3-D, or not 3-D, can Avatar answer the question?
3-D technology in entertainment is hardly new - early use of 3-D in film goes back over a century, and ‘3-D specs’ have been part and parcel of kids entertainment since the 3-D comics of the 1950s.
It never really became more than a passing fad in that decade however, and had a small resurgence in the 1980s.
However our quest for bigger, better, shinier and flashier entertainment goes hand in hand with the invention or progression of newer or better technologies.
After CGI, blue screen effects and motion capture, it was almost inevitable 3-D would make a comeback and become part of the virtual entertainment landscape, once technologies improved enough to carry it successfully to the big screen.
The most eagerly anticipated use of 3-D in film was without doubt James Cameron’s Avatar, which hit the cinemas in December 2009 and I’m certainly not going to be the only one writing or talking about it days, weeks, months, or perhaps even years after its release. In fact movie goers not talking about it or showing 3-Disinterest will be in a minority.
My wife and I managed to catch it just as it was released around the U.K., and the 3-D version led me to 3-Dstinct observations…
First off, is it a genuinely innovative 3-Dvelopment, or a 3-Dtraction?
3-D shouldn’t be that much of an issue for us as a medium as we live in a three dimensional world (maybe even four of five, depends on who you talk to or what science you’re reading). But our systems are programmed for, and used to, reading or watching in two dimensions (from our eyes to paper or ‘flat’ screen). It can be ‘seen’ as uncomfortable or unnatural. Some people simply cannot or will not adjust to it.
For many, it will simply be a gimmick that detracts from the movie you’re watching, who really don’t need to feel that the spear just thrown is heading out the screen towards you.
For others, it will be thrill-a-minute and a true enhancement of the movie itself (or maybe the movie is so lacking in substance or plot that it really needs the 3-D to sell it).
The jury is still out at this relatively early stage and time will tell if it is to be 3-D or not 3-D as regards adding to our toy list that includes iPods, iPhones, Blu-ray DVD players and HD televisual feasts.
Secondly, there is the environment itself, usually a specially designed cinema such as an iMax or a ‘3D ready’ theatre. As much as the cinema complexes can be superb auditoriums complete with comfy seating and digital surround sound, there’s the more usual cinema rip-off just around the corner from you…
We went to our local Odeon cinema to see Avatar and have always felt the Odeon chain doesn't provide enough of a cinematic bang for your buck. We were also unaware of the increased ticket cost (over and above the general pricing) for 3-D films.
There is no reason for this other than to overcharge the paying customer - it’s another example of a charge-what-they-want-because-they-can scenario.
The stock excuses or reasoning that it covers increased on-costs, allows them to provide "a service the customer expects" (a favourite but highly inaccurate statement in my experiences), or helps cover the costs of providing 3-D technology to the particular screen or cinema complex doesn’t wash with me.
These cinemas are being fitted with 3-D compatible screens anyway (to be able to compete with the iMax big boys) and I doubt the Made in China 3-D specs provided cost more than 25p a pair as they spill out of the mass produced production lines.
I understand they are trying to attract Joe Public back to the film theatres, but they would attract a lot more if they priced tickets more fairly, especially at a time when treats such as this are outside the budgets of many families with a number of children.
Keep piracy out of movies? Well, if you charged more reasonably - say a £5 fixed price across the boards - you would probably help do just that, make it more affordable for a vast majority of individuals or families, and bring back more punters and fill more seats.
Huey buys a £7 or even £8 ticket whilst his friend Dewey decides against it... or both buy a £5 ticket? More bums on seats (and Louie might come too if they drop the prices) and an extra few quid in the coffers. It might even mean those people can then afford to buy something at the snack/ sweet kiosks rather than take out a second mortgage because of the obscene pricing. They might even stop bringing their own sweets/ snacks in with them (which is what we do most of the time).
Do the math, boys.
The other glitch with 3-D at the moment is many will have issues initially with the standard 3-D specs supplied for such movies. Anyone wearing spectacles (or needing to wear specs for watching T.V. or movies) can’t comfortably wear both.
A simpler ‘flip over’ set of 3-D lenses that could clip over another pair of spectacles may well be the answer.
But thirdly and most importantly… the film itself.
3-Dsaster, or genuine 3-Dream movie?
Well, as a fan of (well written) science fiction and/ or action adventure movies, it ticked the right boxes for me just based on the initial trailers and it turned out to be so much more than an action/ fantasy call-it-what-you-will film.
It carried not one but two powerful messages - firstly the prediction that 150 years in our future we will have to expand to, or explore, neighbouring worlds.
Not because of our curiosity for discovery and learning but because we have managed to destroy our own planet, or at least used up all the resources (and it has "no green" as mentioned in the movie).
Secondly, and related to that first message, we will see history repeat itself as our 'civilised' human race decide the way to get what we need is to take it - by moving the indigenous dominant species on to pastures new, or their eradication if necessary.
It can’t be lost on anyone that the conflict between the 'Na’vi' (the race populating the planet of 'Pandora') and the military decisions of the humans parallels and portrays the plight of the Native Americans some 150 years in our own past.
The way in which the Na’vi relate and interact with Pandora itself along with the beast, birds and plant life mimics the Native American concepts and culture.
They see and feel the planet having a sentience, which the "sky people" refuse to accept, or simply don’t get.
There are also clear parallels to Dances With Wolves (no bad thing in my book - or movie) and Cameron himself has acknowledged the thematic similarities.
I read some early reviews where comparisons were made to the "Western invasion" of the Middle East, and while I don’t personally make that connection the fact the humans are interested in Pandora for the mineral Unobtainium (a nice touch of wicked humour) is a probable nod to our presence in that area of the world.
My one complaint with the movie is that with so much CGI and special effect work on the Na’vi and Pandora parts of the film (as opposed to the primarily live action filming for the humans/ military base) there was very little cinematic smoothness in the blending of the two aspects. Pandora seemed more like a virtual reality world than a real one. Just my own visual perspective on proceedings.
That personal gripe aside the story, action, direction and pacing were strong enough to make the 160 or so minutes speed past in what seems like half that time, and by half an hour into the movie had forgotten I was watching in 3-D or wearing 3-D spectacles.
And that leads me to the highest compliment I can give to this movie…
For all the hype behind the 3-D and what it can bring visually to the film, this movie didn’t need it. Not for one second.
The 2-D version will do me fine for future viewings.
It stood on it’s own without the three dimensional bells and whistles and James Cameron may also have set a standard here for others to chase…
We have had aliens, terminators, toy stories, dinosaurs, lords, rings, magic and bespectacled young wizards. We have had had science fiction, potential science futures, adult fantasy and children’s fantasy.
But Mr. Cameron has just raised the bar and given us the first, or at least definitive, Science Fantasy.
Or is that 3-Dfinitive Science Fantasy?.
Avatar.
Stonking film.
In any dimension.
Ross Muir
December 2009
3-D technology in entertainment is hardly new - early use of 3-D in film goes back over a century, and ‘3-D specs’ have been part and parcel of kids entertainment since the 3-D comics of the 1950s.
It never really became more than a passing fad in that decade however, and had a small resurgence in the 1980s.
However our quest for bigger, better, shinier and flashier entertainment goes hand in hand with the invention or progression of newer or better technologies.
After CGI, blue screen effects and motion capture, it was almost inevitable 3-D would make a comeback and become part of the virtual entertainment landscape, once technologies improved enough to carry it successfully to the big screen.
The most eagerly anticipated use of 3-D in film was without doubt James Cameron’s Avatar, which hit the cinemas in December 2009 and I’m certainly not going to be the only one writing or talking about it days, weeks, months, or perhaps even years after its release. In fact movie goers not talking about it or showing 3-Disinterest will be in a minority.
My wife and I managed to catch it just as it was released around the U.K., and the 3-D version led me to 3-Dstinct observations…
First off, is it a genuinely innovative 3-Dvelopment, or a 3-Dtraction?
3-D shouldn’t be that much of an issue for us as a medium as we live in a three dimensional world (maybe even four of five, depends on who you talk to or what science you’re reading). But our systems are programmed for, and used to, reading or watching in two dimensions (from our eyes to paper or ‘flat’ screen). It can be ‘seen’ as uncomfortable or unnatural. Some people simply cannot or will not adjust to it.
For many, it will simply be a gimmick that detracts from the movie you’re watching, who really don’t need to feel that the spear just thrown is heading out the screen towards you.
For others, it will be thrill-a-minute and a true enhancement of the movie itself (or maybe the movie is so lacking in substance or plot that it really needs the 3-D to sell it).
The jury is still out at this relatively early stage and time will tell if it is to be 3-D or not 3-D as regards adding to our toy list that includes iPods, iPhones, Blu-ray DVD players and HD televisual feasts.
Secondly, there is the environment itself, usually a specially designed cinema such as an iMax or a ‘3D ready’ theatre. As much as the cinema complexes can be superb auditoriums complete with comfy seating and digital surround sound, there’s the more usual cinema rip-off just around the corner from you…
We went to our local Odeon cinema to see Avatar and have always felt the Odeon chain doesn't provide enough of a cinematic bang for your buck. We were also unaware of the increased ticket cost (over and above the general pricing) for 3-D films.
There is no reason for this other than to overcharge the paying customer - it’s another example of a charge-what-they-want-because-they-can scenario.
The stock excuses or reasoning that it covers increased on-costs, allows them to provide "a service the customer expects" (a favourite but highly inaccurate statement in my experiences), or helps cover the costs of providing 3-D technology to the particular screen or cinema complex doesn’t wash with me.
These cinemas are being fitted with 3-D compatible screens anyway (to be able to compete with the iMax big boys) and I doubt the Made in China 3-D specs provided cost more than 25p a pair as they spill out of the mass produced production lines.
I understand they are trying to attract Joe Public back to the film theatres, but they would attract a lot more if they priced tickets more fairly, especially at a time when treats such as this are outside the budgets of many families with a number of children.
Keep piracy out of movies? Well, if you charged more reasonably - say a £5 fixed price across the boards - you would probably help do just that, make it more affordable for a vast majority of individuals or families, and bring back more punters and fill more seats.
Huey buys a £7 or even £8 ticket whilst his friend Dewey decides against it... or both buy a £5 ticket? More bums on seats (and Louie might come too if they drop the prices) and an extra few quid in the coffers. It might even mean those people can then afford to buy something at the snack/ sweet kiosks rather than take out a second mortgage because of the obscene pricing. They might even stop bringing their own sweets/ snacks in with them (which is what we do most of the time).
Do the math, boys.
The other glitch with 3-D at the moment is many will have issues initially with the standard 3-D specs supplied for such movies. Anyone wearing spectacles (or needing to wear specs for watching T.V. or movies) can’t comfortably wear both.
A simpler ‘flip over’ set of 3-D lenses that could clip over another pair of spectacles may well be the answer.
But thirdly and most importantly… the film itself.
3-Dsaster, or genuine 3-Dream movie?
Well, as a fan of (well written) science fiction and/ or action adventure movies, it ticked the right boxes for me just based on the initial trailers and it turned out to be so much more than an action/ fantasy call-it-what-you-will film.
It carried not one but two powerful messages - firstly the prediction that 150 years in our future we will have to expand to, or explore, neighbouring worlds.
Not because of our curiosity for discovery and learning but because we have managed to destroy our own planet, or at least used up all the resources (and it has "no green" as mentioned in the movie).
Secondly, and related to that first message, we will see history repeat itself as our 'civilised' human race decide the way to get what we need is to take it - by moving the indigenous dominant species on to pastures new, or their eradication if necessary.
It can’t be lost on anyone that the conflict between the 'Na’vi' (the race populating the planet of 'Pandora') and the military decisions of the humans parallels and portrays the plight of the Native Americans some 150 years in our own past.
The way in which the Na’vi relate and interact with Pandora itself along with the beast, birds and plant life mimics the Native American concepts and culture.
They see and feel the planet having a sentience, which the "sky people" refuse to accept, or simply don’t get.
There are also clear parallels to Dances With Wolves (no bad thing in my book - or movie) and Cameron himself has acknowledged the thematic similarities.
I read some early reviews where comparisons were made to the "Western invasion" of the Middle East, and while I don’t personally make that connection the fact the humans are interested in Pandora for the mineral Unobtainium (a nice touch of wicked humour) is a probable nod to our presence in that area of the world.
My one complaint with the movie is that with so much CGI and special effect work on the Na’vi and Pandora parts of the film (as opposed to the primarily live action filming for the humans/ military base) there was very little cinematic smoothness in the blending of the two aspects. Pandora seemed more like a virtual reality world than a real one. Just my own visual perspective on proceedings.
That personal gripe aside the story, action, direction and pacing were strong enough to make the 160 or so minutes speed past in what seems like half that time, and by half an hour into the movie had forgotten I was watching in 3-D or wearing 3-D spectacles.
And that leads me to the highest compliment I can give to this movie…
For all the hype behind the 3-D and what it can bring visually to the film, this movie didn’t need it. Not for one second.
The 2-D version will do me fine for future viewings.
It stood on it’s own without the three dimensional bells and whistles and James Cameron may also have set a standard here for others to chase…
We have had aliens, terminators, toy stories, dinosaurs, lords, rings, magic and bespectacled young wizards. We have had had science fiction, potential science futures, adult fantasy and children’s fantasy.
But Mr. Cameron has just raised the bar and given us the first, or at least definitive, Science Fantasy.
Or is that 3-Dfinitive Science Fantasy?.
Avatar.
Stonking film.
In any dimension.
Ross Muir
December 2009
