3D movies: Where's the beef?

I watched Avatar like everyone else. Of course I watched it in 3D the way it was intended to be watched.It was a good movie, but by them end I started to get annoyed with all the gimmicky atmospheric effects. It was cool when you first saw them, but after a while it grew a bit old. I'm talking about the floaty seeds, the exhaust thermal waves and the floating ashes.Now everything needs to be in 3D to have an effect on people. 3D movies, which leads to 3D TVs at home, 3D video cameras.Why?Compare this to the game console wars. You have three major players: Microsoft's XBOX 360, Sony's PS3 and Nintendo's Wii.The graphics on either the 360 or PS3 simply blow you away. The number of polygons they can push through their graphics engines boggles the mind. All of this beings sent down the wire at 1080p. Amazing!The Wii has crappy graphics. It's nothing more than a slightly overclocked Gamecube. The graphics would look great in 2000 -- 10 years ago.But it's still winning. Why? Content! Nintendo is making games that people want to play. The normal people, not the hard-core gamers. You can get better graphics with Microsoft's or Sony's offering, but the content rules the roost. First-person shooters only appeal to a relatively limited subset of people. But bowling, well there you have a winner!The presentation isn't what people need. The content wins the argument while the presentation gets all the attention. Not only that, but it's much more expensive too.My prediction: 3D movies are the first person shooter of the movies. Some people will only want them, but it's a small subset. People will pay for the good movies regardless of presentation. The gimmicky features you can do with 3D will be seen for what they are: cool in the short term, annoying once they permeate everything.Content is king.