Star Trek Into Darkness is being release into theaters this coming May as a 3D venture. But had it been up to J.J. Abrams, that never would have happened. According to him, he was forced to make the Trek sequel 3D. At least at first.
Abrams came into Trek totally against 3D as a format, but the studio had something else in mind. Says Abrams, "The studio said, 'You have to make it in 3D if you're going to make it, for economic reasons.' But my feeling was I didn't like 3D. So the idea of doing Star Trek in 3D was ridiculous."
Sounds problematic, doesn't it? According to Abrams, though, having that dissonance "was very helpful in some ways, because it let us work with stereographers and the 3D crew in a way that didn't assume we just loved 3D."
That doesn't mean it was all easy going. Abrams confessed he was very "cynical" in his views of 3D. Mirroring the thoughts of many people, Abrams explained, "I have trouble with 3D sometimes. I can't see it right; I get a headache; it annoys me; I hate the glasses; I hate the fact that things get so dim."
So who do you deal with all that when you're directed the sequel to one of the biggest sci-fi franchises of all time? According to Abrams, "The key for me is I got to make my 2D movie that I wanted to make, just the way I wanted to; and it gets to be augmented in 3D but that doesn't detract from the 2D."
Like an old lady in a Wendy's commercial, we're forced to ask, "Where's the beef?" Or, in this case, the 3D. Explains Abrams, the 3D exists through "things like breaking shots into zones, 3D zones, using multiple virtual cameras."
So it sounds like what we'll be seeing is 3D as more set dressing than full-on in-your-face action. How does that make you feel? Are you more likely to check out the 3D version knowing that, or less?
(via Digital Spy)