avoid it like the Kraken.
Email David Laprad at dlaprad @hamiltoncountyherald.com.