There have been a few films I've wanted to see, but they've only been made available in 3-D in my neck of the woods, so I haven't bothered. I do not like 3-D. It hurts my eyes, the colors are shit (and I have James Cameron on my side on that one - Sun Media in Canada quoted him as remarking how vivid Avatar looked in 2-D compared to 3-D), and as someone who wears glasses, wearing the hardware in uncomfortable. I refuse to apologise -- I'm the one with money in my pocket that I'm willing to give people for entertainment. That makes me God. And God isn't happy. Last Airbender, Despicable Me and Toy Story 3 are all films I would have seen in the last WEEK alone, had 2-D versions been made available here*. At least I'm saving money - bought a couple of half-decent books this past week and a Doctor Who DVD I might not have picked up if that money had gone to going to the movies.
Fortunately, not every film is being forcefed in 3-D, but there have been fairly few that have interested me enough to go. The A-Team came close but I never got the chance and now it's moved on from my local theatres. Probably the only film coming up in the next little bit that interests me is Salt, which doesn't look like a 3-D thing.
After that, the only film really on my radar is the next Harry Potter - but only if a local theatre runs the 2-D version. Otherwise I'll give my money to Best Buy when the Blu-Ray comes out later, instead.
Alex
* Before someone flames me (someone always flames me) read this sentence again. I'm well aware most 3-D films are circulated in 2-D versions. But where I live the theatres generally don't bring in the 2-D versions because they want people to pay the extra. Plus the assumption is everyone has drunk the 3-D Kool-Aid and will blindly (pun intended, trust me) go to 3-D.
