What 3D is supposed to be like

Rating: 10/10 (11 March 2012)

Just saw the film - and it's as good as everybody says it is but not only for the reasons specified. I mean it is a love song to old cinema and its sources. It's superbly acted by all the actors involved, and it does carry the signature of Scorsese's genius with every frame. But the aspect I want to speak about is his magnificent use of the 3D technique.- Every picture is multi-layered, both visually and thematically, which means that the visual aspect of the film always reflects its intentions, its ideas - the way that truly good films are supposed to be. I've seen the 3D technique wasted in so many films of the last three years or so. Used for one or two scenes in a film with the real purpose of charging extra at the box office, not this time. Ever since Cameron revived the technique it was mostly misused go and see Hugo in 3D, and you'll see what it's supposed to look like. And also see how it serves the movie and not the producers wish to cash in. All else has already been said but for me this aspect of the film brilliance can never be stressed enough.