Below is a response I made regarding how 3D is a new tool of expression and not just a gimmick.
Absolutely it has and always will be about the content. But I think you might be missing my point so I’ll try my best to clarify.
An Artist uses tools to create art. Not the other way around. The tools themselves do not art make ;^) But the tools do facilitate the creation of art. For example, without the invention of pigment paint and specialized brushes artists would not have been able to express fantastic artworks. If they only had cave walls and chalk or animal blood – we simply would not have the amazing paintings that we do. In the same way canvas and oil paints facilitated new ways for artists to express ideas so does 3D have the ability to open pathways to artists that simply can’t be expressed any other way.
And that is my point; that 3D is not tech for the sake of tech or gimmick or some reason to go see a movie. It is a new tool that has yet to be fully explored in the context of an artist tool. For a long time orchestras only had strings. Certainly, great music is possible with an orchestra comprised only of strings. But add reed instruments and brass instruments… wow the tonal complexities grow exponentially and new art never heard before was possible. They didn’t simply play the music pieces written for strings and added the other instruments as an effect or gimmick. They added the other instruments and created completely new artistic expression. Mahler was most certainly influenced by Mozart when he wrote his Symphonies, but they are completely new and unique art. And it was due to the new tools (instruments) available to Mahler that were not available to Mozart. There was no need to limit music making to Mozart instruments.
The reason a Twilight Zone episode is so great is because the tools available to the artist were used effectively to express a story. We needn’t try to enhance it – because it was created as intended with all of the tools necessary and that the artist was competent using at the time of its creation.
I submit that few if any artists are fully competent with 3D technology – although a motion picture like Avatar will likely break new ground. I am VERY excited about the possibilities of incredible new artist expression using three dimensional technology.
The reference to the Matrix was not a suggestion that ANYTHING needed to be changed in the movie. It was to suggest that if the tool of 3D was available and understood at the time the movie was being created that certain scenes might have been expressed in a new way. Much like the rest of the movie which broke amazing new ground with bullet time camera rigs and new tech to create amazing NEW artistic expression. I suggest the PERHAPS the use of 3D in a scene where they were having trouble expressing a transition from a 2D TV monitor into a different dimension might have been expressed with the use of 3D technology to facilitate the artist’s intent. This is an example to think about – not a suggestion to change the movie in any way.