I do not see 3D, in its current form, sweeping the TV landscape
Friday, May 14, 2010 at 12:05AM 
Roger Ebert railing against 3D in Newsweek, and I will confess to agreeing with a lot of it.
The biggest gripe for me remains the murkiness of the image ("Have you noticed that 3-D seems a little dim?") and the tunnel vision it creates. I actually liked "Avatar" better in my home theater (high-def projector) because there was so much more to see. In the IMAX experience, which I liked plenty, you really find yourself staring at the actors in motion, with the background almost too much to take in.
I'm not arguing against 3-D per se, as I love the immersive quality, but I don't yet see the technology moving beyond the epic-picture requirement, and I really don't see my family donning glasses to watch regular TV. Now, football (and sports in general)? Yeah, I could see that, but again, we're talking the epic nature of the subject matter and a willingness on the part of the audience to totally commit to that viewing experience.
Ebert's larger point is that movies fear the Internet and other new challengers (e.g., role-playing games), and whenever Hollywood gets scared, it turns to technology to spice things up (think back to the 50s and the threat of TV).
I will admit that the lure works: the vast majority of movies I've seen recently have been in Imax and 3D, otherwise I'm usually willing to wait til the DVD. And the kind of movies they're putting into IMAX are the sort that have big global appeal (the blockbuster trend that Hollywood chases right now more than ever), but there are still a ton of movies out there that would not benefit whatsoever from this technology, where it will be--in Ebert's words--a "distraction" from the storytelling, characters, etc.
And as for TV, there's just little on it that justified the personal commitment to donning the glasses, sitting just so, and tuning out all other stimuli and actions. With DVRs and series being seen more on DVD than live in some instances, I just don't see that breakthrough happening any time soon--except in the sense of the dedicated home theater, the committed participation by the audience and the right sort of material--all of which are limited to the epic subject matter.
For 3D to work for me as a routine participation in the home, it would have to escape the requirement for glasses and become more like the floating images that Tony Stark (Iron Man) plays and/or works with in his high-tech office.
Reader Comments (1)
Ah yes, The Robot Monster! A fabulous choice of image: winner of the Golden Turkey Award and possibly the worst film ever made, rivaling Plan 9 From Outer Space. I have friends who can recite entire lines of the awful awful dialogue. (If one can call it that.)