Quote:
Originally Posted by Ann Whiting
Your list seems to justify the lack of serious attention given to 3D cinema over the past 40 years - it's all sex, horror, shock effect or gimmick
|
Yes, that is the point: as I said, these mostly "horrible" films "tarnished the brand" of 3D cinema. We all hope that the current generation — with no exposure to these hard to come by films — can see the new digital 3D movies without the ingrained belief that 3D is a just a "gimmick."
Attitudes do change. There was a time, not so long ago, when the New York Times did not review "comic books." Now they regularly run reviews of notable graphic novels and other comic book collections.
Studios still release 3D schlock like "My Bloody Valentine 3D" and "Final Destination 4," but this year also saw Disney-Pixar's "UP" and before it ends, James Cameron's sci-fi epic, "Avatar."
As Harvey Pekar used to say, comics are just words and pictures with no limit on how good either can be. Although the format is mostly used for super hero fantasies, it can also be used effectively for many other genres, including documentary (like Joe Sacco's "Palestine" and "A.D.: New Orleans After the Deluge" by Josh Neufeld).
The key point will be won when a movie is reviewed and only incidentally referred to as being shot in 3D. Then 3D it will be just another artistic option, like shooting in B&W or casting Steve Guttenberg.