Re: Here we go again

[P3D Larry Berlin <lberlin@xxxxxxxxx>]

> P3D Marvin Jones Wrote:
>We're supposed to be 3D-knowledgable here. Let's get it
straight--throughout the
>3D fad of approximately 1953-1956 not one single solitary feature film was EVER
>released in anaglyph format!!! To the best of my knowledge, the same can be
said
>of the shorts. No early 1950s audience EVER looked at a 3D movie through
>red/blue glasses! Period. As for whether any 3D film was a "high quality
>production," film historians generally regard Kiss Me Kate as one of the best
>musicals ever produced; Dial M for Murder is certainly not prime Hitchcock, but
>is a far cry from a potboiler; House of Wax is simply one of the best horror
>films ever produced; The Glass Web is often cited as a superior film noir
entry;
>and Creature from the Black Lagoon and It Came from Outer Space are excellent
>sci-fi movies in their own right. Not all 3D movies were Fire Maidens from
Outer
>Space! Whatever reasons 3D keeps failing in the movies, in the 1950s is was NOT
>for a lack of good movies and MOST DEFINITELY NOT because audiences didn't like
>the red and blue glasses!

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  I stand corrected as I'm very certain you have more
experience with the older 3D movies than I. However, this illustrates my
point. I have never had the opportunity to view most of those movies in
theaters. The only 3D movies that have arrived in a theater near enough to
know about were usually of the cheap horror types presented with anaglyph
glasses. Once at a special showing by a company that makes 3D cameras for
movie production and projection, I had the opportunity to view a 3D movie
with the polarized system. I was impressed with the system but the movie
wasn't a biggie. Frequently in conversations with other people about 3D
movies, the only type of system they know about is anaglyph, having never
encountered the polarized type.

My understanding of 3D projection is that the movies are shown in either
anaglyph or polarized by the choice of the projectionist. From what little I
know of that industry, they supply by far more anaglyph projection equipment
to theaters than they do of the polarized type. The movies themselves
comprise simply the left and right image in standard film strips.

If those in the 50's were wearing any kind of glasses, that fact is viewed
by many as a negative factor. A factor that contributes to the audience
getting tired of the medium. The titles you mention may be wonderful movies
but there certainly aren't very many of them of that quality. No one in that
time managed to work out enough new material and special effects combined
with good material to keep the audiences interested enough to come back. I
believe a big part of it's decline was a disinterest on the part of
producers which is more significant than audience disinterest. The audience
can't watch and react to a movie that isn't made. Often disappointing
results with some movie that simply wasn't good to begin with, but done in
3D can influence whether they will ever try producing in 3D again. The
result is a decline in the use and availability of 3D.
_______________________________________
>I might also argue with the idea that Star Wars was a "quantum leap in movie
>presentation." It was brilliantly edited and really, really loud, but the main
>distinction of its special effects was their recognition of the trajectories of
>flying objects in the real world. In fact, a lot of the matte work was a tad
>sloppy, betraying the film's relatively limited budget. There was nothing
>unusual about the film's presentation except its lack of foresight. In
>Hollywood, 20th Century Fox had stuck it in at the Chinese Theater for only
>three or four weeks to fill up time until their huge blockbuster hit of the
>universe, Sorcerer, could open there. When Star Wars surprised them, they
had to
>hustle to find another theater for it to continue its run.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  I saw it four times while it was at the Chinese. I think
one of the biggies about Star Wars was the use of computers to make the
special effects possible and realistic. The fact that "they" were surprised
at the favorable audience reaction proves my point. It had qualities that I
and many others had been waiting for literally for years. I wasn't alone in
that inner longing and the movie's success was no surprise to me at all.
While you can poke holes in their special effects and their script rather
easily, it still pioneered a new outlook for movies and pointed the right
direction for special effects. Some have been great and many have been a
waste of resources but it was a point of change. 

I could care less about the size of their budget when they deliver the level
of entertainment that they did. A number of film makers have discovered that
a big budget by itself isn't the ticket to a good movie. If anyone makes
something worthwhile with a low budget, I'm inclined to let them get away
with a lot of rough edges. When the rough edges show up in a big budget
production that's something else.

I fully expect some great 3D production in the future will capture the
attention of audiences once again. This combined with the opportunity to
have special 3D presentations more readily available either on video or the
home computer can be the key factors in the formula for a seriously renewed
interest. 

Special effects in movies have moved hugely into computer enhancement. I
expect that area to be where new 3D productions will gain a lot of strength.
Using a computer you can maintain the optimum parallax factors and still
have strong 3D for all zones of the scene. That's something you just can't
do when using a camera and film. Sometimes it takes ovelaying more than one
image to get the ideal results. You can learn special effects tricks for
your camera but it's so much easier to use computer graphics to do these
types of image compilations and special effects. 

Film is a higher resolution and quality than most digital images but that's
a changing scene too.

Larry Berlin

Email: lberlin@xxxxxxxxx
http://www.sonic.net/~lberlin/


------------------------------