I will pay more money for a non-3D movie when watching it in theaters

[Kaizar]

SvennoJ said:

I hope 4K movies will get directors back to shooting and editting for 2D without all the restrictions imposed by 3D.

Walter Murch still sums it up best:
http://www.rogerebert.com/rogers-journal/why-3d-doesnt-work-and-never-will-case-closed

The biggest problem with 3D, though, is the "convergence/focus" issue. A couple of the other issues -- darkness and "smallness" -- are at least theoretically solvable. But the deeper problem is that the audience must focus their eyes at the plane of the screen -- say it is 80 feet away. This is constant no matter what. But their eyes must converge at perhaps 10 feet away, then 60 feet, then 120 feet, and so on, depending on what the illusion is.

Consequently, the editing of 3D films cannot be as rapid as for 2D films, because of this shifting of convergence: it takes a number of milliseconds for the brain/eye to "get" what the space of each shot is and adjust.

And lastly, the question of immersion. 3D films remind the audience that they are in a certain "perspective" relationship to the image. It is almost a Brechtian trick. Whereas if the film story has really gripped an audience they are "in" the picture in a kind of dreamlike "spaceless" space. So a good story will give you more dimensionality than you can ever cope with.

It's no wonder most succesful 3D movies are CGI amusement park ride material. When it comes to story people either don't notice the 3D or find it distracting. I rather get lost in the movie while letting my eyes wander over all the details, 3D lessens that for me. Keep it for games where you control the camera and perspective.


Or maybe I'm just old, as one of the the conclusions of this article states
http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/2012/12/19/the-hobbit-an-unexpected-masterclass-in-why-hfr-fails-and-a-reaffirmation-of-what-makes-cinema-magical/

*looks at Pacific Rim 3D trailer in theaters and disagrees with statement*