It seems Hollywood turns to 3-D every 25 years or so; it first rose in popularity in the late 50s as cinema turned to unique alternatives to distance itself from television, then again in the early 80s, for reasons I’m not entirely sure, especially in horror films like Jaws 3-D, Amityville 3-D, and Friday the 13th Part III, the latter of which showcased Jason crushing a man’s head with an eyeball popping out at the audience.
And now it’s back, in an improved digital form called “Real D” and touted as the next big thing in cinema. Up till now, however, it’s been almost exclusively used in mainstream animated and concert films, mostly movies that have been made with traditional viewing in mind and 3-D tacked on as a gimmick (Monsters vs. Aliens, which I haven’t seen, may be an exception).
Patrick Lussier’s My Bloody Valentine, however, is not only the first horror film to use the new technology, it’s also been conceived as 3-D experience from the ground up.
In 1981, My Bloody Valentine was a typical slasher film. I haven’t seen it in years, but it was more memorable than most due to an authentic atmosphere and some modest originality within the impossibly strict genre bounds. 2009’s My Bloody Valentine is virtually the same film: a typical slasher, more violent than most, less pretentious than the recent wave, a throwback to 80s efforts. If you see it in 2-D (not at all recommended), that’s all you need to know.
Story: a mine accident caused in part by the owner’s son Tom (Jensen Ackles), who took leave to attend a Valentine’s Day dance, leaves seven men trapped. One of the men, Harry Warden, kills off the other six to preserve oxygen, then gets out and goes on another killing spree before he’s trapped in the mines, again, this time for good (hmm…)
Ten years later, Tom returns to town to sell his father’s mine, meeting up with his old flame Sarah (Jaime King) and her husband, and new sheriff, Axel (Kerr Smith). And the killings start up again.
The movie thrives on a who’s-the-real-killer storyline, which is surprisingly successful right up till the end. Business as usual for the most part, with a large supporting cast killed off one-by-one by a masked miner using a pickaxe: pickaxe to the top of the head, to the back of the head and out through the eye, through the eye out the back, up through the bottom and ripping off the jaw, gutted, decapitated, and so on. You get your money’s worth.
But wait – it’s all in 3-D! My Bloody Valentine may be nothing but an average slasher film in two dimensions, but it’s the best use of 3-D I’ve ever seen in a feature film.
The miner menacingly points his pickaxe at the audience, body parts come flying at us, all well and good. We come to expect that, and the old anaglyph pictures delivered these isolated scenes as well. But every single shot in My Bloody Valentine makes use of three dimensions, or at least the illusion of three dimensions.
A simple scene in a supermarket has real dimensionality as you stare down the aisles and feel what is close to you and what isn’t, adding to the atmosphere in a film like this in a way I’ve never seen before. Two frightened girls are carefully walking around, and you’re not watching them, you’re right in there with them; you get that urge to turn around, the killer might really be behind you.
The deaths sound cartoonish, and they usually are these days, but 3-D does two things: it adds another dimension of reality to the grisly scenes, and it obscures some of the always-noticeable digital effects work. In effect, this adds tremendous realism to the violence; add in buckets of it, and I find it shocking that the film was given an ‘R’ rating in the US.
Something I found interesting: 3-D seems to draw more attention to the actors, their abilities and liabilities. Every scene in the film is fully dimensional, which means most of the time we’re staring at an in-focus actor against an unfocused background as the technology dictates what we focus on as opposed to traditional rules of cinematography.
Going along with this, the actors have to do their job, on some level, for the film to succeed. In My Bloody Valentine, Ackles and Smith perform admirably: while I wouldn’t call what they do here good acting, they’re always interesting to watch, full of expression, with Smith, in particular, using his in-focus advantage to chew up the scenery.
King, on the other hand, is just a vapid blank slate as our female lead. So beautiful in brief roles in Sin City and The Spirit, she’s a frumpy brunette here; her face jumps out at the audience during every scene, but it says absolutely nothing. Old pros Tom Atkins and Kevin Tighe also ham it up, providing welcome focal points whenever on screen.
The film was shot in Nova Scotia, standing in for Pennsylvania, and it looks quite atmospheric; I can’t really be sure, though, since in almost every shot the town/forest/mine in the background is slightly out of focus. This is one aspect of the film that’ll play better in 2-D.
A few notes on the 3-D experience: the 3-D glasses I received at Palace Cinemas Slovanský dům were large enough to fit over normal glasses, which is a nice touch. But they were also recycled from previous wearers, unwashed and greasy with fingerprints on the lenses (which were difficult to clean off the flimsy plastic). There were no trailers before the film, so show up on time. Ticket prices are 50 CZK more than a 2-D film. The film is also screening in 2-D in a few cinemas; make sure you catch the right version.
One Response