This time we are not going to talk whether you prefer 3D movies, or not. We decided to hear opinion about this subject from one of the leading directors – Martin Scorsese. Actor Andy Serkis also has to say something about the same thing.
So, you could read that William Friedkin‘s Exorcist will never be in 3D. That's exactly what the director said, and we gave you his reasons for this decision.
But nowadays, seems like every single information that comes from Hollywood includes the fact that most of directors are very satisfied with suggestion for their projects to be released in 3D.
And we're not only talking about movies that look-like Avatar or pretend to be some kind of revolutionary science fiction stories. No, we often have a chance to hear that even drama, or comedy should have the same treatment.
You might wonder how legendary directors feel about this issue. When it comes to Martin Scorsese, seems like he doesn't have any doubt.
“We see in depth, for the most part. We go to the theater – it's in depth. Why couldn't a film like Precious be in 3D? It should be,” he said and added: “I'd love to do one, it just seems natural that we'd be going in that direction, and it's going to be something to look forward to, but to be used interestingly.”
But is it going to be used “interestingly”? Ok, we all know that 3D is fun. And we also know that it is kind of interesting experience, since it allows every single person in cinema to become a “target”, so it makes sense from that point of view – even when the movie is showing everyday things, there is considerable extra excitement when it is in 3D.
But, on the other hand, there is still some kind of confusion when it comes to an acting part. Interesting thing – this year we have Zoe Saldana nomination for a est Supporting Actress prize at Oscars for her role in Avatar. As well as voicing the role, Saldana had her body movements and facial expressions transposed via CGI.
That could sound excellent if there wasn't word “supporting” between “best” and “actress”. That's exactly the thing that irritates Andy Serkis, since he insisted that the Academy Awards should not introduce a category for actors in films using computer-generated imagery.
We all remember his role of Gollum in Lord of the Rings, which was also computer-assisted, so it's kind of logical that he considers “performance capture” actors equal to those who appear on screen. Here's what he said: “I don't really think there should a special acting in a digital realm award or anything. From an acting standpoint, it's the same.” Is it?
We'll pause our investigation right here, but this is certainly not the end. We're still wondering, we still have our doubts, and a lot of questions to ask. One of them is repeated in this little report from Filmofilia – should all movies be 3D, or should 3D actually be the cherry on top of the cake?
