Roger Ebert lets fly at the rush towards 3D. It's a good piece, in large part because Ebert not only talks about how 3D filmmaking adds little to the experience that wasn't already there, but how theaters are being blackmailed into carrying 3D films.
It's this last which feeds back into my ongoing theories about how the marketing and sales end of the pipeline are the ones running the show now. The exact material being pushed out to the audience isn't important, so they don't care if damage is being done to the movies we're all forced to watch.
Recall the greatest moviegoing experiences of your lifetime. Did they "need" 3-D? A great film completely engages our imaginations... I have the sense that younger Hollywood is losing the instinctive feeling for story and quality that generations of executives possessed. It's all about the marketing.
Losing? Try "lost" - such thinking went into a coma a generation ago, and has been on life-support ever since. Good movies today get made in spite of the current movie-production system, not because of it. The Hurt Locker was a maverick production, not a big-studio concoction. Avatar made tons of money, sure, but I'd wager that's because it was tailor-made to showcase its production technologies, not because it was an interesting story. (From all I've seen, a good story and a spectacular experience do not have to be inherently incompatible.)
It's not the tech of 3D that bugs me, although that can be problematic enough. It's the fact that, once again, bad movies are driving out good across the board.