I think this is an interesting development, and fully understandable. It's actually been developing for some time, the occasional concert's been shown, sometimes live, in movie theaters with good sound, etc, for 28 years that I can recall. Now that many events are available in "3-D", it makes perfect sense to me.

My problem is, it isn't 3-D. It's actually stereoscopy, which many of us recall from View-master viewers. The current version of it doesn't quite make it for me.

A few years ago, IMAX theaters were experimenting with a 3-D format that used a headset with internal speakers and goggles that switched eyes on and off in sync with the projector. It was a slightly higher frame rate, as well, being IMAX. I was really impressed with that; one film had a character seem to peek down from the front of the headset, and the images (animated) were created specifically for that format.

But now they're back to static goggles (which first emerged in the mid-80s, with the re-release of "Dial M for Murder" in 3-D), counting on the polarization of the lenses (as opposed to red-green) to separate out the right-eye and left-eye frames. This does not work as well for people who already wear corrective lenses (and not at all for some).

Also the thing about stereoscopy that makes it not 3-D is its inability to show shading. One perceives basically a large number of flat, layered images, with the illusion of depth triggered by differences in size and relative position. But you never see behind anything, you can't look around objects; indeed, the more you try, the flatter it appears.

I went to see "Superman Returns" in IMAX 3-D; I think there were lots of ways that they did it wrong (the 3-D scenes were way too dark to be effective), but I was unimpressed in any case.

Let me know when they try something besides stereoscopy.

Just run commercials during the movie, just like TV. Most people going to blockbusters are teens. Teens who have a 4 second attention span anyhow. They won't notice or care.

Leading Protestant theologian Dr. Albert Schweitzer taught:

“We need a boundless ethics which will include the animals also.”

Schweitzer opposed the use of animals in entertainment.

“I never go to a menagerie,” he once wrote, “because I cannot endure the sight of the misery of the captive animals. The exhibiting of trained animals I abhor. What an amount of suffering and cruel punishment the poor creatures have to endure to give a few minutes of pleasure to men devoid of all thought and feeling for them.”

In previous years, PETA has endorsed Cirque du Soleil for not using animals. I agree with PETA: animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, or use for "entertainment."