Michael Bay on 3-D conversion: 'Right now, it looks like fake 3-D'

When Hollywood finds a new way to print money, they really go for the gold -- as in bullion. That's what's happening now as the studios have realized what a gold mine they have in 3-D, which is creating box-office bonanzas thanks to its premium ticket prices. So now a host of films are being slated for 3-D, with Sony going the 3-D route for "Popeye," Fox leaning toward 3-D conversions for its "Narnia" sequel, Disney doing the same for its "Pirates of the Caribbean" sequel and Warners having already announced that it will have (count 'em) nine 3-D titles in release in 2011.

Jim Cameron has already loudly voiced skepticism about the artistic merits of the process. And now he has a formidable new ally: Michael Bay. According to this well-reported piece by Deadline's Mike Fleming, Bay is in the midst of a high-stakes tug of war with Paramount over whether he's willing to allow the studio to convert his upcoming "Transformers 3" film to 3-D. Though he's an unlikely voice when it comes to issues of artistic merit, Bay is nothing if not blunt about his reservations, offering the most cogent argument yet against the 3D conversion process:

"I shoot complicated stuff, I put real elements into action scenes and honestly, I am not sold right now on the conversion process.... Right now, it looks like fake 3-D, with layers that are very apparent. You go to the screening room, you are hoping to be thrilled, and you're thinking, huh, this kind of sucks. People can say what they want about my movies, but they are technically precise, and if this isn't going to be excellent, I don't want to do it. And it is my choice.... I'm used to having the A-team working on my films, and I'm going to hand it over to the D-team, have it shipped to India and hope for the best? This conversion process is always going to be inferior to shooting in real 3-D. Studios might be willing to sacrifice the look and use the gimmick to make $3 more a ticket, but I'm not." 

It sounds like Bay has laid down the gauntlet. Whatever you think of his films' aesthetic qualities -- and I'm obviously not a fan -- you have to respect Bay for using his clout he's earned from a string of box-office hits to take a stand against cheesy 3-D conversions. I suspect a lot is riding on the audience reaction to the April 2 release of "Clash of the Titans," which Warners hastily converted to 3-D in the wake of the "Avatar" box-office blitzkrieg. If the movie's business falls off in its second weekend, after word gets around that the 3-D effects aren't worth an extra three bucks, we could suddenly be seeing a lot more filmmakers with the guts Bay has shown by taking a stand against turning his movie into another cash cow.

RECENT AND RELATED: 

Will 'Alice in Wonderland' start a DVD window revolution?

'Transformers 3': Will John Malkovich and Frances McDormand get a robot-sized paycheck?

'Clash of the Titans' 3-D conversion gets a very lackluster review

Is Jim Cameron talking out of both sides of his mouth on 3-D conversions?

Photo of Michael Bay by Ricardo DeAratanha / Los Angeles Times.

Comments

[OfficialCLM]

Look, Michael Bay (even with the weird 'Transformers 2' story line) still makes movies for the audience and I will always appreciate that about him. And so does James Cameron.

But as an audience member who sat opened-jawed through 'Avatar' IMAX 3D AND also thoroughly enjoyed the lower quality 3D conversion of 'Alice', the point here is that audiences KNOW 3D (whether tru3d or conversion) is a gimmick. And we gladly shell out $3 more to go see this fun gimmick. Why? Because for the first time in years, we audience members feel like the movie-going experience is worth revisiting. Honestly most of us don't know the difference between the quality of the two methods of getting 3D, but we do know it's fun to watch Johnny Depp be silly on 3D. We do know it's thrilling to watch the contractors get theirs Pandora-style on 3D. And it looks like watching Persius take on a giant Harryhausen style scorpion in 3D is going to be worth the three extra dollars when the 'Clash of the Titans' remake comes out in April. The point is, though it may make a difference to directors with the trained eye that only the Bays and Camerons may posses, as audience members, as Joe America, we're STOKED about the 3D revolution.

You guys figure out how you want to do it. I know we don't want every movie to cost $500 million to make it and shoot it in true 3D, but if we can have an option between watching our big summer movies with our cool glasses on and jumping and experience the 3D gimmick and watching the same old stuff on 2D for $3 less...I think audiences are ready to get more for our money and Bay and Cameron might just be the guys to lead the charge.

[Rob]

I've always been a fan of Bay's in terms of his aesthetic pieces of work infused with subpar story telling. But nonetheless most of his works have all been entertaining and worth the movie ticket price. After reading this article, i finally have a new found respect for the man. I can only hope this new breach of conformity will un-stigmatize the guy from being the king of cash cow's and proving his artistic merit. Go Bay!

[Ann]

I agree with Mr. Bay and I add that I do not like 3D at all. Remember "It's Back! It's Bigger! It's Better! And it's... Comin' At Ya!" ?

Not good.

[JC]

Alice was converted, and it shows. If you don't shoot it in 3 D, then don't show it in 3 D. Use the tool wisely or it will become nothing but a hammer, smashing everything it touches and killing whatever subtlety was being conveyed.

[John]

"Alice in Wonderland" was a conversion and to me looked bad with considerable eyestrain in the theater I saw it in. I complained to management as their projection lamp was flickering which may have been the cause of headache. Also the cinematography looked drained. Real 3-D experiences are hands down successful as in the excellent 3-D cinematography in "Final Destination" and "Avatar". Don't cheapen the 3-D experience.

[Clyde]

About time the big voices from hollywood speak up about this!
Michael - you the man!
http://www.slideshare.net/clydd/2dto3dconvertedmovies

[puchoo]

true word Mr. Bay said. even if he is pure 100% money bussines director i must stand with him about those conversions. and yes.. his movies are technically precise and if he wants to keep it that way he musn't give up with this 3-D fame.