Thank you for the kind words, but I suppose I need to clarify some things.

First, my argument is not against technological innovation. Technological innovation, by itself, is fine. But… Wow, okay, you just opened a can of worms.

The problem with technological innovation in filmmaking is that when something new is invented, and audiences respond to it, then it becomes the standard. And although color, for example, was a fantastic technological innovation that opened up worlds of possibilities for filmmakers and audiences alike, the fact that black and white has been all but sacrificed as a result isn’t necessarily a good thing.

You point out that The Wizard of Oz would not have been as revolutionary had Oz not been in color. Maybe. Would it still have been a great story in black and white? Yes. Yes it would. Of course, color wasn’t invented for The Wizard of Oz. The only real innovation was combining color WITH black and white photography, but this itself was motivated by the great storytelling already at work.

Perhaps a more recent example that people noticed was the rapid progression of American animated features into CGI. Because CGI was successful for a few films, the artistry inherent to 2D animation was pushed aside in favor of films which often featured a lower level of craftsmanship, in a fledging art style with a lot of kinks to work out, which depended heavily on novelty in order to reach an audience.

And this is my fears for 3-D filmmaking. The assumption that in order for a movie to make money it must now be in 3-D, regardless of artistic merit, appropriateness to the actual story being told, or even the quality of the 3-D.

Now yes, 3-D isn’t intrinsically bad as a technological innovation and has some potential from an artistic perspective. Werner Herzog is currently shooting a 3-D documentary about cave paintings in order to show off their contours and textures, and that’s an intriguing place to take the technology. But we’re already having it shoved down our throats, and the reason why it’s being shoved down our throats is out of a need to make money, not to make good films.

If 3-D was allowed to evolve naturally as an artistic option – an option James Cameron CHOSE to exercise in Avatar, but new filmmakers cannot enjoy because studios are insisting that every major blockbuster now be either filmed in 3-D or converted to 3-D after the fact, regardless of the filmmakers’ wishes – then maybe I’d be a little kinder.

The real issue I was debating was the principle of the thing: Is 3-D better than 2-D? And it’s not. It’s an innovation. I chose to argue the principle because if you only discuss the grey area, then you can forgive anything. 3-D really CAN be okay, certainly within specific contexts, but when it comes to the decision to convert the entire industry to 3-D – which has already effectively been made – then, on sheer principle, I (and many others) think we’re making a mistake.

I hope this clarified my position a bit further for you. Thanks for reading!

I appreciate the arguments you have made in this column, and I agree with many of your past reviews on this site (and others). Yes, there really haven’t been any fantastic films that have been released yet utilizing this technology, including “Avatar”.

However, I take exception with your argument against technological innovation. Of course this is a marketing strategy by the studios to get people back in the theaters. But the technology of film making needs to evolve past just “better CGI”.

Would “The Wizard of Oz” have been as revolutionary if Dorothy would have walked onto a monochrome brick road?

If we’re stuck with it, I prefer the Alice in Wonderland 3D over Avatar’s. (Haven’t seen CotT.)It was subtler and less interfering. I felt that there was something wrong with Avatar’s–there’d be a person x number of feet away from you and the reflection in his eye would be 4 feet closer. It was just impossible to focus. Any kind of a shiny object with reflections is just… incorrect. The brain naturally discerns depth but 3D tries to force it on you, and it feels like you’re always playing catch-up or something.