Rarely has a remake felt more contractually obligated than the 2015 version of Poltergeist.
As "Jackass 3-D" splats into theaters, Frank Paiva and I, over at MSN Movies, debate such urgent questions as: "Are we done with the 3-D yet?"; "What does 3-D add to or subtract from the cinematic experience?"; "Is the technology itself any good?"; and, "What's the best use for it? Science-fiction spectaculars? Art films? Porn? Amusement park rides?"
Here's part of my take:
I think 3-D is simply another incarnation of the much-hyped "Angle" feature on DVDs. You know -- it's still there on your remote. It was the feature that was supposed to allow You, the User, to select alternate angles within a scene (assuming the filmmakers had provided the footage). Your invocation of Megan Fox's cleavage and Jake Gyllenhaal's chest hairs is right on the money. The most commercially viable use for 3-D (and for "Angle" and for the Internet) is porn.
This message came to me from a reader named Peter Svensland. He and a fr...
Having once made the statement above, I have declined all opportunities to ...
An essay on how technology has rendered us a one-handed species.