The purpose of this review is not to comment on the artistic quality (or lack thereof) of Cat Women of the Moon in 3-D, from Rhino Home Video. The laughable dialog and cheap production values of Cat Women of the Moon have already been adequately trashed by legions of others before me. I am an aficionado of 3-D movies and I want to comment on the quality of the 3-D effects in this video release of the film. I purchased the video specifically to see the 3-D, since this is one of the few 3-D movies from the nineteen fifties that I did not see during the original theatrical release.
To the best of my knowledge, this is one of only three full-length theatrical 3-D movies from the 1950's that are available on the home video market in the two-color anaglyphic format. The others are Robot Monster, the ultimate classic of bad taste, and The Mask, which only contained 3-D sequences. One might argue that a low budget film and technically inferior stereoscopic photography go hand in hand. This is a logical argument; however, I decided that I had to see this video myself before passing judgement. I expected to see poor 3-D in this video, but I expected to see some 3-D effect. The shock was that there is no viewable 3-D in this video at all! The title of the video should be changed to Cat Women of the Moon NOT in 3-D. This is the sort of presentation that will give you a headache. It is the type of shoddy product that has given 3-D a bad name.
The problem with this video is extreme vertical mis-registration of the left and right images. Stereoscopic viewing can tolerate some horizontal mis-alignment within the limits of eyestrain. However, significant vertical mis-alignment makes it impossible for the brain to fuse the two images. This is especially true in anaglyphic video presentations, where separation of the images is usually not strong. The result is that the 3-D images in this video, when viewed through the provided red and blue glasses, look like a normal 3-D movie when viewed without any glasses. I can't find a single scene where there is a viewable stereoscopic effect. In addition, many of the scenes are totally flat (2-D). In the flat scenes, the anaglyphic colors are not present, indicating that only one of the two views necessary for 3-D is presented. Normally, this would be negative comment; however, the flat scenes are the only tolerable parts of this video, considering that the anaglyphically encoded segments are completely worthless. I do not know if the original film contained these flat segments, or if some of the film has been lost. Considering that the flat and anaglyphic parts are randomly intermixed, I assume that parts of the two original films have either completely deteriorated, or been lost. The only sin that was not committed by those who converted this film to video is the lack of frame synchronization between the left and right views that sometimes plagues 3-D movies. However, considering the alignment problems present in this video, the consistent synchronization is small compensation.
In fairness to the original producers of the film, one cannot evaluate the stereoscopic photography of the film as it was shown in theaters by the quality of this video. According to Amazing 3-D, the excellent book on 3-D by Hal Morgan and Dan Symmes, Cat Women of the Moon was originally shown in theaters using polarized projection. This was probably done from two B&W films in separate, synchronized projectors, the standard technique at that time. To present the film as a video, the two film images had to be color encoded in red and blue/green, and then superimposed during photographic printing, or during the video transfer. It is possible for an excellent 3-D film to be ruined during the process of converting it to the anaglyphic format if care is not taken. The fault is either with Rhino home video, or some third party that made the anaglyphic conversion, and paid no attention to the vertical alignment during the conversion process. Rhino Home Video may argue that this is such a hokey film that it does not matter if the anaglyphic conversion was done properly. I say that no film should be advertised as being in 3-D if it is so poorly converted that there is absolutely no 3-D effect in the finished product. As far as I'm concerned, this is a case of outright and intentional false advertising.
Some people will argue that is it not possible to achieve true stereoscopic 3-D in home video. I can say from personal experience that it is entirely possible to achieve acceptable stereoscopic 3-D in video using the anaglyphic process. The Mask, also from Rhino Home Video proves this. Although the 3-D in The Mask video is not as good as I recall from seeing the film in a theater, it is passable as 3-D. In this case, Rhino did not have to do the anaglyphic conversion, because the original film already contained anaglyphic sequences. I have also seen several full-length B&W films on TV that have been successfully presented in the anaglyphic format. These films include The Mad Magician (with Vincent Price), Inferno, and It Came from Outer Space. As well as a short subject, Spooks, featuring the Three Stooges. These films reproduce in 3-D very well on a properly adjusted TV set, and are almost as good as the theatrical presentations. I don't understand why these technically superior conversions are not available on home video.
To the best of my knowledge, this is one of only three full-length theatrical 3-D movies from the 1950's that are available on the home video market in the two-color anaglyphic format. The others are Robot Monster, the ultimate classic of bad taste, and The Mask, which only contained 3-D sequences. One might argue that a low budget film and technically inferior stereoscopic photography go hand in hand. This is a logical argument; however, I decided that I had to see this video myself before passing judgement. I expected to see poor 3-D in this video, but I expected to see some 3-D effect. The shock was that there is no viewable 3-D in this video at all! The title of the video should be changed to Cat Women of the Moon NOT in 3-D. This is the sort of presentation that will give you a headache. It is the type of shoddy product that has given 3-D a bad name.
The problem with this video is extreme vertical mis-registration of the left and right images. Stereoscopic viewing can tolerate some horizontal mis-alignment within the limits of eyestrain. However, significant vertical mis-alignment makes it impossible for the brain to fuse the two images. This is especially true in anaglyphic video presentations, where separation of the images is usually not strong. The result is that the 3-D images in this video, when viewed through the provided red and blue glasses, look like a normal 3-D movie when viewed without any glasses. I can't find a single scene where there is a viewable stereoscopic effect. In addition, many of the scenes are totally flat (2-D). In the flat scenes, the anaglyphic colors are not present, indicating that only one of the two views necessary for 3-D is presented. Normally, this would be negative comment; however, the flat scenes are the only tolerable parts of this video, considering that the anaglyphically encoded segments are completely worthless. I do not know if the original film contained these flat segments, or if some of the film has been lost. Considering that the flat and anaglyphic parts are randomly intermixed, I assume that parts of the two original films have either completely deteriorated, or been lost. The only sin that was not committed by those who converted this film to video is the lack of frame synchronization between the left and right views that sometimes plagues 3-D movies. However, considering the alignment problems present in this video, the consistent synchronization is small compensation.
In fairness to the original producers of the film, one cannot evaluate the stereoscopic photography of the film as it was shown in theaters by the quality of this video. According to Amazing 3-D, the excellent book on 3-D by Hal Morgan and Dan Symmes, Cat Women of the Moon was originally shown in theaters using polarized projection. This was probably done from two B&W films in separate, synchronized projectors, the standard technique at that time. To present the film as a video, the two film images had to be color encoded in red and blue/green, and then superimposed during photographic printing, or during the video transfer. It is possible for an excellent 3-D film to be ruined during the process of converting it to the anaglyphic format if care is not taken. The fault is either with Rhino home video, or some third party that made the anaglyphic conversion, and paid no attention to the vertical alignment during the conversion process. Rhino Home Video may argue that this is such a hokey film that it does not matter if the anaglyphic conversion was done properly. I say that no film should be advertised as being in 3-D if it is so poorly converted that there is absolutely no 3-D effect in the finished product. As far as I'm concerned, this is a case of outright and intentional false advertising.
Some people will argue that is it not possible to achieve true stereoscopic 3-D in home video. I can say from personal experience that it is entirely possible to achieve acceptable stereoscopic 3-D in video using the anaglyphic process. The Mask, also from Rhino Home Video proves this. Although the 3-D in The Mask video is not as good as I recall from seeing the film in a theater, it is passable as 3-D. In this case, Rhino did not have to do the anaglyphic conversion, because the original film already contained anaglyphic sequences. I have also seen several full-length B&W films on TV that have been successfully presented in the anaglyphic format. These films include The Mad Magician (with Vincent Price), Inferno, and It Came from Outer Space. As well as a short subject, Spooks, featuring the Three Stooges. These films reproduce in 3-D very well on a properly adjusted TV set, and are almost as good as the theatrical presentations. I don't understand why these technically superior conversions are not available on home video.