posted 06-18-2008 01:07 AM                       

quote:

---

Riddled with mediocre money shots that more often that not amount to gimcrack gimmicks..."

"No single aspect of (the movie) illustrates its makers' relative dearth of ideas for harnessing 3D than the fact that the audience is either spit or drooled upon not once, not twice, but thrice during its scant 92-minute running time...spending who knows how much to capture Brendan Fraser spitting onto the camera after brushing his teeth is a waste of money by anyone's calculation."

"There are two separate shots of a yo-yo springing out toward the audience, which is at least one shot too many."

"Audiences' connection to this gimmicky mistranslation of a sci-fi classic is likely to be...spotty."

---

posted 06-18-2008 10:37 AM                    

quote:

---

After reading of the disagreements between IMAX and the producers, I decided that the film simply *had* to be seen, if for no other reason than the support of free artist endeavour, unfettered by the dictates of the machinery used to present it. The visual aesthetics of current 3D projection technology were also a strong drawing point.

First, the up side. Much of the film is computer-generated, usually quite obviously so, but this detracts very little from the beauty of the images on the screen. By way of introduction, the film begins with the viewer flying over a vast expanse of seascape and hillside, circling an ominous castle...getting ever closer and closer. This echo of early Imax films (i.e. North of Superior) is highly effective as a means to draw the viewer into the world subsequently created. The illusion of depth and solidity is maintained, and increased, throughout this rather short offering by clever viewpoints, slow panning and circling, and the creation of interior spaces and movements that had some of the audience gasping in discomfort, yet loving the "ride". Textures were sumptuous, perspectives both nightmarish and realistic, though the meshing of computer-generated surroundings and human actor(s) was somewhat disconnected or abstract at points. The 3D effect was never lost, though oft-times had a cartoonish quality to it. The music was geared to a 15-25 year-old audience, with some of it having an unearthly beauty that sent shivers along my spine.

The disturbing images are inadvertently humourous, lacking even the "horror punch" present in everyday hellfire-and-brimstone preaching, letalone the creepy-crawly quality present in "Nightmare Before Christmas".

The down side? The plot isn't much, characters lack depth, and trite philosophy underlies much of the dialogue on the screen. The technology is barely tolerable, with rather heavy eyegear needed to complete the illusions of visual depth. Watching three hours with this equipment on one's head would be physically painful, if not impossible. Though I soon adapted to the equipment I had to move my head, rather than my eyes, to look at different sections of the screen, in order to avoid a disconcerting strobing effect. This is hardly "ergonomic".

All in all, worth seeing as an almost-spectacular demonstration of a technology in its primitive stages of development, and a visual genre still in formation. More will come our way, and further refinements will no doubt amaze us in years to come.

---