Friday, August 12, 2011

Why is EVERYTHING in 3D???

So apparently, this has happened:

The Lion King. In 3D. WHAT IS THIS BLASPHEMY?!?!?!

So I might be a person who gets a little too upset about messing with Disney movies. I mean, I am still slightly miffed that the colors of the Beauty and the Beast DVD I have are about five times brighter than the VHS tape I grew up with. I mean, the scene with Maurice lost in the forest isn't that scary if everything is all pretty and gold, now is it?

But all neurotic tendencies aside, why on earth would anyone want to release The Lion King in 3D? Aside from the sheer fact that re-releasing it in theatres means more money... oh yeah. Disney likes doing that.

I have a huge problem with the recent 3D craze. And it's because I feel that 3D in movies brings absolutely nothing other than cheap thrills to the table.

In writing, introducing something to the story just because it is 'cool' does not do the writer or the story any favors. To me, the constant need to make every movie in 3D is kind of like randomly throwing a dragon into a contemporary novel. It doesn't make sense, it doesn't enhance the plot, and so it doesn't need to be there.

Digital effects in movies have been walking this line for a long time. Of course there are movies where the fancy special effects are kind of the point. Okay, sure, fine. But mostly, special effects should be blended in to the story. There shouldn't be a random explosion in every scene just because it looks cool and will be exciting. Pretty soon even that will get boring if that's all there is to offer - and then what do you do to keep audiences captivated?

When I went to the midnight showing of the last Harry Potter movie, my friends and I split up into two groups - I went to see it in 2D, and some others saw it in 3D. One of my friends who saw it in 3D said that all of the crazy effects were more distracting than anything else. It's like dangling something shiny in front of all of us and saying "ooh, look at this, look what we can do, isn't this awesome? Aren't you impressed?" Really, I'd much rather shove that shiny thing out of my face and be shown a good story with good acting. Special effects have their place, and along with the lighting and the soundtrack and all of the other elements that go into the making of a film they can really enhance a movie if done correctly, but they should not be the most important thing. The story should.

When there is a movie with 3D where the effects are actually blended in to the story, where it makes sense with the plot for the audience to be integrated more and for things to pop out of the screen, then I will say that 3D has found its purpose. But right now, the only thing I think 3D is good for is paying that extra three or four dollars for a movie ticket that comes with a flimsy pair of red and blue glasses.

And, Disney? Please keep this 3D silliness out of my childhood. Thanks.


  1. I'm still annoyed at them for forcing me to watch "Morning Report" when I repurchased The Lion King on DVD. That song is *maddeningly* out of place.

  2. I saw HP 7.5 twice with different friends, in 3D and 2D. Voldemort's death, which was the only part of the movie I thought looked lovely in 3D (er...) looked exactly the same in 2D. I don't think anyone really knows what to do with 3D yet, apart from that it's, well, shiny.

    The only part of 3D that might be cool in The Lion King is the herd before Mufasa's death. Otherwise, I fail to see the point, apart from the financial benefits.

    (Also my housemate is going out tonight and now I think I might put on Beauty and the Beast. ♥)

  3. YES. I agree with this SO MUCH. I honestly hate 3D movies for two reasons.

    1) They hurt my eyes and give me a headache. I have to push the glasses halfway down my nose so that I can just tip my head down and watch over them to give my eyes a break. Half the time I watch most of the movie without the glasses even all the way on.

    2) Like you said, most of the 3D special effects are just that: special effects. They don't enhance the movie in any way. They're just THERE because the makers of the movie think everything needs to be in 3D.

    If they make a movie I want to see in both, I always go to see the 2D version. If they don't make both, then I just wait for it to come out on DVD.

  4. Firstly:

    Secondly: Did people do crazy, unnecessary things when movies started using sound or color? Am I being really crotchety about this or just slightly crotchety?

    Thirdly: If I was a child, I would not want wildebeests attacking me through the screen. The scene is really scary and tragic when it's flat; I think it'd be traumatizing in 3D. And that would be tragic.

  5. I agree! I'm still trying to figure out why Glee needs to be in 3D.

  6. Saw in 3D! :D
    Amazing horrific that way.
    At every scene a few people walked away.