Recently, The Wrap did a story on the new 3D technology and the vice-grip hold it has on the world of Hollywood. As we are all very much aware, it feels like every single movie that’s made these days is released in 3D, and in a lot of cases, we find ourselves asking the question “Why?” over and over again. In this new article, it is revealed that apparently Ridley Scott himself is “breathing down the necks” of executives at Universal to spend an extra $7-8 Million to make a 3D version of his upcoming period action/drama, Robin Hood. This is obviously one of the more confusing titles that we’ve heard associated with the 3D phenomena, and it lead us to begin wondering when this whole technology has just gone too far?
Many big names in the business have laid solid claim to 3D being the future of cinema, but judging by the collective feelings of movie fans, it is unclear whether this is what people want. There’s no doubt at all that when it comes to films like Avatar, which is built specifically for that technology, and fun movies like Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs, 3D can be a really great time. But when this is happening so often that a movie like Robin Hood is even joining the party, you can’t help but think it’s only a matter of time before we see movies like Steven Spielberg‘s Abraham Lincoln biopic Lincoln getting in line for some 3D action. That’s just too much.
Speaking of Spielberg, he is one of those who feels the technology is the future of films, and it has even been rumored that he called Avatar the “best movie he’s ever seen,” but that may just be stretching it a bit. Spielberg is one of many directors who have glowing 3D dreams for pre-existing classic films of theirs; he wants to give his own Jurassic Park the makeover, while people like Avatar director James Cameron wants to do it to Terminator 2 and Titanic, and George Lucas is pondering the possibilities for his beloved Star Wars saga.
As I said above, I’m fully okay with certain movies being crafted using 3D, and yes, there is always the option to just see the traditional 2D version of the film. Even older classics that have already done their time getting a little 3D re-release could be plenty of good times for fans. But for the sake of the studios, the film makers, and the fans, I think that if they don’t let back on the throttle a little bit, this could very well become just another novelty that doesn’t latch on like some wish it to.
So this is where we stand, folks, and the question remains: is this REALLY the future that we all want for our movies, or has 3D already been irresponsibly overused in Hollywood? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
[Source: via AICN]