James Pringle

Despite my continued silent revolt against it, it seems that every sector of the entertainment industry is trying to force 3D television and movies down our throats. There have already been numerous 3D movies released and James Cameron’s probable 3D “blockbuster” “Avatar”, some say, will pave the way for mainstream 3D cinema. In the next few years it seems all the major television studios and electronics companies will try to push their 3D programs and 3D equipped devices. It seems, if nothing else, that the attempt of the injection of 3D into our lives is inevitable.

So what’s the problem with that? Doesn’t 3D entertainment bring a whole new element and dimension into our viewing experiences? Doesn’t it have the possibility to breathe new life into our older, favorite films and television series? Doesn’t it hold the possiblity of rekindling the audience’s love for the movie-going experience?

In short: yes, it does.

The problem is the reason behind it. The push toward 3D is nothing more than a gimmick to get people to buy movie tickets and watch more commercials. As with everything in this country (and the world basically) it’s all about money. “But I believe in capitalism”, you say, “what’s wrong with that?” What’s wrong is that the 3D gimmick is not “billed” as a gimmick. It’s billed as something that is going to change the viewing landscape forever (which it might) and that’s how they’re trying to push it and ultimately sell it. It’s being touted as if you could just put the characters “3D” on the end of anything and it will automatically be better than if that same piece of media didn’t have 3D attached to it. Having any title followed by 3D means basically nothing.

The 3D suffix holds no real meaning because it’s irrelevant to whether the movie or television show will be enjoyable, unless you’re entertained merely by bright, flashing lights and fast moving 3D objects. If you are between the ages of 2-5 this might be enough, but most of the viewing audience for this “platform” is not made up of toddlers (they would never keep the glasses on anyway).

Movies today (and television for that matter) really only need one thing to be labeled “good” or “bad”, “enjoyable” or “torturous”: a good story! It’s really as simple as that. When the story is good it renders most of the other cinema additives as moot. When a story is well written and constructed people will even forgive many of the films other short-comings: bad acting, bad lighting, bad special effects, editing mistakes, film stock, color or black and white, etc., you name it. If the story is good then we can be a very forgiving people. What’s more is that if we relate to and enjoy a film we are that much more inclined to purchase it.

It seems after all these years Hollywood still doesn’t understand this. Instead they see a film as a cake in which it doesn’t matter what’s inside or how good it tastes. They think what really matters is how much icing and decorations you put on top of it. The few of us who still go to the cinema don’t even expect a good piece of cake anymore. We expect that the frosting and the decorations will be really good and that’s enough for us. We have unfortunately accepted this standard. The gimmick of 3D is nothing more than another fancy, sugar-coated decoration on the cake. It might taste good for a second or two, but in the end it’s still a bad tasting piece of cake, and when the time comes to buy that piece of cake on DVD we will remember what a bad after-taste it left in our mouths.

This isn’t to say that all those things; acting, special effects, lighting, and even 3D aren’t important enough to matter. They can matter and they can add an extra dimension to the movie experience, but it will only work if the underlying story is well written. Without that you have nothing more than an empty shell that will not hold up with time.

As with any artistic medium you have a huge library of techniques to utilize in order to enhance the piece, but you have to know when to use something and when not to use it. Making everything in 3D is like painting all oil paintings in red because it’s a loud color. Appropriateness and subtly is the key. 3D in the hands of the struggling movie and television industries is not something in which I feel confident that the technique will be used effectively.

The movie industry spends tons of hours and dollars trying to fight to keep their profits high. They openly try to fight the pirating community claiming that they are to blame for huge losses at the box office and in home rentals and DVD sales. There’s really nothing wrong with that. It is their product. But, on top of this, they scramble to try and figure out why their margins are down, and despite all their brain power working together it seems they still haven’t figured it out. So, they’re lost.

Along comes the second-coming of Christ: “3D”. Some industry big wig is shown some prototypical 3D feature and is sold on the idea that this 3D gimmick is what will save their industry. He (or she) stands up and declares all minions tally-forth to rollout 3D features across the nation.

So, for all of us that actually do enjoy a good piece of cake, we sit back and wait to see if this “3D thing” will either fade away as it once did, or if it will shine on into the future. I can’t help but think I’m not the only one who watches with some hesitation as more candy-coated garbage gets in the way of good storytelling.

Fingers crossed.