Have you heard of this movie called The Avengers? Apparently it’s a team-up movie of a group of at least semi-known superheroes that is being directed by a guy named Joss Whedon, who may have already done some genre work in his past. There hasn’t been any news throughout the film’s production that Whedon and company were filming things with 3D cameras, so you probably haven’t been anticipating it getting a 3D release; but you would be wrong.
Today Disney announced that come May 4, 2012, The Avengers will be hitting theaters both in 2D and 3D versions. What does this mean as far as the nuts and bolts of the filmmaking goes? It means that once the movie is put together, it will have to go through the 3D post-conversion process, which is controversial. Perhaps most famously, Clash of the Titans came out sporting post-converted 3D, and audiences were heard to unanimously groan at how subtle and non-existent the 3D effects were. The issue with this is that shoddy post-produced 3D movies sport a ticket price that is just as jacked up as films that are shot natively in 3D, and perhaps deserve the extra few bucks.
Some indication has come out over the years that post-converting a film to 3D doesn’t necessarily mean that it has to look terrible. If enough time is taken to properly layer in the effect it can both be noticeable and beneficial to an immersive experience, like in the last Harry Potter movie, Deathly Hollows: Part 2; but personally I still haven’t seen one that looks nearly as good as a film shot natively in the format. Nor have I seen one that I would say is worth a higher ticket price than a normal 2D showing of the film.
So, I guess the question is, with returns on 3D ticket sales shrinking as the months go by, why do studios keep alienating their customers by putting out overpriced, disappointing experiences? Am I off base about this? Are any of you planning on paying extra for the 3D Avengers experience once it hits theaters, or will you save a couple bucks and watch the film as it was shot? [THR]