Dimensionalizing

I've been talking about the new process whereby a 2D movie can be made into a 3D movie. Variety calls it 'dimensionalizing' and the British call it 'dimensionalising' and some very big names are very bullish about it.

Read more...

LAS VEGAS -- Jedis, Hobbits and the Terminator joined the crusade for digital 3-D cinema on the closing day of ShoWest.
In two much-hyped demonstrations, heavyweight helmers George Lucas, James Cameron, Robert Zemeckis and Robert Rodriguez evangelized 3-D filmmaking and exhorted exhibs to install the digital upgrades required to play the stereoscopic attractions.

...

The presentations, sponsored by Texas Instruments' DLP Cinema, featured 3-D clips from "The Polar Express," "The Lord of the Rings," Cameron's underwater doc "Aliens of the Deep," as well as "dimensionalized" clips of older titles including the original "Star Wars," "Top Gun" and "Titanic."

Cameron said he plans to make all his future films in 3-D, including "Battle Angel," which 20th Century Fox plans to release in 2007. Since the number of 3-D houses is still small, pic is expected to get a wide 2-D release.

...

With the advent of new processes to convert older films into 3-D, Lucas said he is extremely anxious to reissue his "Star Wars" films in the format. In-Three Inc. developed the tech used for the presentation.

Link (expensive reg. req).

The print edition of the article is longer, and includes this nugget:

Appearing in a pre-taped clip, "Rings" helmer Peter Jackson said, "I'm one day looking forward seeing Hobbits in 3-D."

Let's assume for a moment that after Cameron releases Battle Angel in 2007, digital projectors take off because the public demands to see the latest big-budget spectacles in 3D. The studios rush to dimensionalize what's in their pipeline and Lucas manages to monetize his Star Wars franchise once again. This means that downstream people are also going to want to see stuff in 3D. Downstream by that time will probably be heavily HDTV and Internet broadband. So t.v. does what it has always done: steal film's thunder. They add color, t.v. adds color. They go widescreen, t.v. goes widescreen. Right?

So what does film do then? Do we branch out into another sense? Touch? Smell? Videogames have been trying to go immersive for a while. I could see theaters installing 'rumble packs' in the seats, but that would be a pretty blunt way to add a sense of touch. Sound systems with heavy bass already have the ability to shake your whole body anyway.

You could have a braille type thing that you slide your hand into that would make different textures. Smell seems almost rude, because so many people have so many allergies and sensitivites to smell. And if you thought fart jokes in kid's movies were bad before, well...

If I could add a sense to film, it would be taste. I know Ang Lee would be right there with me. But really, people already eat during movies. Why not have concession stands serve themed food as well? Dinner theater suddenly looks prescient.

But seriously. Meals are communal and film is communal, even in a way that t.v. isn't. Many people think the next generation of film will be totally immersive and indistinguishable from a video game. But that's so solo it ain't even Han. The idea of film is that you're sharing the experience with a bunch of warm bodies sitting next to you. Regular movie-goers know the difference between seeing a movie on opening night and catching three weeks later in an empty theater. If you're alone, it isn't fully dimensional.