The Future of 3-D


Avatar tsmall flickr.jpg
In case you haven't heard, James Cameron's Avatar is a huge success. By now, global revenues have surpassed $1.5 billion, with its backers projected to earn a $1 billion or more over time. The film's technical artistry has dazzled critics (the script and acting much less so, despite taking top honors at the Golden Globes). But the most significant lasting impact of the film is the anointing of 3-D as the next big thing in movies and television.

Avatar comes in 2-D formats, but the 3-D version on huge IMAX screens at $15 per ticket has shown the potential for raising the upper limit of what consumers will pay for a movie. I saw it that way in a crowded theater with stadium seating and buckets of popcorn on most laps. IMAX is booming, although it still represents a small number of total screens. According to BusinessWeek, nine of the top ten movies with the best opening weekend box office in 2009 were shown in IMAX venues as well as regular theaters. In the next twelve months, the magazine reported, IMAX will boost its theater capacity by 50 percent. Right after New Year's Day, the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas featured 3-D televisions to be released soon at prices around $10,000 and Discovery and ESPN said they will launch programming that can be aired on those sets. Clearly, the combination of videography, computer animation, and projection has rendered stereoscopic presentation possible on a scale to make filmmakers delirious and moguls giddy.

As any film buff knows, 3-D is nothing new. The merging of left-eye, right-eye pictures into single images with depth fields has been around since Thomas Edison. The short-lived peak of previous movie popularity for 3-D was in the 1950s, with the advent of polarized lenses. Probably the most famous movie of that 3-D era was The House of Wax, in which Vincent Price's grotesque, melting face in flames at the climax was meant to terrify filmgoers. Bosley Crowther's review in The New York Times on April 1, 1953, is worth reading for its vituperation. He called it as "wild a display of noise and nonsense as has rattled a movie screen in years." Ultimately, he concludes, "the added dimension of 'deepness' is of slight significance." It should be noted that, at New York's Paramount Theater, an accompanying stageshow featured crooner Eddie Fisher, then at the height of his fame. The 3-D era soon ended, just as several memorable pictures were being released, including Alfred Hitchcock's Dial M for Murder, because studios decided the added revenues weren't worth the trouble.

I have no idea what 3-D on television is like, but one of the most striking features of Avatar as the pinnacle of the movie genre is that, after a few minutes, what Crowther called "deepness" is no longer especially important to the film. Engulfed by all the computer wizardry on an enormous screen with stereophonic sound, having creatures fluttering and weapons blasting overhead seems no particularly big deal. As has been the case for movies so often before--faced with the competition of television, ever-larger home screens, DVDs with extra features, HDTV, and now Blu-Ray--the goal of 3-D and IMAX is to draw audiences into theaters. Ticket sales reached a record $10.6 billion last year, proving again that theaters still provide the essential lift-off for event films that then roll up added revenues in home release. And with each succeeding breakthrough in magnificence, the audiences are inclined to become more demanding.

It certainly seems now that Avatar will be hard to top. It cost $380 million to make, and a vast additional fortune to promote. Because his Titanic was such a blockbuster, Cameron could command the resources to make this movie happen at the level it did. Yet history shows that today's extravaganza is bound to be superseded eventually. A generation ago, Star Wars was the ne plus ultra; now it looks almost quaint. The enduring films of sweep and spectacle are those like Lawrence of Arabia, Gandhi, and Saving Private Ryan, which are as memorable for their story telling as for their panoramic vision. Avatar is a technical triumph. But I'm guessing it is too much of Cameron's supersized video game to provide much basis for other 3-D films.

As for the 3-D television, the likelihood that it will eventually dominate the market seems remote given the costs and the need for accompanying goggles. In his skeptical appraisal of home 3-D, David Pogue, The New York Times technology columnist, wrote after the consumer show, "didn't the TV makers and broadcasters just finish dragging the populace through a confusing, expensive transition from our old TV system into the new, flat panel, high definition age? . . . I think there's something called Upgrade Fatigue, my friends, and I think the TV industry is about to face-plant right into it." The future of 3-D may well turn out to be a lot like its past: a recurring fascination and fun to watch in the right circumstances, but less a pillar of entertainment than Avatar's colossal momentum at the start of 2010 would make it seem.

Photo credit: tsmall/flickr

Jump to comments
Presented by

Peter Osnos is a journalist turned book editor/publisher. He spent 18 years working at various bureaus for The Washington Post before founding Public Affairs Books. More

Peter Osnos is founder and editor at large of PublicAffairs books and a media fellow at The Century Foundation which distributes this weekly "Platform" column. (An archive of the columns is available at He is vice-chairman of the Columbia Journalism Review and executive director of The Caravan Project, which is also based at The Century Foundation.

Osnos spent 18 years at the Washington Post, where he was variously Indochina bureau chief, Moscow correspondent, foreign editor, national editor and London bureau chief.

He was publisher of Random House's Times Books Division from 1991 to 1996, and was also vice president and associate publisher of the Random House imprint. Authors he has worked with include President Bill Clinton, former President Jimmy Carter, Rosalyn Carter, Nancy Reagan, former Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill, Barack Obama, Boris Yeltsin, Paul Volcker, Kareem Abdul Jabbar, Clark Clifford, Sam Donaldson, Morley Safer, Peggy Noonan, Molly Ivins, Stanley Karnow, Jim Lehrer, Muhammad Yunus, Scott McClellan, Robert McNamara, Natan Sharansky, and journalists from the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, Wall Street Journal, Newsweek, The Atlantic and the Economist.

He served as chair of the Trade Division of the Association of American Publishers Committee, and is an emeritus member of the Board of Directors of Human Rights Watch. He serves on the board of other journalism and human rights organizations and is a member of The Council on Foreign Relations.
Get Today's Top Stories in Your Inbox (preview)

Sad Desk Lunch: Is This How You Want to Die?

How to avoid working through lunch, and diseases related to social isolation.

Elsewhere on the web

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register. blog comments powered by Disqus


Where Time Comes From

The clocks that coordinate your cellphone, GPS, and more


Computer Vision Syndrome and You

Save your eyes. Take breaks.


What Happens in 60 Seconds

Quantifying human activity around the world



More in Entertainment

Just In