Is 3D the new 2D?

By Charu Suri

February 1st, 2010

Not so long ago, the world was crazy about Computer Generated Imagery (CGI), live action and reality TV shows. Now, the craze has shifted to the world of the 3D, where movies like “Up”, “Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince” and “Monsters versus Aliens” are taking the box office by storm.

When Disney’s Up debuted in 3D, it rose to the top of the box office, garnering $68.2 million in sales during the debut weekend. Pixar’s first 3D film, Up, beat Monsters vs. Aliens as the topmost 3D blockbuster ever. The latter garnered $35 million when it debuted in March 2009. In fact, Up had the third best opening for a Pixar film (this includes 2D films as well), following the heels of the $70m debuts of Finding Nemo and The Incredibles.

3D movies are a relatively old concept. This format of moviemaking has been around for more than fifty years, especially in the amusement parks and museum spaces. Surely you’ve seen IMAX 3D movies as a kid at Disney World or watched a museum documentary in 3D? It seems natural that this concept be applied to mainstream movies.

Beginnings

In the late 1890s, the British film pioneer William Frisee-Greene had filed a patent for the process of filming a movie in 3D. The first three-dimensional film to debut to a paying audience was “The Power of Love,” which came out as early as 1922.

Production and development of these films were hindered by the two World Wars, and the “golden age” of 3D did not come to fruition until the 1950s. But although there were quite a few movies produced during this decade, the technology was painful and time consuming and often very “hard on the eyes.” You see, the older 3D movies used a technology called “anaglyph” technology where two prints had to be printed simultaneously and had to be in perfect synchronization at all times; otherwise the picture would be blurred and often unwatchable. Sometimes, it would even require two projectors to make sure the dual prints worked in sync. Given the tediousness with which the entire technology played out, it’s no surprise that the “golden age” of 3D was fairly short lived.

A minor revival ensued in the 1960s but it wasn’t until Sept. 2003 when the world’s first 3D exposition was held to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the original craze that 3D really began to blaze a trend again.

That same year, James Cameron’s “Ghosts of the Abyss” was released as the first full-length 3D IMAX film with a new technology called the Reality Camera System. The first full-length animated 3D film was “The Polar Express” in November 2004. Although the story line was received in lukewarm fashion, the 3D version ended up earning 14 times per screen than the 2D version.

3D Fever in the 21st Century

“Not every movie belongs in 3D,” says Greg Foster, president of Imax Filmed Entertainment. “Movie theater owners charge a premium for this, of course. 3D was typically in documentary films and amusement parks but now the tech tools to produce them for movie theaters currently exist. Sure, they used to look great but it wasn’t really easy to get there.”

The way you film a 3D scene is by using dual cameras. These are typically positioned side by side, facing each other and filming at a 90-degree angle. This process typically involves mirrors, and needs to be perfectly synchronized. The optical “illusion” generated by the human eye will interpret the pair of images as a singled three-dimensional image – one with depth.

During the recent few years, 3D seems to have exploded on the screen. There isn’t a new release of a blockbuster film that comes out without some sort of 3D version: “Transformers 2,” “Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince,” “Star Trek,”“ My Bloody Valentine.” Now remember, there are 2D versions of these films as well, but the 3D version has became a cash cow for several production houses. In 2010 we can expect to see “Shrek Goes Fourth” (the fourth sequel to the popular “Shrek” in 3D); and “Puss in Boots,” which is a spin-off of the “Shrek” series – both in 3D. Jeffrey Katzenberg, who heads Dreamworks Animation, says that all animated movies released by Dreamworks after 2009 will be in 3D.

Foster credits IMAX’s success in the 3D realm to a rigorous selection process and balance. “We are very careful not to make too many of ‘one of a kind’ movies in a row,” he says. “It’s about balanced programming. Ultimately, does the movie take you somewhere where you dream about going to but will probably never get to? Those are the types of movies we choose to feature in 3D IMAX.”

Films like “Night at the Museum 2,” “Harry Potter,” “Star Trek” are all examples of what Foster calls the “best fruit” from the cherry farm of blockbuster movies.

The Challenges Ahead

But Christopher Sharrett, professor of communication and film studies at Seton Hall University, says that we are currently in the realm of “3D exploitation.” “It is a bit ridiculous to suggest that 3D will replace 2D in the near future,” he says. “Most 3D films don’t really have a decent story line; it’s more a tendency to give viewers a spectacle. It pushes customers and young people to go out.”

Sharrett does not think that 3D will become a dominant filmmaking format in the future. “It’s too niche and too gimmicky,” he says. He has yet to see a “credible” 3D movie being made – one with depth and a good human story. How many Oscar ‘Best Picture’ awards have gone to a 3D film?” he asks.

Phil Lelyveld, brand manager at the Consumer 3D Experience Lab at the University of Southern California, is on the side of the 3D boom. “3D will really be accepted when it becomes part of the dramatic process,” he says. “There are live action movies in the pipeline (of the big production companies). Thirty-four movies are on the schedule to be released in 2010 and a number of them are going to be live action. It will become part of dramatic story line and won’t look like a gimmick. My point here is that we’re in the early stages and are moving towards it being more mainstream.”

What We Can Expect to See on the Horizon

The industry is working overtime to make the transition of 3D into home theater. While you can do that right now with some movies (really nothing on Netflix, we checked!), getting your hands on a DVD that has a terrific 3D quality with polarized glasses is not yet on the market. But it will be soon.

“3D can work perfectly well on a laptop and iPhone,” says Lelyveld. “In fact, companies are developing content for laptop viewing. The question is really how will the content develop and what will market acceptance be like. There are obstacles to be overcome.”

You can expect to see more 3D enabled video games, and a higher quality of Blu-ray enabled 3D experience. But before you can go and buy a 3D enabled TV (Japan is light years ahead in that aspect … they already have this one down), America has to come to an agreement regarding the standard for 3D glasses. Currently there are three formats: the anaglyph (the very basic style of 3D glasses); polarized (the version that you use in most theaters today); and shutter glasses (the left eye and right blink on and off, triggered by signs from the screen).

Once the industry finally settles this question, chances are that your local Best Buy or P.C. Richards will be flooded with the next generation 3D TV set, complete with 3D glasses.

“The big obstacle is to have consumer electronics and content delivery to have the same standard and to work in a way consumers are willing to pay,” says Lelyveld. Japan already has 3D TV sets on the market and several 3D channels. America can expect to see some solid innovation in the home theater division within the next two years; but the current economy is also not the best time for new TV sales.

But Lelyveld is enthusiastic about the progress that’s already been made. “We’ve already had sports networks discuss with us how they will be shooting in 3D when they broadcast.” A special 3D episode of the animated tongue-in-cheek secret agent series, “Chuck,” was shown during the last Super Bowl by NBC. “Monsters vs. Aliens” had a 3D 90-second preview during the Super Bowl as well. Both these shorts needed special 3D polarized glasses (there were opportunities to get them for free through some special Super Bowl promos).

The point is that network providers have not only begun thinking and talking about 3D for your TV, they’ve started to produce content as well. Lelyveld understands the need for 3D to be integrated into the story telling aspect of the film so as to not be “gimmicky.”

There’s no doubt that we will see “glasses-free 3D” at some point, but we’re not there yet. That technology is now reserved for public spaces, bars and shopping malls where something just catches your eye in 3D as you walk by.

We’re definitely on the verge of new and exciting innovations in 3D but it will be interesting to see if it takes off in the realm of “credible” story telling. Will a film ever be good enough in 3D to win “Best Picture” at the Oscars?

Only time will tell but in the meantime, it’s a safe bet to say that the gimmicks have won America’s heart.