It’sbeen less than a year since “Avatar,” the 3-D experience that supposedly transformed movies, became a runaway success, but the James Cameron film’s box office draw rapidly changed how Hollywood releases its films.
Now, instead of an occasional release, more often than not, studios have chosen to convert most new action, fantasy or animated films into 3-D. Not only does this not enhance the viewing experience at all most of the time, it makes an afternoon at the movies far more expensive.
Many films like “Clash of the Titans” and “The Last Airbender” were filmed before “Avatar” proved that 3-D showings could generate more money for the studio and weren’t filmed with 3-D technology. In an attempt to cash in on the newest trend, studios converted movies like these into 3-D to gain money, and it worked. However, many critics and the public pointed out the 3-D was poorly done and more of a distraction than a highlight.
3-D glasses also dull the color of the movie, so the bright colors used in films were rendered useless. In most cases, the studio’s choice to use the technology compromises the original vision of the film.
Very few directors have a good reason to use 3-D as a medium to tell their story. “Inception” was a summer blockbuster with a story arc, character development and exciting action scenes and viewers didn’t need the lure of another dimension to understand the lure of the film.
Besides 3-D compromising the integrity of the movie, it also isn’t accessible to everyone. Some people suffer from headaches, stomachaches, dizziness or other problems after viewing this version of the film. Furthermore, some people have eye problems that make seeing 3-D at all an impossibility.
When theaters only play 3-D versions of films instead of giving the audience a choice between 2-D and 3-D, it forces people to pay higher prices, see a less pure version of the film and possibly experience uncomfortable sensations. Maybe a reason 3-D movies are doing so well in certain areas is simply because people do not have a choice between mediums.
While it is undeniably popular right now, there are many people who are growing tired of being forced to pay a surcharge on their ticket. A day at the movies is becoming so ridiculously expensive that it’s easier to rent movies and stay home.
Though there are people who love 3-D, the medium isn’t appealing to everyone, and the price certainly doesn’t work for the average college student’s budget every time a new movie is released.
It’s obvious everything can’t be about artistic value &mdash studios need money to survive and create new movies. While every cinema cannot afford to show both 3-D and 2-D versions of movies, at least viewers should be given a choice when it comes to popular movies like “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows.” There should be enough respect for the audience to not simply slap together a 3-D movie because it’s what will make the most money or force viewers to chose between 3-D or no movie at all.
Films are catering to consumers and should be made for those watching the film, not for the executive who wants to make extra money at the cost of the value of the product.
Hannah Rogers is the assitant news editor of The Reflector. She can be contacted at [email protected].