Dimensional MusingsJackass 3D had a gigantic opening weekend, bringing in $50 million, almost twice as much as its predecessor. Two weeks previously I watched Joe Dante’s The Hole 3D at the New York Film Festival, which is still without a distributor. The bump in the Jackass money is not only attributable to the 3D premium pricing, it attracted more admissions than its first two entries as well, as Ben Fritz reported in the L.A. Times. Regardless of the flak the technology receives from critics like Roger Ebert, it draws crowds, and thus will be a part of the cinematic landscape for some time to come. And while muddy-looking 3D conversions will surely mar theaters in the future, there are plenty of productions that are producing fascinating depth effects with the new technology.
Let’s start with Jackass 3D and The Hole. I enjoyed both films, although they approached the technology from vastly differing positions. Jackass, a non-narrative parade of scatalogical slapstick, is a return to early silent filmmaking and the “cinema of attractions” that Tom Gunning identified. Gunning:
3D is the shiniest new weapon in their toolbox, and so they gleefully push the technology to purely presentational ends.
Dante also discussed 3D dos and dont’s including avoiding cuts on quick motion, because the level of eyestrain involved. The film flew along, a combination of classic Dantaen elements like a suffocating suburbia, coming-of-age subtexts, a Dick Miller sighting, and a rich intertextual conversation with film history. The major touchstone here seems to be German Expressionism, from the hat tip to Hands of Orlac in the cheekily named “Gloves of Orlac” factory, to the vertiginous, Cabinet of Dr. Caligari inspired set design in the finale. It’s unbelievable that the film, about kids who discover a portal into their own subconscious in their basement, has no distributor. It’s wildly entertaining and reliably scary (a harlequin puppet had my wife gripping my arm), and contains some of the most imaginative uses of 3D that I’ve seen all year. The other great 3D film this year, is, believe it or not, Resident Evil: Afterlife. I am an admirer of Paul W.S. Anderson’s Although to be honest, the finest 3D film I saw this year was still Raoul Walsh’s Gun Fury, from 1953. Nothing has effected me more than the simple use of dust kicking up in the foreground as Rock Hudson plots his revenge behind it. Maybe such simple pleasures would come back to the current 3D wave if The Hole found some success, and encouraged more mid-budgeted, modest 3D productions to get made. Here’s hoping. 5 Responses Dimensional Musings
Variety reported that overall the summer 3-D movies were box office disappointments to their studios, suggesting (without saying) that this could be the beginning of the end. Horror seems the genre best suited to 3-D, which made me want to see Piranha 3-D, though I blinked and it was already gone from theaters. I am skeptical of kids movies of all types, but I respect Joe Dante, so if this movie ever does get distributed, I will try to catch it. What makes 3-D unbearable to watch in most cases is that filmmakers tend to be wooed by the technology, which makes its use a gimmick, instead of controlling 3D like a technique that services the material. Suzi, I think Hollywood is still figuring out how to use these new 3D technologies, and that we’re at the beginning of the wave. Cameron’s comments in the interview I linked to are instructive on how this will play out: “I think there was a rush, a gold rush, and some mistakes were made and some bad 3-D reached the marketplace. And then there was a little pushback from the audience, that we don’t want to pay extra for something that’s not a great experience. And I think that the studios have been somewhat chastened by that, and they’re now attempting to do 3-D at a higher quality.” Also, I don’t see why horror is best suited for 3D. Wouldn’t that be limiting it to the gimmickry you decry? I think the real breakthrough will come when it’s used to thoughtfully push forward the story in something like a romantic comedy. And Frank, I think think 3D has great possibilities beyond the spectacle of having knives flung at the screen. Lots to explore there in terms of visual narration, which I think Anderson shows in the new RESIDENT EVIL. I’m always amazed how people still draw high/low distinctions in the arts. Don’t people remember how Hawks and Hitchcock were marginalized as mere entertainers? Everything should be approached as a work of art until it proves otherwise. If they could just make it without giving me a headache and nausea, I would be all for it. 3D in the 80′s did it to me, but I thought maybe there would be some improvement in the “system”. I was wrong. Won’t catch me in another 3D movie for a long time. Great post Mr. Sweeney, and I second Mr. Krul’s comments. However, I do think you’re letting post-production conversion off a little lightly. I have a big, big problem with this technology; I’m yet to see an instance in which it is half as effective or enjoyable as films that are filmed in 3D. Went to see Piranha 3D unaware that it was converted, but it soon became obvious by the way foreground and background objects often blurred together, and many “comin’ at ya” effects didn’t come off at all. It’s a cheap, inferior shortcut, and I think marketing films that have been produced this way as being in “3D” is, in a way, false advertising. Can we get a law on the books where movie studios have to divulge in their advertising whether a film is in real 3D or not? Considering how they jack up ticket prices, I think a little consumer protection is in order. Leave a Reply |
Archives
Featured Sites
Popular terms
3-D
Action Films
Actors
Actors' Endorsements
Actresses
animal stars
Animation
Anime
Anthology Films
Autobiography
Avant-Garde
Aviation
Awards
B-movies
Beer in Film
Behind the Scenes
Best of the Year lists
Biography
Biopics
Blu-Ray
Books on Film
Boxing films
British Cinema
Canadian Cinema
Character Actors
Chicago Film History
Cinematography
Classic Films
College Life on Film
Comedy
Comic Book Movies
Crime
Czech Film
Dance on Film
Digital Cinema
Directors
Disaster Films
Documentary
Drama
DVD
Early Talkies
Editing
Educational Films
European Influence on American Cinema
Experimental
Exploitation
Fairy Tales on Film
Faith or Christian-based Films
Family Films
Fan Edits
Film Composers
Film Criticism
film festivals
Film History in Florida
Film Noir
Film Scholars
Film titles
Filmmaking Techniques
Films of the 1980s
Food in Film
Foreign Film
French Film
Gangster films
Genre
Genre spoofs
Guest Programmers
HD & Blu-Ray
Holiday Movies
Hollywood history
Hollywood lifestyles
Horror
Horror Movies
Icons
independent film
Italian Film
Japanese Film
Korean Film
Leadership
Literary Adaptations
Martial Arts
Melodramas
Method Acting
Mexican Cinema
Moguls
Monster Movies
Movie Books
Movie Costumes
Movie locations
Movie lovers
Movie Magazines
Movie Reviewers
Movie settings
Movie Stars
Movies about movies
Music in Film
Musicals
New Releases
Outdoor Cinema
Paranoid Thrillers
Parenting on film
Pirate movies
Polish film industry
political thrillers
Politics in Film
Pornography
Pre-Code
Producers
Race in American Film
Remakes
Revenge
Road Movies
Romance
Romantic Comedies
Russian Film Industry
Satire
Scandals
Science Fiction
Screenwriters
Semi-documentaries
Serials
Short Films
Silent Film
silent films
Social Problem Film
Spaghetti Westerns
Sports
Sports on Film
Stereotypes
Straight-to-DVD
Studio Politics
Stunts and stuntmen
Suspense thriller
Swashbucklers
TCM Classic Film Festival
Tearjerkers
Television
The British in Hollywood
The Germans in Hollywood
The Hungarians in Hollywood
The Irish in Hollywood
The Russians in Hollywood
Theaters
Thriller
Trains in movies
Underground Cinema
VOD
War film
Westerns
Women in the Film Industry
Women's Weepies |
I always get a little anxious when true film critics/cinephiles review contemporary work (especially the low-brow variety) and I get doubly anxious when they get into contemporary or trendy technologies. Usually it ends up in some serious dismissal of the work and technology as “juvenile” and wasteful and ocasionally includes an admission of secret enjoyment.
So, to that end, I gotta say that this article threw me for a loop: anti dogme95 if you will, but nevertheless gives strong and positive feedback on what the technology can do for the art.