Media, My Media
Media, My Media
Pixar’s “Up” - 2D or 3D?
By Leo N. Holzer
OK, "Up" just wrapped its opening weekend and the real debate isn't whether the film is worth seeing -- it's whether it's worth the additional charge ($2 to $5, depending on the theater) to see the film in 3-D.
I've seen both versions and now I'm here with my thoughts, likely to muddle the debate even more.
First, there's a bit of a difference in the lead-in promotions. "Up" in Disney Digital 3-D offers audiences a teaser trailer for "Toy Story 3" in Disney Digital 3-D. By now, you've likely seen a 2-D version of it from the various links posted on the 'Net.
While it's great to see the gang all back together (and I loved the funny bit with Ham), it does little other than to remind us of those beloved characters and let us know about its June 2010 release date. There's also a new 3-D logo for Pixar, with
P I X A R at an angle vs. straight on facing the audience.
"Up" as it is shown in traditional 2-D film format includes a wonderful trailer for "The Princess and the Frog," reminding the audience of all those great films from Walt's days to the last resurgence of great Disney animation in "The Little Mermaid," "Beauty and the Beast," etc.
In addition, we get a few scenes from "Princess and the Frog," a glimpse of the voodoo villain, the prince and Disney's first black princess, who becomes a frog herself after planting a kiss on the frog prince. We get a few laughs and more from it that we do the 3-D "Toy Story 3" trailer.
Actually, I think it was a mistake not to prime audiences for the 3-D double-bill theatrical release of "Toy Story" and "Toy Story 2." Think about all those children who've yet to see Pixar's first feature and its first "sequel more than equal" on the big screen. It'll be real interesting to see how well these films do at the box office given all the home video and DVD copies floating out there.
Now, as to the feature presentation of "Up," there really are things I liked about both.
As "Up" director Pete Docter and producer Jonas Rivera told me, the 3-D is used to help support "feelings" and "moods" in certain scenes, just as Pixar uses colors, lighting, scene compostion and the interplay of various shapes: angularity and squares vs. circles.
But, should you decide to pay the additional charge to view "Up" in 3-D, take a look at each lens in those special glasses. Hold them up to a wall or ceiling light source and see just how much of that projected image will be blocked from your eyes. It's like watching a film wearing your sunglasses, something that reduces the light by 20 percent or more and slightly changes the colors received by your eyes.
The scene with the reflected lighting off the balloons holding the house aloft is glorious in 2-D; a bit less so in 3-D. But then, the scene of the house flying above the city and rural landscapes seems a bit more special in 3-D.
While there are no "hugga bugga" moments to "sell" 3-D, its use seems appropriate and adds a bit to the overall emotional experience. Still it's like adding 10 more pounds of muscle to a 300-pound gorilla which already has a knockout punch.
If you can afford the "Up" charge, see the film in Disney Digital 3-D -- it's something that may be difficult to replicate at home (but maybe you can watch a 3-D film via a home Blu-ray set up). But if the additional $$ for everyone in your household to see "Up," is money you'd rather spend on something else ... that's perfectly understandable.
Either way, you're going to have a great time at the movies. Story, Story, Story ... no other studio works harder to deliver films audiences will enjoy for generations.
Pixar delivers yet again. Maybe, after the commercial and critical hit string is extended to 15 or 20 films, the naysayers at the Wall Street Journal and elsewhere -- expecting a flop with every new film -- will be silenced.
Tuesday, June 2, 2009