Right now the movie theater closest to me is playing 4 out of 9 movies in 3-D: Cats & Dogs, The Revenge of Kitty Galore, Despicable Me, Step Up 3-D, and Toy Story 3. Ever since Avatar shoved blue alien smurfs in our faces, more and more movies are coming out in 3-D to cash in on both the trend and the higher ticket price. However, with more studios cutting corners by converting their films into 3-D instead filming in it, are moviegoers quickly going to experience 3-D burnout?

Unlike many 3-D films being released, Avatar was actually filmed in 3D. James Cameron didn't rely on the effect as a gimmick (there were no spears being chucked directly at the screen so you could see it leap out towards you); instead, it was a subtle enhancement that gave visual depth to scenes both ordinary (items on a desk in a briefing room) and extraordinary (the details in the jungles of Pandora). Movie studios saw how much money Avatar made and erroneously determined that the 3-D is what brought so much moolah to Cameron's pocket. True, 3-D movies can cost more money to film because of the costs to either film it in 3-D or to convert it, plus the equipment required by the theater and moviegoers to experience it properly. However, Avatar didn't make money hand over fist simply because it was in 3-D -- it had other things going on for it (a renowned director, good special effects, a diverse cast -- note that I'm not gushing about the storyline here because, let's face it, it's basically Dances with Wolves + Pocahontas + Ferngully).

We're not stupid, Cameron

Nonetheless, studios somehow see a correlation between 3-D and dollar signs, and they're not too far off. Ticket prices for 3-D movies have risen 8%, and 3-D on IMAX screens have gone up 10% for adults and 12% for children. Moviegoers are paying an average of $4 extra to see a movie in 3-D, and $6 extra to see a movie in IMAX 3-D. That amount adds up, so it's no wonder why studios are shoving 3-D movies out the door as fast as they can.

The problem is that most movies aren't actually filmed in 3-D, they're converted after the fact so they can cash in on a cheap gimmick. It's a bit sleazy since the audience isn't getting the same quality 3-D than if the movie were actually filmed properly. This blu-ray.com forum thread has a growing list of which movies were actually filmed in 3-D vs. which movies were converted. Some notables include the following:

• The upcoming Harry Potter movies: converted
• The new Chronicles of Narnia movie: converted
• The Green Hornet (starring Seth Rogen): converted
• Piranha (coming out today!): converted
• The new Pirates of the Caribbean movie: filmed
• The new Saw movie (groan): filmed 
• Transformers 3 (double groan): filmed

At this point it seems like a crapshoot as to whether a 3-D movie was filmed or converted. Regardless of how the 3-D got there, it seems like some movies have no business being in 3-D other than pure, simple greed. Is seeing The Green Hornet in 3-D really going to enhance the experience of hearing Seth Rogen's stoner laugh?

Now in THREE dimensions!

I think that, as with other movie fads (Japanese horror movie adaptations, Lindsay Lohan's career), 3-D movies will for the most part die off. Some films will still be able to get away with the effect if it's supported by actual quality (in terms of acting, the script, etc), but soon enough I don't think audiences will put up with gimmicky 3-D effects just for the sake of seeing crap fling out towards them.

What do you think about the recent boom of 3-D movies? Are you getting tired of it or do you enjoy the 3-D experience?

Are you getting sick of the 3-D movie gimmick?