3D Films – For: 3D enhances the depth perception of film and it’s this that creates the experience of the action, which makes film more enjoyable. In 2009’s The Christmas Carol, Scrooge has been shrunk and is being chased around London by a carriage. In 3D, the audience feels the tension of the scene, which adds to the excitement for children. For the adults, there is the almost breath taking depiction of the London skyline. The audience is astounded by an animation, which has captured the character of London almost perfectly.
3D allows the filmmaker more scope and more investigating in how to tell the story. It allows for the beauty to be captured in things almost unexplainable in 2D. The numerous death scenes in The Final Destination seam almost astoundingly poetic, even if it is disturbing!
The audience for film has become more demanding and with the evolution of image, this pushes the audience further into wanting to see something more stimulating which 3D provides.
And anyway, Avatar. Enough Said.
Emma Breward
Against: The last thing I want when I go to the cinema is something flying out the screen and giving me a heart attack, not to mention wearing ridiculous glasses that would make Elton John look fashion-forward (not quite on the same level but nevertheless scarring). Now, I must admit 3D has calmed down and as seen in Avatar can be used to create fascinating depth and scope, but I am still scarred by the gimmicks used in earlier 3D films such as Journey to the Centre of the Earth where tape measurers, bugs and pretty much anything with motion was used to scare the audience into thinking it was a good film … which it wasn’t. It’s hard to look past the gimmicks in such films and even in non-gimmicky films such as Alice in Wonderland, one word is always in my mind – unnecessary. The films would be just as good without the use of 3D technology and they ask for more than they give; they ask you to pay more for the ticket and to pay for a pair of glasses that you are bound to forget the next time you need them. All you end up with is more pairs of 3D glasses than limbs and digits, and a niggling sense of disappointment. Yes, Avatar has shown us 3D can be visually stunning but still I always leave with that one word in my mind – unnecessary.
Becky Elizabeth Wojturska
For: It’s not hard to see why people are so sceptical of 3D. Clunky glasses and the gimmicky use of things flying out of the screen at you seem more like fairground distractions than the dawn of a new age of cinema. However, slowly but surely, things are beginning to change. Avatar and Up are two examples of films that utilise 3D technology in far more effective ways. In Avatar for instance, none of Pandora’s ferocious creatures leap off the screen and into the audience’s faces. Instead, 3D is used to create an unrivalled sense of depth and scope. The effect is subtle but the results are breathtaking. Now Avatar and Up still look fantastic in 2D and would be great films even without cutting edge special effects. However 3D definitely adds a certain magic to the experience and makes these fantastical worlds seem that little bit more tangible. For that, the glasses are small price to pay.
Kane Basterrechea
Against: It’s official: 3D movies are Hollywood’s new plaything. First there was Up, Pixar and DreamWorks imaginative story of discovery, then of course the big blue abyss that is the groundbreaking Avatar, and inevitably Tim Burton’s new gothic fantasy Alice in Wonderland got the three dimensional treatment. All three films are achievements in their own right, with or without 3D; and that is precisely the point I’m making. By creating and marketing a film in 3D takes some of the magic and attention away from the storylines; do you really think that the Disney film G-Force (about ninja guinea pigs) would have enthralled audiences in on the narrative alone or that the 3D aspect helped? 3D films are allowing more and more projects to become gimmicky. For example, when the idea for Clash of the Titans was conceptualised there was no mention of making it three dimensional. It was only when the film was finished that the big powers behind it saw the cash cow that is Avatar and decided to bank in on the success. And what was the difference? Ticket prices are raised by £2.10 and you get to see Sam Worthington (Avatar, Clash of the Titans) once again brandish a weapon but in high definition. Please don’t think I have a personal vendetta against 3D, because in fact I think it compliments certain films. But the fact remains that 3D technology is inevitably going to be over-used, over-applied and over-distracting for most projects. Would you rather be fuzzy eyed and disappointed or in focus and engrossed?
Sophie Birkin
Tags: 3d, alice in wonderland, avatar, technology
