Saturday, July 28, 2012

Non-Cameron 3-D isn't good enough


In April 2009 I witnessed Monsters vs. Aliens, the first movie to be directly produced in a stereoscopic 3-D format instead of being converted into 3-D after completion. It was quite remarkable. I remember reaching out with my hands attempting to touch several “floating” objects – my senses being completely fooled by the technology.

Just before the dawn of a new decade I witnessed the first mainstream modern 3D blockbuster, Avatar which applied this new stereoscopic tech to live action. With one fell swoop James Cameron redefined 3-D as he pioneered the next evolution of computer generated imagery and melded it with the 3-D technology previously reserved for children's animated movies. The care and attention to each and every detail, creature, character and environment was abundantly clear.  Graphically, Avatar was a masterpiece. A triumph of three dimensional projection technology that pushed the boundaries of cinema as we know it.

In the months, nay - years that have followed, we have seen a multitude of examples of movies that have capitalised on this emerging technology. Among those; Resident Evil: AfterlifeUnderworld: Awakening and Prometheus. All of these movies, good or bad have had some extremely impressive set-pieces which took advantage of the extra dimension. However when compared to Avatar, they all sadly lack the same level of three-dimensional detail. The main overriding problem is that that the common 3-D movie throws things out at you, enhances depth and makes obvious vain attempts to surround your perception. It was however only Avatar that truly immersed me in the movie and made me feel like I was practically there inside it.

While I reject the notion of post-processed 3-D movies [with the obvious exception of Star Wars] I felt it was my duty as a progressive patron of both technology and the arts to offer singular unswerving support to true-3-D. After recently evaluating the examples that Hollywood has offered to us since Avatar, culminating with the 'flat' 3-D of The Amazing Spider-Man, I must admit that not a single one has come anywhere near the magic that Cameron wove.

The fact that I would have no issue with sitting down and watching Transformers: Dark of the Moon or Tron: Legacy and the like on my 2-D TV but could never watch Avatar [itself a 5-Star movie] in 2-D speaks not about the quality of Avatar but the lack of necessity to need only to witness the 3-D of the other movies. I feel no great overriding need to see these movies again in 3-D but I could never watch Avatar in 2-D.

I must therefore publicly declare, my withdrawal of total support for three-dimensional cinematic presentations and reduce support to a provisional basis which covers only the following instances:
(A) Movies which must be seen but have no 2-D presentation such as Underworld:Awakening, (B) 3-D conversions of religious imagery [the Star Wars saga], (C) Avatar 2 and all subsequent creations of James Cameron, (D) any presentation for which like-minded individuals explicitly request that it be viewed in 3-D and (E) force mejure.

This declaration will remain in effect from the date below, until such time as Hollywood begins to adopt the standards and practices employed by James Cameron and create visual imagery at least to 75% of the standard that he set in 2009.

Signed: Colonel "Whopper" Creedon, Mahon Point Omniplex, July 7th 2012

1 comment:

The Whitehouse said...

hear, hear, I agree whole-heartedley