Diet Coke 3D
By
Sergio, on March 17th, 2010
With all this 3D movie craziness going around, since studios believe it’s going to be the savior of Hollywood (HINT: making good movies will be the savior of Hollywood), I’m already hearing negative things from hard core film buffs that it’s a temporary fad, lasting as long as Hollywood’s last great craze for 3D movies, back during the early 50’s, which started around 1953, and quickly died out a year and half year. Studios got so burned by the 3D craze back then that, in the end, they started releasing films originally shot in 3D like Alfred Hitchcock’s Dial M for Murder and the MGM musical Kiss Me Kate, “flat” or 2D, because the fad was stone cold dead and people were tired of it.
Unlike today where studios are rushing to convert 2D movies into 3D. Case in point, which I wrote about on S & A a few months ago, is Warner Bros’ Clash of the Titans, coming out April 2, which the studio decided at the last minute to convert the action sequences into 3D. However, this has caused problems, namely, a crappy looking 3D film since you can’t truly get the same 3 dimensional effects from a film that was originally conceived and shot in 2D. No wonder Tim Burton’s Alice In Wonderland is unimpressive in 3D since it was shot 2D, and converted into 3D, when the studios decided to ride on Avatar’s coattails. But getting back to Clash and its problems. According to Obsessedwithfilm.com
Apparently they’ve had 100s of Indian SFX sub-contractors working round the clock to 3D it. The SFX teams that did the primary effects aren’t overly pleased.
This message needs to be delivered to the masses who will be unsuspecting. They will see 3-D and expect an Avatar-like experience every time they lay down their extra few quid/dollars but it’s just not going to happen with post-converted tinkering.
Everyone knows and expects by now that Clash will be the Diet Coke of 3-D. This is common knowledge. Any movie that is shot in 2-D and later post-converted into 3-D is an inferior product and just won’t have the same effect on the eyeballs as films shot with 3-D cameras.
Doesn’t sound good at all does it? And by the way, if you’re anxious to see the film, do yourself a favor and watch the original 1981 version Clash with special effects by the master Ray Harryhausen. I admit it’s definitely not the greatest and may look quaint to you when compared to all this CGI stuff, but it’s still fun.
I loved the original “Clash Of The Titans” when I was a kid, even with its less-than impressive visual effects. And I’d say that the original was fun, as you state, because the story was engaging! The reliance wasn’t on CG, 3D or other visual gimmicks to enhance the story, as seems to be the case currently – taking mediocre, tedious movies, and converting them to 3D. The effects enhanced the story, they weren’t the story.
Yeah, I think all this 3D excitement will quickly fade, especially if Hollywood keeps making the same mostly shitty movies. 3D won’t save the industry. At the end of the day, story matters most.
Moms took me to see it in the theater when it came out. I was like eight.The scene with when Perseus kills Medusa gave me nightmares for years.