The TV Addict 

If someone had told me five years ago that 3-D would catch on the way it seems to be doing now, I’d probably have politely guffawed in their face. I mean, while I was growing up any film that was 3-D was usually extremely cheesy and low-budget science fiction or horror films, requiring you to park in a drive-in and wear cheap, goofy looking glasses. No studio would have dreamed to make a big-budget film in 3-D, and yet that’s exactly what’s happening now. I’m not sure which film you can blame for the resurrection of 3-D. On the one hand SPY KIDS 3D: GAME OVER, was a relatively high profile use of it, but I would argue it was really the surprise success of the 3-D IMAX version of THE POLAR EXPRESS that really cemented the trend, particularly for kids films. I mean, just have a look here to see how many films in the last few years had some 3-D elements to them.

It seems now that a studio will take any chance to make a film 3-D if they can. For better or worse the trend seems to be staying. The recent HANNAH MONTANA concert film proved very popular, and there are several 3-D projects currently in development as well. The announcement that prompted me to write about all this, actually, is that Disney is planning on making STEP UP 3-D.

Now, I’m not sure what is a bigger shock at this point for me. The fact that I didn’t realize until now that the STEP UP series even was Disney? (Well, technically, Touchstone, but that’s owned by Disney. I guess I never could be bothered enough with the film to even check who made it.) The fact that there was even a sequel in the first place? The fact that the sequel did well enough that it merited another one? Or the fact that the third installment for some reason needs to be in 3-D?

I don’t mean this to sound too catty, but who is actually going to watch STEP UP 2 in the theatres? What’s the demographic like? It must be tweens and teenagers, because that’s the only reason I can determine why Disney would feel the third installment of the series would be a good choice for 3-D, because they are the demographic that seems predominantly tempted by 3-D. Of course to some degree the property lends itself to the format, allowing viewers to see dance moves jump right out at them. The thing is, I just don’t see 3-D as anything appealing. You could tempt me with the new INDIANA JONES film being in 3-D, and I still wouldn’t see it because I see the format as nothing more than a novelty that – to me – detracts, not enhances, my experience of a film.

But to a much younger demographic, the novelty of 3-D is presumably what makes it so appealing to them. I’ll admit, a twelve-year old me would have been excited about a 3-D version of INDIANA JONES, because I would totally confuse the novel and gimmicky nature of 3-D as something that was “cool.” And I think that’s exactly why the studios are making so many films now with that technology. I doubt that they see the format as anything more than a novelty, but I also know that what they see more predominantly is the dollars that this particular gimmick can produce for them.

Read the rest of this entry »