The sky looks different. The air “feels” different. Strange noises break the silence as a group of our ancestors gathered around the fire to listen to the elder. It’s a hundred thousand years in our past, and entertainment is as scarce as food and shelter, and sought out with as much enthusiasm. The people settle, the elder looks around, waiting for the murmurs to fade. In a soft voice he begins to speak of traditions, of fantastic places, of courageous and extraordinary men and women. Men and women like the people who killed the inventor of “work”. Suddenly, to make a point, he picks up his spear, and hurls it at the person across from him. All of the listeners duck, especially the intended target. A few inches from the hapless man, the spear stops, having reached the end of the attached makeshift rope. People pick themselves up, letting go of nervous laughter. Then, after a brief hesitation, they stone the elder to death. Forward to present day.
Suit No. 1: “Theater attendance is down! What shall we do?”
Suit No. 2: “We’ve tried everything but good writing. Don’t know what else to do!!”
Suit No. 1: “Should we try good writing?”
Suit No. 2: “Hahaha, that’s a good one!! . . . seriously, we’ve got to do something.”
Suit No. 1: “How about 3-D?”
Suit No. 2: “Treedee? What’s a treedee?”
Suit No. 1: “No, I mean 3-D, as in 3-Dimensional.”
Of course I was not there, but I’m thinking it went down something like that. By the way, that’s a new intro to this piece because Slice of SciFi #159 stole my thunder. I had this piece half written. I had all these righteous rants and clever points I was going to make, but then I listened to the show; the guys went into their own major 3-D rant, covering the same points I made. I was left with the dregs of the argument.
I guess I’ll start with the sheer audacity required to believe what is missing from today’s theater experience is the implementation of more visual technology. It boggles my mind to read about the conversion of 10,000 theaters to the digital technology supporting 3-D at a cost of $70,000,000… why, that’s more than what it would cost to make Serenity 2, which coincidentally would get me into a theater.
But… perhaps those suits know their business. Not that they are smart. Heck, not even close. But they do have a rudimentary understanding of numbers. They know “big-numbers-better-than-small-numbers”. So they look at Pirates of the Caribbean; $1B in receipts. They look at Spider Man; $1B in receipts. They look at Transformers; $1B in receipts. Must be what the people want. That is a 3x return on investment… or about half the return of investment of The Bourne Ultimatum (cost $25M, returned $150M, or 6x).
That’s called math. But everyone knows you can’t do coke and math at the same time. At least not past comparing two numbers, and to be fair, $1Billion is larger than $150 Millions. Also to be fair, there’s not much CGI in the Bourne movie. That’s because the computer refuses to duplicate the random shaking of the human hand.
All kidding aside here, I cannot understand the attraction of 3-D. I saw one 3-D movie in my life. Seen it, it was neat, it was boring, and never had the desire to see any since. I have no doubt the new technology is spectacular. I’ll venture a guess it will be one of the wonders of the vacuous world, far surpassing anything we’ve seen before. Might even be better that my own eyes, but I think the guys nailed it on the show. It means nothing unless the story is engrossing . . . and if the story is engrossing, the 3-D effect will hardly be noticed. It’s not the technology, it’s the story telling.
This is rooted in our ancient past. And it’s played out every day around the world, albeit in more comfortable surroundings. We tell tales of great hunts (shopping sprees), extraordinary people (celebrities who don’t wear panties), and fantastic places (the Mall of America). And we do all that without throwing stuff at each other, trying to make the other person duck. That simple formula, tales told without stuff flying at your head, has worked from ancient time all the way to today. Yes, it still works. I’ll sit and watch a piece of cardboard if it meant hearing a great tale. By the same token, I get quickly bored with special effects if they are done for no other reason than we have the technology.
But the suits, the suits know I am not the target audience. The target audience is a third my age, owns a number of game stations, a bunch of games, lives as much in the virtual world as the real one, and prefers dazzle to any kind of substance (the iPhone being their version of the Holy Grail). “Careful!” you say, “You’ll offend them if they happen to read this.” I’m not worried… the few who can read quit doing so at the paragraph where I did some math. Probably went scrambling for a calculator, and got sidetracked by some blinking lights. For those who made it this far, I meant the other guys. But, if the shoe fits…
Anyway, am I saying all 3-D movies will suck? No, I’m sure there will be good ones. But then, I would have gone to see those even without the 3-D.
Whether we like it or not, consumer behavior will always lead the giants to produce whatever trash pays the bills. Am I frustrated at the simple plots that over stimulate us with scenes of car chases, rape, explosions, and perfectly choreographed sex. The stories all look the same, end the same and bore me to death. 3D is no different.
One 3D movie I saw at the imax was actually outstanding (not science fiction – sorry). It was a documentary about the Titanic. Yes I did duck when the anchor came hurling towards me. It even made me gasp. The 3D really did make me feel like I was there and I did enjoy the experience.
Emilio give 3D one more chance!
Here’s a novel idea: Try writing quality, unique, never before told stories instead of recycling the same old crap 50 million times.
My apologies. I do write some fiction, but here I’m struggling to write opinion pieces.
I knew this one was iffy because it was covered on the show, but since I already had some time into it, I figure I would submit it on the chance someone might still find it a fun read.
Perhaps it’s a case of saturation. Four pieces in a week seems a little much even to me. Then again, I take the time when I have it. So cheer up, it’s not likely I can keep this up.
One tiny hint . . . the stories have both the name and my picture. It’s an easy thing to skip right through them.
But point taken. I will strive for higher literary quality, and if at all within my grasp, by golly I will certainly latch onto it.
Emilio, I think Michael was commenting on screenwriter’s inability to come up with a decent plot these days and relying too much on the technology of filmmaking (such as 3-D) instead of the story in the film — not your editorial content or quality.
3D is a tool, that’s all. It can be used well, or used poorly, or worse.
I have been into (still) photography for *years*. One aspect of photography that I have experimented with is 3D. I own three 3D cameras and also an accessory to add to the lens of a SLR to make 3D pics on a single 35mm (or digital) frame.
It took me a while to realize that it is totally different to compose a 3D still photo than to compose a 2D photo. I have seen prize winning 3D photos that (before I viewed them in 3D) looked plain, simple and nothing exceptional .. but they came alive when viewed as 3D.
Film makers need to *learn* how to shoot in 3D. Some will “get it” some will not.
It is very similar to horror films or SF films. There are those who “get it” and make good to excellent films … and then there are those who don’t .. and make trash.
Richard in Boston
Dang!! My apologies again!
. . . writers!! Seesh! They’re so sensitive about their work . . .
Hey!! Does this mean I don’t have to strive for higher literary quality?
I am a firm believer that “guilty pleasure” entertainment has its place-
For me, that sometimes means flashy movies with lousy writing that are FUN. (Sometimes, but not always happens.)
The occasional extremely idiotic movie or tv show also qualifies- “Ace Ventura”, anyone?
And yet, even with the admission that I do occasionally watch and ENJOY some of the truly bad movies as guilty pleasures, I agree with the article:
I would, as a rule, rather watch a well written, well acted show even if there is zero flash, action or special effects.
Hell, I don’t even go to IMAX movies- they hurt my neck!
It is fairly rare that I spend money on a movie theater ticket; not so much that I resent watching TV ads when I have paid for a movie (although I do) or even the high cost.
It is because a movie like Transformers… well, I would not have been happy if I had paid $20 for a pair of tickets to see that.
A few bucks to rent the dvd: that seems a fair price for the quality of entertainment. (and I actually kind of enjoyed Transformers too.)
Yup, I am in agreement: make a good movie and I’ll pay good money to see it.
Make trash like Hollywood mostly does- well, I can watch old episodes of the 3 Stooges more comfortably in my home.
And the writing is better.
that is not the new trailer. the new trailer has the kidnap of jabbas son and the jedi’s involvement to rescue him.
oops wrong thread
by the way i don’t need 3-D Jar Jar’s or Fake Yoda CGi.
i would prefer an actual restoration of the original theatrical star wars films.
3D is nothing but a gimick, i have heard them go on and on about how adding color to movies was also but i disagree 100%
imax sucks because they cut down the theatrical features to fit the format.
i don’t need a picture 10 stories high. i like traditional 35mm projected film which is actually higher resolution than even 2k dlp. never mind 70mm showcase presentations which have all but dissapeared.
3D a gimick? SURE.. just like color was a gimick, and just like sound was a gimick.
3D is a TOOL. It can been used properly or improperly. It takes skill and talent to use it effectivly. Don’t dismiss it because some moviemakers have failed to use it properly.
Richard in Boston