If you're interested in the future of 3D movie-making – and you probably should be because it's, well, the future – you'd do well to go and read Variety's rather hefty interview with James Cameron on the latest techniques and how he's using them. Have a look here. It's rather technical at times (apparently it's not just done with red and green plastic now), but there's interesting stuff in there. We got a bit confused when he started talking about 'stereospace'. But then we get confused when reading the microwave instructions for our morning porridge.
Cameron talks a bit about Avatar, but it's more about applying the technology to the movie rather than anything to do with plot. He does, however, say that despite this being a 3D movie he's not planning all the shots with the intention of things springing out directly at you.
"On Avatar, I have not consciously composed my shots differently for 3-D. I am just using the same style I always do," he says. "Having said that, I am not above milking a good 3-D moment, as long as it doesn't interrupt the narrative flow."
He also adds that he'd like to use this technology for something smaller, to show that it doesn't just have to be applied for blockbusters. "I plan to shoot a small dramatic film in 3-D, just to prove this point, after Avatar," he continues. "In Avatar, there are a number of scenes that are straight dramatic scenes, no action, no effects. They play very well, and in fact seem to be enhanced by the stereo viewing experience. So I think this can work for the full length of a dramatic feature."
Would something like Sex, Lies and Videotape or Juno be enhanced by 3D viewing? We can't see how, but then James Cameron's rather more of an expert on the technology than we are. It will certainly be interesting to see if 3D can be incorporated to become the norm for filmmaking. There's an argument to be made that it could increase the immersive experience in things other than effects blockbusters. 3D could conceivably make something like Schindler's List more harrowing by putting the audience almost literally in the scene. Or something like Moulin Rouge could be dazzling by putting the viewer among the dancers. We think the days of it moving beyond gimmick are a way off, but the possibilities are fascinating and it'll be interesting to see if directors known for smaller films start to experiment with the technology.
What do you think of the future of 3D?