3-D Films: The New Colorization?

Sorry to bang an old drum, but I couldn't help but notice a piece in yesterday's New York Times that detailed James Cameron's grand plans for "three-dimensionalizing" more and more classic movies. You all know Cameron as the somewhat megalomaniacal director of "Avatar," and that other amazing cinematic work, "The Titanic" (excuse the archness, but I really can't help it if this is what is held up as great film art nowadays). Cameron now claims that, via the magic of technology which he pioneered, film editors will be able to make great films even more exciting by choosing which parts of the mis-en-scene should be closer and which further away, thus allowing the viewer to more fully enter the physical world of the film.

Hmm, why am I suddenly having deja-vu all over again? Who does this sound exactly like? Yep, you guessed it, that other paradigm of megalomania, Ted Turner, who believed that colorization was the answer to engaging people more fully in classic movies. By the way, have you seen any colorized movies lately? Yeah, probably not, because they have really become a rip-roaring dated embarrassment, a large Brontosaurus of an idea passed over by aesthetic and technological evolution. My first few experiences of watching colorized movies were filled with wonderment -- not at the added dimension to the viewing experience, but at how much the colorized films looked like those syrupy old studio photos that were once touched up with colored pencils -- you know, roses on the cheeks, blue dots on top of the eyes. Well, that's exactly what colorized movies look like -- touched up, and not with the colors you might have imagined -- no, the most banal and stereotypical color conceptions of some low-end production prole sitting in Turner production studios.

In sum, I really don't want someone to tell me what color Katherine Hepburn's hair is, and I also don't want someone to tell me if Rosebud is closer to me than Orson Welles. Believe it or not, I already have my own ideas about those things. And I will remain skeptical of any more "advances" by these presumptive "film innovators" that only appeal to a kind of lack of imagination and ADD-like need for stimulation in movie viewers.

James and Ted, your assignment today is to watch Eric Rohmer's "My Night At Maude's," and then tell me exactly why it doesn't need color or 3-D. Class dismissed.