3D - A gimmick, or a revolution?

A friend of mine refuses to see 'Up' because it has not been released in 2D yet. He doesn't believe in 3D on the whole. He believes it's a gimmick that will kill the independent film makers if it truely takes off. It's an interesting subject.

What do you guys think?

We've discussed this before, but I'm not convinced it's going to take over. Gonna see Up in 3D on tuesday.

Whoops my bad man. On this forum? Should have checked back...

3D has been around for years, therefore it isn't a revolution. It isn't a gimmick either... it is just, well, there.

I'm confident 2D and 3D can coexist peacefully.

as you know i cant see 3D so the usual is good for me

It's turned from gimmick to revolution. As for pushing out indie filmmaking, 1. Panasonic are releasing an affordable 3D camera which would be easy for indie filmmakers and 2. Indie filmmakers are already being edged out by the faux-indie peddled by Fox Searchlight and Miramax among others. Juno and Little Miss Sunshine are completely studio funded films that create certain unattainable standards for truly independent film. Jim Jarmusch and the Coen brothers would have a harder time breaking into the film industry these days. Genius doesn't cut it, you have to make the studios money, and that all depends on public perception of indie film, which currently includes crane shots and expensive licensed songs, which don't stop the audience leaving the cinema thinking they've supported a truly indie film, because for some reason studios are able to get away with marketing these films as "independent". There are more urgent worries for indie film than 3D. It's a studio driven fad bubble that's going to collapse in on itself and take new filmmakers with it.

Where's the option for neither?