Solidarity Against 3D

Every now and then, we get a quote of brilliance from someone involved in The Hunger Games series, something that makes us go “YES! YOU GET IT! THANK YOU!”

One that was released once a while ago is still filling us with all sorts of happiness even after the film’s release!

What is it?

Yeahhhhh.... NO THANKS.

Gary Ross, discussing why no part of the films will ever be in 3D:

“No, absolutely not, no [I wouldn’t consider 3D for ‘Catching Fire’]. I don’t think it’s appropriate for this film. I think that if we shoot this movie in 3D, we become the Capitol; we start making spectacle out of something that I don’t think is really appropriate here. There needs to be an aesthetic distance because of the nature of the material, the premise, what they’re doing. I think that cinematic techniques designed to intensify the experience if you feel them that way, aren’t really appropriate. I mean I love 3D, I really do and I think it’s a wonderful tool, I just don’t think it’s the right tool for this.”

Why are we bring this up now, you ask? The entertainment media is ripe with reviews and critiques (which we’ve mainly stopped looking at, lest we end up punching a critic in the face). In a few of them, critics have suggested that a 3D would have enhanced the viewing experience, which is just about the stupidest thing we’ve ever heard.

This is a story about HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS, people! It’s children killing each other and families being ripped apart and a government system that is beyond corrupt! It is not a children’s cartoon or a sci-fi drama or even a cheeseball horror movie.

The films are not meant to be a delightful visual spectacle. They are meant to make you uncomfortable and make you consider our current society’s dangerous desensitization toward violence.

We’re not saying 3D is good for nothing. It was appropriate for Josh Hutcherson’s flick Journey 2: The Mysterious Island to be in 3D, because it was a children’s adventure film with a heavy hand in visual effects. It’s meant to inflict these fantastically warm, fuzzy feelings. The Hunger Games is not.

“Well, then why did they bother with IMAX?” You ask. Simple. They are not the same! IMAX is meant to intensify the movie-going experience by providing you with a larger screen and better sound. It doesn’t actually change the movie and make things jump out at you for cheap thrills.

Yes, there are a lot of awesome tricks filmmakers keep up their sleeves, but it’s important to know when to use them!

So thank you, Gary Ross, for knowing the difference between telling a story and mindless entertainment!

How About We Just Get a Longer IMAX Run Next Time,
The Girl With The Pearl


One comment

  1. Yes! Agree! And it was AMAZING in IMAX which I saw the movie in twice lol! Like you said it should be on IMAX longer for Catching Fire.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s