In D-fense of 3D

Critics and movie-goers alike have united in condemning the recent crop of 3D movies that have hit since Avatar broke in a mind blowing way. The crappy quality of most of these converted-in-post-production 3D movies quickly turned most opinions against the resurgent technology. Two of the biggest offenders were "The Last Airbender" and "Clash of the Titans." Their 3D effect was essentially non-existant--leaving the audience paying a lot more money for a darker, murkier image thanks to the still not attractive looking glasses needed.

It didn't stop either of those movies from ending up amongst the Top 20 grossing films of 2010. There were a few converted 3D flicks that were actually done fairly well, and also scored big at the box office, including Tim Burton's "Alice in Wonderland" and one of my favorite films of the year "Pirahana 3D." Doing it right after the fact can be done, which is supposedly why The Green Hornet was pushed back to 2011.

Due to the backlash of slapdash 3D, Warner Brothers decided to stop converting the most recent Harry Potter film "The Deathly Hallows Part 1." The official line was that they didn't want to rush the process, but they obviously didn't want to end the much loved franchise on a sour note. Even though I have no evidence to support this, I can't help but think that they will eventually finish the Deathly Hallows conversion to coincide with the release of Part 2 (supposedly still on track to be released in 3D) or for an eventual 3D Blu Ray home video release.

The best 3D releases of this year have been the slew of terrific animated films (the exception being the hilarious gross out "Jackass," which was shot in 3D thus avoiding the conversion nightmare), including this year's highest grossing film "Toy Story 3." The other excellent 3D cartoons landing in the Top 20 of this year's biggest money makers were "Despicable Me," "Shrek Forever After," "How To Train Your Dragon," "Tangled" and "Megamind." Even before Avatar made 3D trendy, animated films have been coming out successfully in 3D. Dreamworks really pushed the envelope on this with "Monsters vs. Aliens," which in 3D IMAX is really something to see. The 3D is really flawless and totally appropriate for a sci-fi/horror movie that spoofs the era (50s and 60s) when 3D first hit big.

Real credit for the 3D revolution belongs to the IMAX format, which Robert Zemekis released "The Polar Express" for and was the first feature length 3D animated movie released in IMAX as the same time as the 35mm version. The 3D version out performed the 2D and proved that it was a commercially viable option. James Cameron also first dabbled with live action 3D for his IMAX documentary "Ghosts of the Abyss," but as amazing as it was visually the technology had not yet advanced far enough to be free from headache inducing moments.

Which brings me to my first exposure of 3D way back in the early 80s, when I was just starting to go to movies without adult supervision. There was a slew of crappy movies whose only real attraction was that they were in 3D. Friday the 13th Part 3, Metalstorm: The Destruction of Jared-Syn, Treasure of the Four Crowns, Starchaser: The Legend of Orin were just a few of the matinees that captured my imagination with what to me was a brand new technology. So popular was the effect that my friends and I huddled around the TV one halloween to watch local horror show icon Count Scary host a movie that I can't even remember. Perhaps proving that the 3D gimmick is at times more important then the content it's meant to support. As much as I loved the stereoscopic effect, I never did see "Comin' At Ya!" the film that is said to have kicked off the 80s 3D revival (hey, I was at the mercy of what movies my mother would take me to), whose poster promised "It's back! It's bigger! It's better!" Some 25 years later, James Cameron could've used the same tagline for Avatar's 3D IMAX release.

It wasn't until several years later that I realized 3D had been around for quite a while, and could be done artfully, when I saw a revival screening of Hitchcock's "Dial ´M´ for Murder" on a silver screen optimized for 3D. Unfortunately, vintage 3D films are rarely screened these days, so it's been a challenge to see any of those movies that came out in the first wave of 3D. Someone really needs to start a classic 3D film festival!

So yes, my love of 3D is part nostalgic, but it has as much to do as the technology finally being perfected. I loved being able to take my then 4 year old daughter to see "Bolt" in 3D and seeing her jump out of her seat and take her glasses of because she was so convinced that the animated dog was jumping out of the screen and into her world! Over this holiday season I've taken my daughter (she now has conquered her trepidation of seeing 3D movies and even likes to sit up close for full effect) to a handful of new 3D movies, including "Tron: Legacy," "Yogi Bear" and "Gulliver's Travels." All have been universally panned by reviewers, but not for their 3D effect. Actually, I probably liked each of these movies more than the average viewer because the 3D was exceptional and helped enhance their stories. Much like "The Wizard of Oz" used B&W and color to distinguish the two worlds Dorothy travels between, "Tron: Legacy" switches from 2D to 3D when the younger Flynn enters the "grid." The 3D effect in "Yogi" really makes Jellystone come to life and reinforces the character's love of the fictional park, while "Gulliver's" uses the technology to exagerate the size differences between Jack Black and his Lilliputian hosts.

Hopefully we've gotten past the cheap money grabs and to the point where filmmakers and studios use 3D to help dramatize the narrative, because when done right it can help make a mediocre movie better and a great movie even more immersive. Even at home with my new 3D Sony Bravia TV, the effect is pretty mind blowing (don't get me started on the mind blowing 3D videogames for my PS3!). Like any technology, 3D can be used for good or bad, so let's push them in the right direction by not supporting the poorly made 3D conversions. Conversly, let's not lump all of the great 3D films in with the bad, because like it or not 3D is here to stay.

"Winter's Bone" is worthy sister film to "Frozen River"

Just finished "Winter's Bone" on Blu-Ray, which is probably the best way to watch this movie--meaning it's not a movie that needs to be seen on the big screen to be appreciated. (Rant warning ahead!) It received a limited run here in Metro Detroit out at the Landmark Maple Theatre, which I really dislike for it's horribly outdated facilities and is one of the reasons I didn't see it when it was released theatrically.

As for the film itself, it reminded me a lot of another previous Sundance winner, "Frozen River." Both are rural, winter set stories about poor women flirting with crime to save their homes and families. The big difference is the age of the protagonists. Melissa Leo in "Frozen River" is a middle aged mom trying to undo the damage left behind from her husband's disappearance, while "Winter's Bone" is about a young woman, Jennifer Lawrence (whose career is about to take off, much like Leo who is now getting Oscar buzz for "The Fighter"), trying to find her missing drug making father while trying to decide what to do with the rest of her life.

Needless to say both movies would make a fascinating double feature. Neither of these movies are masterpieces, but should be seen by anyone who appreciates well crafted character studies that double as offbeat crime thrillers.

For more on the movie:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter%27s_bone
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1399683/
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/10012136-winters_bone/