Monster Distractions in 3D

Mitsubishi debuts a new line of 3D HDTVs Meanwhile as theaters across North America prepare for another salvo of movies featuring video’s third dimension. At least one studio and movie theater chains are now squabbling over who pays for those plastic glasses handed out before the show. It’s part of the growing pains of the entertainment industry’s latest frontier. But there’s a serious philosophical question that just isn’t part of the dialogue on 3D cinema. Is it really even necessary?

We congratulate ourselves on our technical prowess all the time. We don’t just buy the latest technology we have cults of gizmo-lovers (myself included) who read about them on websites like Engadget.com. It’s just as entertaining to read about clever new technologies as it is to wonder who in the world would actually want something like that. It brings to mind an old philosophical question – just because we can do something, does it mean we should?

It’s clear that 3D movies are in demand. Chief of DreamWorks animation studios, Jeffery Katzenberg hails the Tru3D process used in Monsters vs. Aliens as the future of cinema. Anytime a 3D version of a film competes directly with its 2D counterpart the box office results are always heavily in favor of the visual effect.  And why not! Who wants to see a movie made for 3D with the primary reason for seeing it stripped down into mere two-dimensions?

Fox has caused a stir by saying it won’t fund the 3D glasses given out at showings of its upcoming Ice Age 3: Dawn of Dinosaurs, to be shown in full 3D. As a retort a few leading Cinema chains have said they simply won’t show the film in 3D, including Cinemark, AMC and Regal.

As the price of HDTV has been dropping to affordable levels the next dimension in home entertainment is getting ready. Mitsubishi has just announced a line of 3D-ready TVs for your home theater.

“…the 737 Series (60-, 65-, 73- and 82-inch), 837 Series (65-, 73- and 82-inch) and the standalone 82-inch WD-82737. The big screen crew is completely 3D ready and the whole lot features 120Hz dejudder technology, the firm's exclusive 6-color processor, four HDMI 1.3a sockets and a JADE Activity-based user interface.”

The prices almost sound reasonable if you consider an 82-incher is running for $5,000. But keep in mind these are not flat panel LCD sets as is being widely misunderstood. They’re DLP, a rear projection micro-display technology. The new Mitsubishi sets include 3D-Ready1 technology. So, whenever home-3D cinema gets off the ground you’ll be ready to have Monsters and Aliens jump out at you.

But one nagging question remains – is all this 3D anything more than a distraction? Sure, it’s a cool effect for certain material. I took my son to see Monsters vs. Aliens recently and it was a great time at the movies, although many of the scenes seemed to exist only to support the added visual dimension.

In his review of the most recent 3D film; Monsters vs. Aliens, Roger Ebert said of the visual effect: “Younger moviegoers may think they like it because they've been told to…”.  It might be a harsh judgment for a kid’s film that aims to showcase the effects. But you can certainly see his point that the trend could be worrying if studios believe any film would be enhanced with 3D.

Can 3D become as ubiquitous to cinema as color?

Color truly brought something to film. Sure, we don’t want to see the grayscale classics colorized but overall the addition of color has created a visual feast for the eyes. Can you imagine many of the modern classics without color?

But if you care about film as a media for story-telling, 3D brings almost nothing to the table. Even with the best the technology has to offer, it’s still no more than a side-show thrill.

Color on the other hand, is an important part of our vision. Color was as inevitable an advance as talkies. Without color we miss much of the picture. Shades of grey simply can’t convey the same information as full color film. The same can’t be said for 3D.

Depth perception already exists in 2D movies. We’re capable of seeing perspective in two-dimensional images without a special effect to enhance it. A special effect that makes an on-screen object seem to jump out at you is just not required to tell any portion of a story through the medium of film. Although it can certainly be fun! That 3D fun-factor would utterly destroy many great movies.

Having seen and even enjoyed the remarkable 3D effects available nowadays, I’m left with the conclusion that it’s just a distraction. It’ll always fit for certain titles specifically designed to exploit the effect. But it’s an effect that can never simply fade into the background and let the actors and director tell the story. It’ll always remain the proverbial giant monster in the room, which is fine if you’re watching a movie about giant monsters.