The current 3D wave has thrown just about everything our way, from three-dimensional boobs (“Piranha 3D”) to Medusa’s snaky mane (“Clash of the Titans”).
But we haven’t yet had a certifiable auteur take a crack at the format – until now.
Martin Scorsese’s “Hugo,” opening wide tomorrow, finds the Oscar-winning director turning his attention to the third dimension. The early reviews are glowing – a gaggle of comments essentially saying it’s the best use of 3D technology yet. Will that be enough to convince audiences that paying a surcharge – and wearing those clumsy glasses – are worth the effort?
Scorsese has his work cut out for him, and he can blame an industry which abused 3D nearly every step of the way.
Director James Cameron’s “Avatar” wasn’t the first 3D film of this generation, but it was the first that took advantage of the format in ways we hadn’t seen before. Nearly every subsequent 3D feature has been either mildly diverting or an utter fraud, with too many falling into the latter category. Most were “up-converted” from 2D, meaning they were shot in traditional fashion and then retro-fitted to 3D.
The results were a far cry from Cameron’s magical realm of Pandora.
Audiences quickly caught on, and box office numbers for 3D films sank. “Drive Angry,” “Step-Up 3D,” “Fright Night” and “The Three Musketeers” all flopped, while other 3D films simply underwhelmed (like this month’s “A Very Harold & Kumar 3D Christmas”).
We’ve been hoodwinked (another 3D flop) and we’re not in the mood to keep paying extra for the chance to see a movie’s title float off the big screen.
That’s where Scorsese comes in. If “Hugo” stuns audiences, perhaps they’ll give 3D filmmaking a second chance. If not, we might as well stow away those black-framed glasses until the next generation of filmmakers decides it’s time to try 3D all over again.