Top Five Reasons Why I Hate 3-D Movies

OK, I don't really hate 3D, but I don't love it. Yes, there's a place for new technology which enhances entertainment. The Nintendo Wii stands as a pioneering example of video games practically reinvented, or at least reinvigorated by motion tracking. Hollywood must also keep up with high tech, since its brand of magic influences global popular culture. Avatar became the greatest example of using 3D to bolster jaw dropping visuals. And boy did it work - to the tune of billions. There's nothing wrong with Avatar in 3D, in fact it's nothing short of a cinematic landmark.

So, what's my tridimensional beef?

If nothing else, movies must tell good stories. All the action, shocks and thrills can't make up for the absence of a really good yarn. Indeed, all the eye and ear candy in the world won't camouflage a dumb plot or badly written script. The Avengers & Transformers come quickly to mind as two obvious examples of pricey visual rides, but finally hollow movies. Sure, I enjoy a flick or two for mostly its visuals, but those are few in number. There's more to my distaste over the growing 3D embrace by Hollywood. After reading movie critic Roger Ebert's essay on the same subject, I knew I had to add my two cents to Hollywood's three dimensional dilemma.

Gimmicky & Exhausting

In 1982, I saw my first 3D movie with the debut of Friday The 13^th Part III. Yeah, I know, what a cinema classic. However, I was a kid, and to be honest it was pretty thrilling. I barely even remember the plot, but I do recall all the nifty things thrown at me via the magic of 3D. Even the chunky titles blared out and practically touched my face. So, yeah, sure it was fun, but it also was pretty tiring. By close of the second reel, I was exhausted. The new 3D process is light years better, and the movies - like Avatar - have far better stories, but how many 3D movies are merely throwing stuff at an audience before they start throwing things back - or taking things back like our money. It all depends on the type of movie of course, but I just wonder how much the 3D process adds to the overall film - without the simple gimmicky, and ultimately tiresome feel to it all.

Forced Ticket Price Increase

All this new fancy 3D tech requires new equipment and theater projectors - not to mention those nifty, fashion statement glasses. When the tech becomes so good, there's no need for glasses, it will be a major plus, but for now we pay more to see 'more' and we have to wear more. Isn't less more? I'd love a company to devise a way to show cheaper 3D, and do away with the geeky glasses. When that glorious day arrives, I'll write an article showering them with praise - or at least go see more 3D flicks.

Health Impact

Yes, believe it or not, many people suffer some ill effects from watching 3D movies. I remember how tired I felt after only about an hour of 3D back in 1982. It's been reported that more than a healthy percentage of people experience nausea and headaches after 3D viewing. Small price to pay to see Shrek waddle out and fart in your face? Sorry, I'll pass. I'll watch Shrek in all his flatulent glory in good old 2D. Safeguarding my healthy vision and my general distaste for headaches and nausea compel me to do so.

Small Movies Suffer

Can you imagine watching The Trip To Bountiful in 3D? How about All About Eve, My Dinner With Andre, or a nuanced life story like the toe tapping fun of Ray starring Oscar winner Jamie Foxx? There's simply no need to dress up a complex drama, or a poignant biography with eye popping visuals floating around you. I'm definitely not arguing these small, quiet type of movies will never be made again because of 3D, but some may indeed be passed over because a studio can't maximize profit - or charge more - to justify producing a quiet, intelligent movie, over a big, loud 3D money maker.

Artistic Arrest

My sub-title plays with translating the classic film Gone With The Wind into 3D. Think it's purely laughable? Actually more and more old movies will be repackaged and recycled via 3D. This can work wonderfully for something like Star Wars. Big serous fare like Ghandi or A Streetcar Named Desire - not so much. The bottom line of this '3D transforming' of older films distresses on many levels, but most of all the impact it could make on future films is most alarming. If you're a new filmmaker, wanting to please a studio boss, or your investors, won't you seek to make your movie more 3D friendly? This will further shut out small, or less 3D receptive films, and we as an audience, and finally as a culture will suffer the loss.