Oh 3D movies, how you’re so deservedly hated by moviegoers. Let us count down the reasons why. But first, this article isn’t trying to convince anyone that everyone hates 3D movies. It’s just meant to point out the many reasons why 3D movies should be stomped out in the mainstream and be kept from becoming any more of a fad than they already are.
It really does seem like every movie coming out these days is in “spectacular 3D!” While some films admittedly should be in 3D, it’s becoming less of an “event” type of technique and becoming the norm. This will do nothing but make the fun and spectacle of 3D films seem boring and trendy.
Now, let’s begin counting down the list of reasons that 3D films are so lame. There are so many this will definitely not include them all. Where to begin? Where to begin?
Post-production transfers to 3D for films is definitely one of the top reasons for hating 3D. This is a definite sign of trying to jump on a bandwagon to make a quick buck. A perfect example of this is the absolutely wretched transfer to 3D of “Clash of the Titans.” What a cluttered mess of a film. Half the time in the action sequences you can’t even tell what’s going on or who’s doing it. It also seems like you get a shallower depth between layers when movies are transferred to 3D after the fact.
3D appears to be a crutch for sub-par films to pull in more moviegoers. The attitude seems to be that if the story and direction is crap, then “let’s make it in 3D” so it’s worth seeing for some reason. An example of this would be the countless number of children’s animated films coming out in “wonderful 3D!”
It seems like 3D is a hypnotic distraction. A lot of times when I’ve been watching a 3D film, I have a hard time following the storyline because the viewing experience becomes more visual and less intellectual. That’s probably one of the reasons why brainless fourth-rate cinema is being pushed out in 3D.
3D is obviously another way to squeeze more money out of moviegoers. When purchasing tickets to a 3D movie there’s always a $3 to $4.00 surcharge for the glasses. That wouldn’t be so bad if after you paid the money for the glasses you got to keep them to re-use later but they expect and sometimes actually guilt you into “recycling” the glasses. Why should we give back something we paid for so that the theater can turn around and charge someone else for them again? Very lame. I’d like tot hear what would happen if someone tried to buy a ticket without the glasses and told the clerk at the booth you brought your own. Anyone tried that?
There’s nothing wrong with a 3D movie that has a reason for existence. The perfect example of this would be an event film like “Avatar.” I mean, let’s be honest. If you watch “Avatar” in 2D, it’s just another lame preachy environmental / political flick with really nothing new to offer us that we haven’t seen before. I guess that kind of goes against my rules but I do give James Cameron props where they are due. He really is the guy that pushed the technology of 3D to the next level so he deserves at least one 3D “spectacle” before being criticized. He’s also to blame for launching us into an era of lazy film-making and screenwriting because the movie viewing experience has become nothing more than a blur of image-popping eye-candy.