One Titanic misstep - A review of Titanic in 3-D
Titanic is still a classic film, but the 3-D conversion really wasn't necessary
3-D is all the rage among filmmakers these days. Everything under the sun is coming out in 3-D. It's too bad that the films that really should have been made 3-D (Inception, anyone?) weren't made that way, but I think that Hollywood should keep it's paws off the classics. They were good enough without the tinkering.
Titanic is a perfect case in point. Here's a fantastic movie that should have been left alone.
I understand that it's the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the actual ship. Re-releasing the movie was a great idea and a tribute to the 1500 lives that were lost that terrible night.
But did Cameron have to try to top himself? Avatar was fantastic. Titanic is just so-so.
In good 3-D movies, the effect is gradually layered so you get a perception of depth in the entire scene, thus making it appear to your eyes that the scene is more lifelike. Here, on several occasions, the layered effect is so pronounced that I almost thought I was watching paper cutouts acting against an animated background. It was not realistic.
The film though still shines through and if for no other reason than to see the sheer magnificense of the ocean liner once again on the big screen, Titanic is more than worth the money and the time spent to see it again.
But I'll hedge my bets when it comes to this 3-D technology. The desire to overdo it in Hollywood is turning a once magnificent enterprise into a shilling expedition for more box office bucks.
I rate the movie Titanic with 5 stars (out of 5), but the 3-D version only gets 4 stars out of me.