It seems these days that more and more movie-makers feel the need to see their productions in the third dimension.  This is a fad which strikes the industry every few decades, though in the past it has always ended in headaches and tears.  I remember as a child going to see 3-D films and having to wear those ridiculous glasses – you know them, the ones with one red-eye and one blue-eye?  Inevitably, I would end the movie with a terrific headache, despite how “neat” the extra dimension seemed.

In my old age, I have gotten worse.  While the technology has improved quite a bit, and the headaches I experience from watching a film in 3-D are lessened, my jaded movie-sense has just found more reasons to complain.

The main problem I have now with the 3-D movies is that you just can’t see all of the movie that you’re watching.  I find myself scrolling my head left and right, dodging my vision between what’s popping out and what’s going on with the rest of the film.  There’s no separation or distance when the movie is designed to drag you into the middle of it.  Sure, this may be interesting for films with little plot and lots of special effects, such as Cameron’s Avatar, but for genuinely good films it’s just a huge pain in the butt.

The other reason I am a bit peeved with the current trend is that even old films are getting post-production altered to be 3-D so that already rich directors and producers can squeeze a little more money out of their audiences.  Star Wars is already on this path, and it only remains to be seen how many other classics will be abused in this commercial fashion in the future.

At least in most theaters they have the good sense to play both the 3-D and traditional 2-D versions, so that movie-goers have a choice.  I may give 3-D another try at some point, when I find a movie that I wouldn’t mind seeing without really watching, but until then I’ll stick to my old-fashioned films and less headaches.