The question is, is 3D another form of enhancing the viewers watching pleasure like awesome lighting, or is it just a gimmick to pull more probes to watch their movie than normally would? I, of course, believe that 3D is pure probe, plain and simple, and that all it enhances is the weight of the movie makers', and 3D glasses makers' wallets. 3D in no way has the ability to add anything to the actual story. 3D did nothing to the story for Harry Potter, bad example because there really was no story to add anything anyways. But when I was watching Potter I did not feel like the 3D made the movie or did anything more than the normal movie would. And the biggest example to prove my point that 3D is just a gimmick is when you watch a movie that was made for 3D in 2D and you can tell when things jump out at you. Like in Beowulf with the spear, or any other object coming out at you for no reason what so ever. These moments in the movie are only put in the as 3D gimmicks. To do what 3D does best, make the viewer jump out of her or his seat. It adds nothing and will never add anything to movies. It just makes whatever is there worst.
I would be fine with 3D if it was like ten years ago and 3D was not that big and was just pure gimmick and that was the point. But now we have people making movie just for that 3D and when we make movies just for 3D we lose the most important part of the movie, the story. This is the future of cinema. Give it no less than ten years and we will have a movie named BLOOD in 3D and HOLY SHIT MOMENTS in 3D. There will be no story, no meaning, no point. It will just be an hour and a half of just in your face action screens and sexual intercourse. Don't get me wrong, it will look good, I mean, damn good. I mean, you will feel like you are right there in the car during the race for no reason, or in between the two hot sweaty bodies as they go at it. But whats the point? Why do you want to view any of that if there is no story being told?
No comments:
Post a Comment