McGee's Movie Moments: Do we really need to see the third dimension?

Header image for Interrobang article CREDIT: PIXAR/DISNEY
Finding Nemo gets the 3D treatment with a re-release in November, and a lot of movie lovers aren't too happy about it.

Maybe it's just me, but I enjoy my theatregoing experience to have a hint of nostalgia to it. My best movie memories are of watching a film — yes on actual film — at the theatre: the big screen looming ahead and the impurities of the film crackling through the frame. Sure, I'm probably biased from my time spent at film school, memories of teachers preaching "film is best" echoing over and over in my mind.

I'm all for advancing the industry with rapid frame rates, higher definition and larger screen capabilities. I will even concede that every once in a while I can sit back, put on the oversized, uncomfortable glasses and submit to the glory and majesty of 3D film.

My biggest disappointment with the 3D technology wave that seems to be sweeping not just Hollywood but the film industry worldwide is the remastering of classic films into modern 3D marvels. Take, for example, The Lion King. Originally released in 1994, which made me the perfect age to enjoy its popularity when it was new, it will forever be a classic Disney children's movie.

Now think back to last September when The Lion King 3D graced screens across the country for two weeks in what some have hailed as a glorious run in remastered 3D. If any of you had the chance to see it, you will know what I mean when I say that 3D killed the magic of Simba, Timon, Pumbaa and all the other characters on the African savannah.

This year promises to bring much of the same destruction to a favourite children's film with the 3D release of Finding Nemo in November. Now, I love Finding Nemo as much as the next person — who can resist its silly charms? — but I just can't bring myself to watch it in the third dimension. Just as The Lion King lost nearly all of its charm when infused with the assaulting, dizzying feel of 3D technology, I fear Nemo's adventure will face the same fate.

I wonder why the film industry feels the need to turn to movies that have already given them huge successes and release them to audiences again, instead of focusing their energies on finding a new story to tell, a new film to make.

You wouldn't go and tamper with Homer's Odyssey just because grammatical structure has changed since it was written and translated into modern English. In the same vein, I have to wonder why the bigwigs in the industry feel like they need to tamper with classic films that work perfectly for what they are and change them because there is something bigger and better available.

A movie is a story captured in time, rich with the atmosphere of the world in which it was made, and trying to "update" an artifact to suit the tastes of a newer generation is nothing short of blasphemous, as far as I'm concerned.

So go home and watch an old movie the way it was made to be watched: in just two dimensions with the imperfections that made you love it in the first place.