New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Tom Houseman: Really? Since when has Hollywood ever actively tried to make good movies? (The '70s aside, but that was an anomaly). Is Michael Bay suddenly going to become Stanley Kubrick because he's making movies in 3-D? I think this trend will let filmmakers focus less on quality storytelling and more on mindblowing visuals. Also, I suspect we will see even more franchises just so that the third movie in the series will be You, Me and Dupree 3-D. Let's see what happens when Step Up 3-D comes out before we talk about the possibility of 3-D being good for the industry.

Jim Van Nest: I'm with Matt on this one, I think. Right now, 3D is the "ooh shiny" and everyone is gobbling up anything hyped as 3D. Eventually, the crappy movies will flush themselves out and even the excitement of 3D won't help them. The comparison to computer animated movies is spot on. The technology isn't new anymore, so only the good films (or over-hyped series of films...hello, Shrek) are really hitting the jackpot.

I think we'll start to see the same thing with 3D, especially as studios are converting 2D films to 3D to cash in. We saw Avatar in 3D (with no projector issues) and thought it was fantastic. If the next 3D movie I see sucks, or the 3D doesn't add anything, I'll likely give it one more shot. If that one doesn't live up, I'll save the cash.

I really think that this craze will last a little longer, but then we'll see it fall back to the pack like everything else. The really good 3D films will still draw great box office...just like the Pixar films still draw great box office. Now...when you have a Pixar film in 3D, watch out! THAT'S gonna be nuts.

David Mumpower: Jim, your logic is why I believe Toy Story 3 has a chance to open as well as the prior two biggest Pixar debuts combined (around $140 million). It is their primary brand with 11 years of pent up demand from Toy Story 2 and 2010 3-D ticket pricing. Of course, Up was in 3-D yet it opened to "only" $68.1 million.

Jason Lee: I think that the success of 3-D is still largely tied to the attractiveness of seeing the product in 3-D. James Cameron's opus in 3-D? Sure. Tim Burton's visuals in 3-D? Sounds great. Giant scorpions in 3-D? Yes please. Until we get a bunch of movies in which 3-D makes absolutely no sense (like "Precious in 3-D"), I don't think we're close to a saturation / backlash point.

David Mumpower: Jason, I completely agree with what you're saying, which is why Tom is on to something when he points out the madness of Step Up 3-D. This trend is good for the industry as long as movie producers are respectful enough of the process to ask, "Does 3-D add a legitimate element to our film?" If the answer is no, the yard should be stomped in 2-D only. Otherwise, they're blowing it for everybody and that premise makes me worry that Madea may be adding a new dimension next time. Literally.

Continued:       1       2       3       4       5