Disney dominates 3D Oscar noms

Disney dominated the 3D movies nominated for Oscars today, with five of the six nominated 3D movies.

“Toy Story 3” picked up one of the 10 noms in the top category of Best Motion Picture as well as Best Animated Feature among its five total noms.

“Alice in Wonderland” had three Academy Award nominations, including best visual effects, while “Tron: Legacy” is up for sound editing, Pixar’s “Day & Night” for animated short film (Warner’s 3D Road Runner short “Fur of Flying” should also have been nominated), and “Tangled” for original song.

The only other 3D movie with a nomination is Paramount’s “How to Train Your Dragon” from DreamWorks Animation in the animated feature category.

But for all the hoopla surrounding 3D this year, and all the high-profile movies released in the format, only one was nominated in the bloated primary category and the nominations for two of the other six had nothing to do with the 3D (“Tron” for sound editing and “Tangled” for song). Likewise, two of the three for “Alice” are for non-3D elements of art direction and costume, and the third of visual effects may not be meant for the 3D effects. Similarly, three of the five noms for “Toy Story 3” are for sound, song and screenplay, and one of the two noms for “Dragon” was for score.

As a matter of fact, one suspects the 3D didn’t play much of a role in the two best picture noms for “Toy Story 3,” especially since the 3D in the movie was nearly undetectable.

It’s possible that 3D only played a role in the nomination of one movie, “How to Train Your Dragon,” which came across as if it were designed specifically for 3D.

But two animated movies in 3D that should have been nominated in the animated feature category are Universal’s “Despicable Me” and Disney’s “Tangled,” both of which were comparable to “Toy Story 3” and superior to “How to Train Your Dragon” in their cleverness and artistic elements and featured 3D that was far superior to “TS3.”

Except for one screenplay nom for “TS3,” there was no recognition for any 3D movie in the prominent above-the-line categories of directing, writing, or acting. And I think IMAX’s “Hubble 3D” was overlooked in the documentary category.

Perhaps that is an indication that 3D is still perceived as a gimmick technology at the moment. Or perhaps it means that 3D movies are being produced more for the gimmickry than for the substance of the material to which 3D is brought in as just another filmmaking tool to tell the story.

If the quality of the 3D were factored  in,

— By Scott Hettrick