Am I the only person who sees the whole 3D thing as a pointless gimmick?
As a counterpoint, a friend of mine says, "No, it's how your eyes work. You wouldn't call colour just a gimmick, would you?"
To which I respond: if you take a movie filmed in black and white, and re-colour it, yes. And just as it took film-makers a while to figure out how to use their new Technicolor palettes, it'll take a lot of experience with 3D.
But I still question the point. It's not like the difference between a normal film and theatre: in the latter, each member of the audience sees something slightly different, and the director has to take that into account. With a 3D film, it's still projected onto a flat surface, and everyone sees everything from the point of view of the director (the camera) - it's just that those off to the sides see a very slightly warped version, as they do now.
Possibly part of this grumpiness is that I wear glasses, so have to have two pairs while watching them (bah), and have a one-eyed parent, for whom these films will forever be a blurry, unwatchable mess. So maybe I'm just biased.