Once
again, another source, Cheddar News on YouTube, has proclaimed the
Final Death of 3-D. Of course, they've done so with a ton of
misinformation. What's particularly sad about this is the attempt to
educate us about 3-D while knowing nothing about it. So let's go
through this once again: 3-D is not as dead as you think or the
haters want. Sorry to disappoint the haters.
Let's talk a little about the history for 3-D for a moment. The earliest 3-D experiments date back to at least 1915 with the first feature in 3-D being in 1922. The Cheddar News video does correctly attribute these to being in the anaglyphic (red/cyan) format. There was a mini-boom in the 20s, mostly shorts with a couple of features. Why did it go away in the 20s? I would think mostly because the big experimentation was for sound. Sound and the Great Depression put a kibosh on a number of film experiments at the time, including Widescreen.
During
the 1930s, polarized 3-D was being developed. One of the earliest
polarized films was shown at the 1939 World's Fair in NY, a stop
motion film called In Tune With Tomorrow. It was remade the following
year in color as New Dimensions. The shorts were done in dual strip
polarized 3-D. According to Cheddar, polarized glasses as yellow and
brown as opposed to red and blue. What this proves is that the person
doing the video hasn't actually seen any 3-D movies, especially
polarized ones. Polarized glasses are clear and made of polarizing
filters that are at a 90 degree angle to one another. Yellow and
brown indeed.
World
War II put a hold on further 3-D experimentation until the 1950s. And
frankly, 3-D has pretty much been with us in one way or another ever
since. Don't believe me? Let's look at the evidence.
It's generally accepted that Bwana Devil kicked off 3-D in the 1950s, but you can actually take it back a year to the Festival of Britain in 1951. A number of 3-D shorts were shot and shown there and almost all of them ended up in America in early 1953 after the success of Bwana Devil. Bwana Devil and 99% of all the 3D movies of the 50s were done in dual strip polarized 3-D. There were a couple of part 3D Burlesque features in anaglyph, but the mainstream stuff was all polarized. How does dual strip polarized 3-D work? It's shot using two cameras, one for each eye. It's then projected through two projectors. The two projectors have to be in perfect synchronization. The screen has to be an actual silver screen to reflect the light back. And the polarizing filters that the image passes through on the projector have to be changed every few days. They also have to be clean of smudges and fingerprints, as do the glasses. In short, projection of dual strip 3-D was a very precise science and if just one thing went wrong, the whole presentation would blow up.
Naturally,
projectionists didn't care to be that precise. If they couldn't get
it to sync up right away, they'd just let it go. Even one frame out
of sync can lead to headaches and nausea. There reports of film being
a full 24 frames--one full second--out of sync. To give you an idea
of what that might look like, picture watching House of Wax and your
left eye sees a medium shot of Vincent Price and your right eye sees
a two shot of Price and Charles Bronson. The theater owners would
cheap out as well, painting the screen instead of installing a proper
silver screen. The projectionist union demanded two projectionists in
a booth for 3-D shows, 3 if the magnetic stereo soundtrack was
involved. Theater owners fought that, too. The end result was many
shoddy presentations which left patron sick. Audiences began avoiding
3-D movies for this reason.
While
all this was going on, 20th Century Fox was developing CinemaScope, a
widescreen process that only used a single projector and a special
lens. Theater owners, projectionists, and eventually audiences
preferred this over the precision of 3-D, so many 3-D movies started
getting flat showings only. Universal rolled out one last 3-D movie
in 1955, Revenge of the Creature, and that as they say was that.
But
not quite. As early as 1957, 3-D movies were being successfully
reissued. The first new 3-D movie after Revenge of the Creature was
also the first one released in 3-D and CinemaScope: September Storm
in 1960. September Storm became the last dual strip 3-D movie. The
following year, The Mask became the first of the part 3-D releases,
with 3 segments in anaglyphic 3-D. This was followed by a pair of
Nudie Cuties also in part 3-D in 1962, The Bellboy and the Playgirls
and Paradiso. A third Nudie Cutie, Adam and Six Eves, was shot in 3-D
but released flat until it made a 3-D Blu Ray debut last year
courtesy of the 3-D Film Archive and Kino. 3-D took another four
years off before returning with 1966's The Bubble, the first single
strip polarized 3-D film. Single strip 3-D was supposed to solve the
problems of projection. Each image was printed on the same strip of
film, either side by side or over and under. They were then
projected--again on a silver screen--through a special beam splitter.
The whole thing should have been idiot-proof. Never underestimate the
idiocy of the American projectionist, however. I've seen far too many
single strip presentations that were sometimes painfully
mis-projected: the wrong type of screen, the wrong type of beam
splitter, the beam splitter not put on correctly, as well as the film
being cut incorrectly by the projectionists all could and did wreak
havoc on unsuspecting audiences for literally decades.
Nonetheless,
The Bubble begat a system that was used for decades. It was followed
by Paul Naschy's La Marca del Hombre Lobo in 1968, released in the US
in 1971 as Frankenstein's Bloody Terror. 1969 gave us the infamous
porn The Stewardesses, which set off a decade of similar films. There
were some mainstream films in the 70s, including the part 3-D horror
film The Flesh and Blood Show, the 1974 gorefest Andy Warhol's
Frankenstein, the 1976 South Korean Kaiju flick A*P*E, and a
couple of Kung Fu movies. While not everything was mainstream, 3-D
was still alive and kicking for practically the whole decade.
3-D
took a 3 year break before returning with Comin' At Ya! in 1981. That
film started a new mini-boom that lasted until 1985 and produced 18
movies in 3-D. Maybe not as much as the 50s boom, but 3-D was very
front and center for a few years in the 80s. Why did it die this
time? I suspect projectionists had something to do with it as well as
the simple fact that all 18 movies are actually terrible movies. The
50s had some bad films, too, but by and large the 50s batch was
pretty good. There wasn't a single good movie released in 3-D from
1981 to 1985. I know because I've seen most of them. I can't imagine
that the few I haven't seen are much better than the ones I have.
Six
years went between 1985's Starchaser: The Legend of Orin and 1991's
Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare, which was another part 3-D
anaglyphic affair. But that's not the full story, either since IMAX
3-D was ramping up starting in the mid-1980s and Disney was having a
lot of success with Captain EO at their theme parks. In fact, IMAX
3-D (and porn ironically) carried 3-D through the 90s. And it was an
IMAX 3-D release, James Cameron's 2003n Titanic documentary Ghosts of
the Abyss, coupled with that same year's part 3-D anaglyphic release
of Spy Kids 3-D: Game Over that set the current boom in motion. But
even before that there were a few more mainstream releases: a
terrible 1995 film called Run For Cover with Adam West in it and a
1997 Charles Band horror comedy called The Creeps. Plus there were
3-D made for video horror films in the late 90s like the atrocious
Camp Blood. To say nothing of all the theme park attractions in 3-D
like T2 3D: Battle Across Time, Shrek 4-D, MuppetVision 3-D, etc.
Ever
since Spy Kids 3-D, there hasn't been a year without 3-D movies. Part
of the longevity now seems to be the fact that projection is finally
Projectionist-proof. Outside of forgetting to turn the 3-D filter for
the projector on (I've seen this happen), there's no way the image
can be screwed up nowadays. It also helps that there's much better
movies being made nowadays as opposed to the batch from the 60s
through the 90s. While there's definitely been some stinkers in the past 17 years, there's been plenty of movies like Hugo, Gravity, Life of Pi, the various Marvel and Star Wars movies, etc. that can stand alongside the classics of the 50s. The circular polarized glasses are better, too. More
comfortable and you can tilt your head without losing the effect. Of
course, Hollywood did itself no favors with some lousy rushed
conversions like Clash of the Titans, but now even the conversions
look great. Watching The Force Awakens or The Walk, you'd hardly
believe they weren't actually shot in 3-D.
Yes,
there's not as many 3-D movies as there were 7 or 8 years ago, but
there's still some high profile releases. Yes, TV manufacturers
stopped making 3-D TVS, but you can still get 3-D projectors for the
home. Frankly, bigger is better with 3-D anyhow. There's a huge
difference between seeing The Force Awakens in 3-D on a 50 inch TV
screen and seeing it on a 100 inch projection screen. And while it is
also true that not as many 3-D Blu Rays are being released in
America, you can still get many of the big releases from Europe. I've
gotten the last half dozen Marvel movies and the last 3 Star Wars
movies all from the UK on 3-D Blu Ray, and all region free. On top of
that, the 3-D Film Archive is still releasing several titles a year
on 3-D Blu Ray. Taza, Son of Cochise will be out from the 3DFA and
Kino later this month. And unless Covid-19 kills movie theaters
totally forever, there are some high profile releases coming this
fall like Black Widow and Wonder Woman 1984.
So
no, 3-D is not totally dead. And it really hasn't been totally dead
for nearly 70 years. Even when it goes away, it only goes away for a
few years before poking back up in some fashion. The longest gap
between movies since the 50s has been five, and that was right after
Revenge of the Creature. All the other gaps have been an average of
3-4 years. So I have to say it: 3-D, like the Force, will be with us
always.
No comments:
Post a Comment