In one way we can blame James Cameron for the 3D debacle has descended into cinemas. One wonders if Avatar wasn’t the highest grossing movie of all time would 3D have exploded? And explode quite literally it did…in more ways than one. What you can’t blame Cameron for is the dodgy 2D to 3D conversions alongside shoddily shot movies.
And while 3D may be victim of Cameron’s success, the director who always seems to adopt a no bullshit rule has spoken out saying "[It's] one thing [to shoot] in 3D and another to convert to 3D," he said at the Tag DF art, design and technology conference. "Studios were simply trying "to make money," he added, by "pushing 3D to directors who are not comfortable or do not like 3D".Cameron continued: "Man of Steel, Iron Man 3 and all those movies should not necessarily be in 3D. If you spend $150m on visual effects, the film is already going to be spectacular, perfect."
With the BBC recently dropping their 3D commitments and the amount of 3D movies being released being down on last year, one wonders how much is left in the 3D pony? I’ll be honest, I’m not the biggest fan of 3D anymore. Yes I love the gimmicks of stuff coming at you and especially love the whole depth and immersion factor, but no doubt many people, like me, felt ripped off time and time again with sub standard shite in cinemas. And the cinemas themselves are part of the equation here too. Many of them offer a poor 3D experience, with 3D projectors running below par to save bulb life and a cinema going experience that is more akin to looking at a movie through thick fog than anything else!
And while 3D may be victim of Cameron’s success, the director who always seems to adopt a no bullshit rule has spoken out saying "[It's] one thing [to shoot] in 3D and another to convert to 3D," he said at the Tag DF art, design and technology conference. "Studios were simply trying "to make money," he added, by "pushing 3D to directors who are not comfortable or do not like 3D".Cameron continued: "Man of Steel, Iron Man 3 and all those movies should not necessarily be in 3D. If you spend $150m on visual effects, the film is already going to be spectacular, perfect."
With the BBC recently dropping their 3D commitments and the amount of 3D movies being released being down on last year, one wonders how much is left in the 3D pony? I’ll be honest, I’m not the biggest fan of 3D anymore. Yes I love the gimmicks of stuff coming at you and especially love the whole depth and immersion factor, but no doubt many people, like me, felt ripped off time and time again with sub standard shite in cinemas. And the cinemas themselves are part of the equation here too. Many of them offer a poor 3D experience, with 3D projectors running below par to save bulb life and a cinema going experience that is more akin to looking at a movie through thick fog than anything else!
