MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland

The Cameron Digital Argument

As I wrote from CinemaCon, what’s interesting about what Cameron is now arguing is not that 3D is this cool thing that will draw people into theaters.

He is now arguing that ALL film/television will be enhanced by 3D production in much the way color enhances the experience. He doesn’t want it to be special. He wants it to be the norm. Just the way we see every show.

And the fps thing, ramping it up to 48 fps or 60 fps is about enhancement, in much the same way. A denser image is not terribly expensive in digital and it may enhance the experience.

So rather than the alleged and now, failed, 3D revolution, this is a true revolution… if it takes.

Be Sociable, Share!

3 Responses to “The Cameron Digital Argument”

  1. IOv3 says:

    Yeah but it’s not going to take. 3D failed and Avatar put it in the ground. The home entertainment aspects of it are pretty cool but it’s not selling, neither are the 3D BDs, and the glasses are still balls.

    If the revolution involved the weird optical tricks involved with the 3DS then maybe we would be onto something, but it’s still the silly glasses. There’s just no winning with the silly glasses.

  2. Martin says:

    I kinda like the glasses, but imo the current tech is just no big deal. Many films ive seen in both 2d and 3d versions.. about the same experience with the exception of a couple 3d ‘shock’ moments.

  3. leahnz says:

    i have a new 3D LED TV and it’s the bees knees, weirdly and unexpectedly the 3D effect is WAY better than at the cinema, perhaps simply because one is sitting much closer to the screen and that ‘must reach out and touch it’ sensation is all the more heightened closer up. i had a little test-viewing with a couple other people for ‘res evil-afterlife 3D’ to see how the 3D held up on the box – mainly because ‘afterlife’ was filmed with a fusion camera and the 3D action photography in it is quite inventive – and the otherwise standard proceedings were greatly enhance by the third dimension, particularly that ginormous mutant dude with his humongous axe or whatever it was, bonza carnage (i’m fairly certain all the new LEDs here are 3D capable, i don’t think you can even buy a NEW non-3D capable LED from what i saw doing my research before purchase; fortunately i happened upon a deal wherein a $800 3D blu-ray player and 4 glasses ($120 a pop otherwise) were thrown in as part of a good deal, tho PS3 is 3D capable with a download so the player was bonus rather than a necessity for me, electronics here are outrageously overpriced as a general rule).

    the retail 3D blus are now starting to appear in earnest, easing in with the animated flicks some months ago and now the live-action 3Ds are coming out — i guess time will tell re: the 3D revolution, but the fact that a certain percentage of people simply can’t view 3D without experiencing problems due to their specific physiology is always going to be a serious stumbling block, one would think. and whether higher fps to reduce 3D strobing will positively effect the ‘non-compatibility rate’ (supposedly about 6% of people from what i’ve been told but i’d imagine that’s a conservative estimate at best) remains to be seen. further studies needed and all that

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon