By Jae-Ha Kim
Chicago Sun-Times
July 2, 1998
Whatever happened to three-dimensional films?
You know – the kind where you strapped on a pair of goofy glasses, sat in a dark movie theater and squealed as Vincent Price worked his magic in “House of Wax.”
Four decades after their ’50s heyday, three-dimensional pictures are making a comeback – sort of.
“I don’t see a day when 3-D movies will be playing at the local cineplex like they used to in the 1950s,” said Susan Pinsky, president of Reel 3-D Enterprises in Culver City, Calif.
“There’s just too much at stake, and it’s very expensive to do a 3-D film right. Like with `Titanic,’ didn’t they play it on something like 1,400 screens a day? You can’t afford to do that with a 3-D film, where the theaters have to supply polarized eyeglasses and all that.
“But companies such as IMAX and Disney (for Disney World) are making some great 3-D pictures. They use this wonderful art form and make it into something really amazing for moviegoers to watch.”
Which means that while there’s little chance of being able to reach out and (kinda) touch Leonardo DiCaprio in his next picture, you can still live the 3-D experience at select theaters.
IMAX’s latest 3-D film, “Mark Twain’s America,” opens today at Navy Pier’s Imax Theatre. And the movie’s director, Stephen Low, thinks technology has finally caught up with the demands of producing a truly good 3-D film.
“Cinema couldn’t handle the demands of 3-D in the ’50s,” he says. “But today, with a large-screen format like IMAX, it’s the perfect time for 3-D to become more prevalent in films.”
Of his 50-minute, $6 million picture, he says, “IMAX really is the only way to make a 3-D film work. IMAX is a giant-screen format that uses film 10 times larger than 35-millimeter. It offers a very bright and high-quality image that is similar to your 3-D eyesight.”
Replacing the old anaglyph glasses with their red and green (or red and blue) lenses are plastic goggles equipped with liquid crystal lenses controlled by radio waves. Each lens blinks 48 times per second, roughly the same speed as the images on the screen. The goggles also are equipped with personal sound environment headphones.
With the high-tech goggles, moviegoers get the sensation that they can actually reach out and touch the images that appear to be flying toward them.
This sensation was one reason 3-D porno films such as John Holmes’ “Disco Dolls in Hot Skin” (1978) worked so well – even through old-fashioned anaglyph and polarized lenses.
Low says that the days of affordable personal goggles aren’t far away.
“I think that some people certainly are caught up in the idea that they don’t like to wear the glasses,” he says. “But many of us wear (eye)glasses anyway. I don’t think it’s inconceivable that people will one day get their own prescription 3-D glasses that they could wear into a theater to see a 3-D film.
“It’s the obvious next step. Real-life isn’t in two dimensions. Movies shouldn’t be, either. People always tell me about 3-D films, `I liked it when the thing came flying at my face.’ It’s a natural reaction because most people aren’t exposed to 3-D films. The problem is there are only about 200 IMAX theaters around the world, and only about 25 percent of them are equipped to show 3-D.”
The first: “Bwana Devil” started the craze in 1952. It had a cheesy plot and mediocre acting, but 3-D’s kitsch value was attractive to moviegoers.
You can’t touch this: For sheer nail-biting terror, you can’t beat “House of Wax” (1953) or Alfred Hitchcock’s “Dial M for Murder” (1954). In the former, creepy Vincent Price is as spooky as the wax dummies that populate the picture. And who can forget the latter, with beautiful Grace Kelly trying to defend herself with a pair of scissors that appear to be darting back and forth from the screen?
Sexiest: The ads for “The French Line” (1954) declared: “(Jane Russell) in 3-D. She’ll knock both your eyes out.” Her midriff-baring costumes were considered so daring that the wardrobe mistress had to cover Russell’s belly button with netting.
Warhol’s world: Even Andy Warhol had his 15 minutes of fame in the 3-D arena. Though his protege Paul Morrissey directed 1974’s “Frankenstein,” Warhol received the acclaim.
Scariest: “Jaws 3-D” (1983). Dun-dun dun-dun dun-dun.
Worst: “Comin’ at Ya!” There’s this guy who’s all tied up, see, and a bunch of rats are eating away at him, see. … Oh, yeah, you don’t want to see this 1981 Spanish feature.
Best IMAX film: “Into the Deep” (1994) is spectacular. You feel as if you’re swimming with the fishes in this gorgeous documentary.
The one with the King of Pop: Before he got so gosh-darned weird, Michael Jackson was on the cutting edge of making some pretty cool videos. He went one step further with his 1986 short “Captain EO.”
