- Culture
- 18 Jan 10
Finally, we have a bone to pick with perfect Pixar. When is 3D not really 3D at all? When it’s ‘immersive’. This is the logic that underlines the reissues from the Toy Story franchise and James Cameron’s Avatar. Here’s the deal. The studios like 3D as a piracy prevention measure but remain wary that audiences will soon tire of this new chicanery.
Historically, 3D gimmickry has flitted on and off our screens leaving little lasting impression. And there is nothing to indicate that the general population’s satiety for novelty is any greater than it was in the days of House Of Wax.
Thus, Hollywood is taking no chances. The latest raft of exercises in depth perception differs from the Golden Age of 3D (1952-1955) and the various attempts to revive the form across the ‘60s and ‘70s. Nowadays, digital 3D is all about making 3D look like non-3D. Confused?
We certainly are. Special effects just aren’t special unless they call attention to themselves. Is an axe flying at our heads too much to ask for? To date, only U2:3D has made decent use of the technology; watching Catherine Owens’ fine concert film, we could count as many as seven layers. Watching Avatar or the Toy Story reissues, we count zero. They’re in there alright; they’re just hidden from view. Heaven forefend we actually see 3D technology in a 3D film.
Toy Story 2 may be a wonderful picture and well worth another trip to the cinema – Buzz and the boys hit the streets in search of kidnapped Woody, Joan Cusack’s Jessie breaks our hearts, Kelsey Grammar does John Ford’s Sideshow Bob – but there is little or nothing to justify this 3D reissue. Indeed, as you lose between 20% and 30% of brightness and clarity as soon as you don those ridiculously priced glasses, there’s an argument that the film is diminished.
We can only hope that the incoming Toy Story 3 can make amends. Immersion be gone.