Thursday, September 18, 2014
Inquirer Daily News

UP: To 3-D or Not 3-D?

There's no question that you will see Up, the sublime Pixar animation about a septuagenarian grouch and a pesky kid who sail to the Orinoco in a Victorian house hoisted by a bouquet of helium balloons. The only questions are when and how.

UP: To 3-D or Not 3-D?

Things are looking "Up."
Things are looking "Up."

There's no question that you will see Up, the sublime Pixar animation about a septuagenarian grouch and a pesky kid who sail to the Orinoco in a Victorian house hoisted by a bouquet of helium balloons. The only questions are when and how.

When is up to you. How is a more delicate matter. Should you see it in 3-D? I chose not to. For me, while 3-D glasses deepen spatial perspectives, they wash out the evocative colors of animated films. (For this reason, I vastly preferred Coraline in its "flat," or 2-D version, than in 3-D glasses.) Many others have experienced the same problem. Although Roger Ebert is agnostic about the preferable format, here's what he has to say:

"But let me gently mention one of the film's qualities that is likely to be diminished by 3D: Its subtle and beautiful  color palette. Up, like Finding Nemo, Toy Story, Shrek and The Lion King,   uses colors in  a way  particularly suited to its content."

While the so-called "Pixar guys" -- John Lasseter, Andrew Stanton, Brad Bird and Pete Docter -- are avowed fans of the legendary Japanese anime master Hayao Miyazaki, Up is the first Pixar movie to approximate the watercolor transparency of Miyazaki's images.

Your thoughts? Consider this an open thread to talk about your experience of 3-D, animation and Pixar v. Disney and Dreamworks.

Carrie Rickey Film Critic
About this blog

Carrie Rickey Film Critic
Latest Videos:
Also on Philly.com:
Stay Connected