Since the wide-spread and unprecedented success of Avatar in 2009, 3-D movies have been hitting the market with increased regularity. Banking on the success of this 3-D trend, production companies have started remaking older movies with a 3-D twist.
According to Devin Orgeron, associate professor of film studies, so many movies are being made in 3-D because the movie industry is capitalizing on the audience’s new found interest.
“3-D films are hitting the scene pretty hard right now,” Oregon said. “Harder, in fact, than they did in the 1950s, because the industry has suffered. Home theater technology is more sophisticated than ever, and of course, more common, and 3-D is a way to woo ticket buyers back to the Cineplex.”
The recent push towards re-releasing older 2-D movies in 3-D makes financial sense for movie studios, according to Orgeron.
“While I can’t speak directly to the technology involved, I can say that it is relatively inexpensive to make a born-2-D film 3-D in post-production,” Orgeron said.
Movies like The Lion King and The Green Hornet started off as standard 2-D films and have been subsequently reformatted for 3-D screens, with varying success in quality.
“The results aren’t always visually satisfactory,” Orgeron said. “Dimensionality is tricky, and the disjointedness can be jarring. The Green Hornet, which was an interesting disaster for a number of reasons, is an excellent case in point. Shot traditionally, the film is slightly nauseating because its post-production play at dimensionality is illogical.”
Despite the failures of some 3-D movies, the success of others is still causing moviegoers to hit the stands in droves.
The success of such films is bringing a response from studios. The Lion King was re-released in September last year. The film, originally released in 1994, managed to make over $30 million in its opening week in 3-D. Its popularity with viewers spurred Disney to remake classics like Beauty and the Beast and The Little Mermaid in 3-D as well.
According to Orgeron, remaking these movies in 3-D is part of a strategy movie studios are using for future generations.
“A good number of the films being ‘transformed’ are children’s titles,” Orgeron said. “So the industry is planting a seed. It’s creating, or trying to, a generation of filmgoers that demand 3-D.”
However, Orgeron points out the uncertainty of 3-D in the film industry’s future.
“I wonder how long audiences will delight at thinking they need to brush snow, or dust, or bugs, or rain, or tiny creatures from the future, or tiny creatures from the past off of their shoulders,” Orgeron said.
Andrew Marhefka, senior in environmental technology, said he doesn’t care for 3-D movies.
“It’s a trend that died out in the 80s until some people in Hollywood decided to bring it back in the [the last decade],” Marhefka said. “It’ll probably die out. I don’t think it’s here to stay.”
Marhefka said he thinks the current trend of remaking old 2-D movies into 3-D is just another way for studios to make money.
“There’s no artistic value in it,” Marhefka said. “It’s just a cash-grab.”
Orgeron also pointed out the limited believability of the technology as it is today.
“[A 3-D movie] forces a particular point of view in its effort to create the illusion of dimensionality,” Orgeron said. “And the result, sadly, is that the dimensionality sought after is reduced as a consequence. Natural vision is stymied. Try to look around the frame while watching a 3-D film and you’ll see what I mean. This is not how our eyes work.”
However, with advances in technology, Orgeron says there is still hope for 3-D, though perhaps in a different venue.
“These things evolve, though,” Orgeron said. “My guess is that this technology will improve. And I suspect that its real application will be in gaming, where that sort of immersion, even the forced perspective, is more desirable.”
