This article shows the hatred of an aspect of theater projection, 3-D, by the film critic Roger Ebert. This article reads like a editorial in that it expresses one mans opinion on a particular subject with a purpose to leave the reader something to think about. Although it stresses a opinionated article with repetitive uses of "I", it does present interesting points and back these points up with hard facts. Such as the surcharge of 5-7 dollar that 3-D films charge as opposed to the standard 2-D films. From this the author brings up a correlation between the power of advertising and the surcharge which I thought was very interesting. A movie that emphasizes on 3-D in their trailer will most likely attract audiences to their film because of it's 3-D aspect to the film. To what extent does the film show instances of 3-D and how there executed is never mentioned leaving the viewer of the film disgruntled and the executive studios 5-7 dollars richer and happier. When the author brought up how the projection from 3-D films can leave the viewer experiencing nausea and headaches according to medical research, I had a personal experience. After seeing the movies Clash of the Titans and Avatar (2nd time), I left the theater not reflecting on what the movie I saw showcased, rather I reached in my medicine cabinet, pulled out the Advil, and went to bed. I also agree with Ebert on how the Oscar contenders are slowly fading away if this trend of studio executives demanding their directors to film 3-D more as opposed to quality films.
Top 5 Films that would be worse if changed to 3-D
1. The Godfather
2. Dawn of the Dead
3. Jason and the Argonauts
4. The Dark Knight
5. Balto
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment