Hustler, an adult film maker has announced his new feature film ‘This Ain’t Avatar XXX’. This movie will be the first 3D porn movie. Much exciting as it might sound, it only adds to the growing number of movies being released in 3D. I find it really difficult to understand this sudden fixation with making movies in 3D
Experts believe that the technology of viewing 3D is not set to improve for another 8-10 years. It means that we have to bear with the glasses till then. What is the fun in wearing a pair of polarized spectacles all throughout a movie? Some might get away with the Ray Charles look, but if you have the misfortune of having a small face like mine, they keep slipping off. I had a bad experience when watching Clash of the Titans in 3D. For one, it was not exactly a movie worth spending 300 bucks for. Secondly it was a movie converted into 3D during post-production which made it even worse. This is not the same at all when it comes to the actual 3D experience. The difference is not only in the visuals but in the total 3D experience. A movie which is shot in 3D will give a more immersive experience. Whilst a movie converted in post-production will not have the same effect, robbing the audience of the real experience. Thus in many of the scenes in Clash of the Titans, the characters on screen looked like pieces of cardboard and the background looked blurred.
Experts though are optimistic about auto-stereoscopic technology, i.e. watching 3D without glasses. They say it is the future of how we will view all kinds of media. 3D TV have entered the market with Sony and LG launching their products in the US and European markets. These products though are at a nascent stage and still a far dream for us Indians. In such a case my question is why not wait till the technology becomes more common? Why not till then concentrate more on the substance of the movie like the story and the background score, instead of just concentrating on the visuals. It seems that releasing a movie in 3D has become a way for the film studios to earn extra profits by charging the theatre going audiences a premium.
This becomes evident when you see the sheer number of movies being released in 3D. According to Imdb.com, Avatar's success brought in a lot of 3D titles, an estimate of 60 in all between 2009 and the present day. In fact the trade group International 3D Society say that since Avatar was released, 33 percent of box office earnings are from 3D movies. There are about 43 films being released in 3D between now and the end of 2011. Of this most of them have been converted to 3D in post-production.
Though it is good to see some really good movies about to be released, it brings us to the question. Are 3D films really worth the hype the film-makers are creating? And lastly do we really need to pay over 300 bucks to go see a movie wearing spectacles?
Experts believe that the technology of viewing 3D is not set to improve for another 8-10 years. It means that we have to bear with the glasses till then. What is the fun in wearing a pair of polarized spectacles all throughout a movie? Some might get away with the Ray Charles look, but if you have the misfortune of having a small face like mine, they keep slipping off. I had a bad experience when watching Clash of the Titans in 3D. For one, it was not exactly a movie worth spending 300 bucks for. Secondly it was a movie converted into 3D during post-production which made it even worse. This is not the same at all when it comes to the actual 3D experience. The difference is not only in the visuals but in the total 3D experience. A movie which is shot in 3D will give a more immersive experience. Whilst a movie converted in post-production will not have the same effect, robbing the audience of the real experience. Thus in many of the scenes in Clash of the Titans, the characters on screen looked like pieces of cardboard and the background looked blurred.
Experts though are optimistic about auto-stereoscopic technology, i.e. watching 3D without glasses. They say it is the future of how we will view all kinds of media. 3D TV have entered the market with Sony and LG launching their products in the US and European markets. These products though are at a nascent stage and still a far dream for us Indians. In such a case my question is why not wait till the technology becomes more common? Why not till then concentrate more on the substance of the movie like the story and the background score, instead of just concentrating on the visuals. It seems that releasing a movie in 3D has become a way for the film studios to earn extra profits by charging the theatre going audiences a premium.
The movie that set the current trend |
Though it is good to see some really good movies about to be released, it brings us to the question. Are 3D films really worth the hype the film-makers are creating? And lastly do we really need to pay over 300 bucks to go see a movie wearing spectacles?
good that u started a blog!!..wil try n keep it updated..
ReplyDeleteDear Sambit,
ReplyDeleteI have gone through ur recent blog and found some way interesting and informative.
The present world can not stop from technology adoption. The invention of stereophonic sound is a milestone in the field of audio entertainment. I noticed the effect vividly at Lal Kila through the sound and light program.
Similarly the optimum position of photography will rest at 3 dimensional pictures. Putting a pair of glasses before ur eyes is like splitting the frequency band of light. It takes into account the effect of persistence of vision. In comparison to the things that are coming in future the present technology is in infant stage. The future technology will definitely dispense use of spectacles. This requires lot of experiments and research. As a layman, I guess this will be through computer graphics and adoption of right kind of software.
While, people think of entertainment, they forgot about cost. Considering ur age u are really matured to wait. Most of the people can not wait. They have all the eagerness to glance at the proto stage. The question of 300 bucks is a subject of economics, which do not come in technology and entertainment. Any how this is ur finding, it will differ from people to people. Keep us abreast with the development in the technology and news related to it
Hey That was really informative ..I watched Clash of Titans and it totally looked like a normal 2D Movie to me..But I did not had to pay 300 bucks went for the Morning Show ;)
ReplyDeletethank you!!! yah we can watch it in less than 300 bucks, but it still isn't worth it..
ReplyDeletethank you!!! yah we can watch it in less than 300 bucks, but it still isn't worth it..
ReplyDeleteHey That was really informative ..I watched Clash of Titans and it totally looked like a normal 2D Movie to me..But I did not had to pay 300 bucks went for the Morning Show ;)
ReplyDelete