3-D Horror Movies At Home

PoppaScotch

I am well aware that the gimmick of 3D is not only making a comeback, but has also been discussed at great lengths on the websites via both the forums and the editorials.  However this isn’t going to be your standard “3D is a lame gimmick” argument or even a “3D it totally radical!” perspective (kids still say radical right?). What I want to delve into is a rather formulated and highly thought out question:

Why is My Bloody Valentine 3D in the crappy Blue and red 3D rather than awesome movie theatreblurry rad  3D?

After spending a few hours yelling that phrase (with many NSFW words) I realized that screaming it in the faces of every person walking past my house was not the best way to get an answer.  So like always, I fall back to my good friend the internet.  After hours of research (minutes, literally like 3 minutes) I stumbled onto some information that is highly technical and filled with words I rarely ever use.  Therefore I will repeat them in an effort to sound smart (which is the new “stupid” apparently?).

If you are not a nerd, loser, or just don’t care to know the absolute basics of 3D film, skip the next two paragraphs)

The 3D that it hitting the waves recently has a more specific name titled Polarized 3D (Which by the way if you find the entry for 3D film in Wikipedia, it is retardedly long).  Clearly just by going to the theatre and watching a movie in 3D, it’s not the same experience you may have been used to back in the day.  The camera (picture here) has what is essentially, two independent lenses in order to create a 3D effect for the viewer.  This is to simulate the two most kickass lenses/cameras you will ever see (your eyeballs).  Just like your eyeballs, they use a split perspective to create a depth of field which explains why you live your life in 3d.  You can tell when something is located in relation to the things surrounding it because having two eyes creates a depth of field.  This is also why pirates have terrible depth perception.  So, these cameras with two separate lenses are actually filming two images that are projected on top of one other and played simultaneously to give the illusion of depth.  When you wear the special glasses (these are called polarizing lenses) the image becomes focused, clear, and in 3D.  For those of you that wear contacts or glasses, it’s pretty much the same concept.  Everything is blurry and out of focus, then when you look through a specific lens, everything becomes clear to you.

The Red/Cyan (crappy cardboard glasses that cut your ears) frames are a different type of 3D projection known as anaglyph 3D.  The difference between real 3D and anaglyph 3D is that anaglyph shoots one images, and then doubles it into separate light spectrums (red and cyan) while Real 3D (polarizing) actually shoots two separate images in the same color spectrum.

Ok, normal people, you can keep reading again, the nerds are done doing their nerddery.

So with my new found knowledge of what the difference is between these two types of 3D, my question has not yet been answered somehow even though I explored a vaguely similar topic.

 Looking on the internets a bit more, I find a very common trap which I refer to as “The Corporate Horse*&$^ Philosophy”.  If you play videogames, you are already familiar with this practice, allow me to explain.  This is when a company blatantly lies to you about their technical limitations and then assumes that you will buy whatever they horse&%$* they are shipping out.  Like for example, when a videogame programmer tells me that in order to play this game online with a friend, I need to go out and buy another PS3 and a whole other own copy of the game because the system “can’t handle generating two simultaneous environments” via split screen?  We all know this is a bunch of garbage.  Remember Mario Kart or Goldeneye way back on the N64?  That was over 15 years ago (with a system that had 8 megs of ram).  Stop lying to me.  At least be honest about the greedy truth.  Yes it generates hate, but also respect.

Anyway getting back from that nerd garbage (which I swear my super nerdy roommate told me because I’m only into cool stuff like cars, drinking, and bangin’ hot chicks) it still doesn’t make any sense to me.  All it takes is for two images to be sent out at the same time and displayed mere inches apart.  They can already fit two different cuts of a movie on a blue ray disk so what’s the hold up?  Doing some more research (interweb-related), it says that HDMI cable are currently capable of streaming two separate video images so again I ask – why don’t I have this technology at my house right now?

If you are for some reason still with me, I bet you are asking yourself “yes Poppa, we get that you are a nerd and know way more about 3D than I could ever comprehend in your total and absolute awesomeness”.  That would be odd that you would “ask yourself” something that isn’t a question, so I’m going to assume you want to know how this pertains to horror movies.

We, being devout fans of the genre know damn well that this 3d gimmick is solely aimed at us and children that like cartoons (they overlap a lot, someone get on a Venn diagram…wait, here is one).


Movies like Final Destination 4 and Piranha are both going to be in 3D while a number of future remakes (and pieces of junk) are all throwing around the idea of shooting their films in 3D.  Anything these films can do to stay ahead of the pack (or keep up with it) will be done which is a school of thought I completely understand.  But what also needs to be understood is the need for the fans of the films to be able to get the same (or comparable) experience at their homes.  My entire life, I have had some kind of home video version of any movie I wanted to see.  When I become coherent, VHS was all the rage and everyone was rushing to dump new and classic films onto this medium.  Like everyone else can attest to, this led people to try and make their homes as much like the theaters as possible and with that comes a similar, yet different viewing experience.

I absolutely love going to the movie theater.  Something about sitting in the dark with a bunch of strangers who have at least some of the same interests that I have really gets me excited to be a fan.  The smell of the popcorn, the sound of a ripping ticket, or even the warm humid breeze of the backwoods Pennsylvania air blanketing the drive-in all paint a picture of what I believe heaven will be like.  But sometimes I just want to sit at home and pop in a DVD with some friends in the sanctity of my dwelling area.  And I would think by now, in 2009 someone can make the technology readily available so that a 50 year old gimmick looks awesome on my 50” plasma. 

Someone better get on this.

blog comments powered by Disqus