Why 3D movies are bad for Hollywood

Posted Monday, April 14, 2008 at 2:45 PM Central

by Tim Briscoe

Even the most casual of movie fans can tell you that Hollywood likes sequels. When movie studios are hard up for original ideas, they usually recycle a proven commodity. They turn a TV series or remake a classic into next year's big tent pole release.

Hollywood is sequelizing itself with the current proliferation of 3D movies. I'm here to tell you why it's a bad idea.

Back in the 1950s, movie-going was being threatened by television. People were opting to stay at home rather than going to theaters for a movie. What did Hollywood do to put butts in cinema seats? Introduce 3D movies, a device unlike anything that could be presented on TV at the time.

Flash forward 50 years. Ticket sales at the box office have gone down. Movies face unprecedented competition from the likes of video games, the internet, and, once again, TV. Hollywood is even battling themselves with home theaters and DVD/Blu-ray.

What is the strategy of the movie execs to stem this tide? "3D Movies II: The Sequel - Even Better Than Before" is coming soon to a theater near you. (Actually this is Hollywood's third try at 3D after a failed attempt in the early '80s.)

Just last week Disney announced their slate of animated movies. Nearly all will be offered in "Disney Digital 3D." DreamWorks Animation is following with 3D movies of its own. George Lucas is hard at work on 3D versions of the Star Wars films. James Cameron's next film, Avatar, will be presented in 3D. Journey to the Center of the Earth 3D is coming to theaters this summer.

Yes, the technology has gotten better. Those flimsy 3D glasses with the red and blue lens have been replaced with slightly better plastic versions. (Wired.com has an excellent article on the new technology.) The movies supposedly don't cause headaches like they used to do.

Best(?) of all -- this new 3D experience will cost you more for a ticket. Perhaps as much as twice as much as a traditional 2D movie in some cases.

Here is some free advice for movie studios. Rather than pursuing 3D technology for theaters, try another tactic: make better movies.

Hollywood should recall the ending of its first foray into 3D. Do you remember the films Man in the Dark, House of Wax, It Came From Outer Space, 13 Ghosts, Inferno, or House on Haunted Hill? Aside from the recent, failed remakes(!) of a few of these, I'm willing to guess these titles don't even register with you. They were all 3D movies from early 1950s.

Now, what about these movies from roughly the same period? Singin' In The Rain, On the Waterfront, High Noon, Rear Window, and The African Queen. These classics live on to this very day. Why? Because they were excellent stories with excellent performances told in a visually stunning format -- boring ol' 2D.

Take a gander at what Tucson, Arizona film critic Chuck Graham recently wrote on the 3D resurgence:

A good story is a good story, whether it is being told around a campfire or projected in a 3-D movie theater with wraparound sound. The greatest irony of all is that a great story will be just as great on a 20-inch TV in your bedroom. In other words, making movies in 3-D is just another way to distract audiences from Hollywood's inability to tell a good script from a bad one.

Hollywood, please take this one to heart. I may not have the answer to your problems with competition in entertainment but I do know that 3D is not the solution.