Personally, I blame James Cameron.

For what you may ask?

How about the fact that just about every movie with special effects being put to film these days has to also be done in 3D. All because ‘Avatar’ used the filming technology and became the biggest movie in history. Now everyone feels the need to do it, whether it’s warranted or not.

Not only does it cost more at the theater, but sometimes it’s just a rip-off. Not every movie has to be made in 3D.

‘Piranha,’ for example, was awesome in 3D. I think men everywhere appreciated the naked factor being amped up for them – right up until that part where the movie director gets, umm, eaten that is. If you haven’t seen the movie, it’s worth renting for that scene alone. Only if you’re not prudish, though.

On the flip side, making ‘Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2’ 3D was unnecessary. The movie was already laden with special effects. Making it 3D, even though it wasn’t originally filmed that way, was a waste of money and effort. It didn’t need that extra oomph. The story stood for itself.

If you ask me, which I know you haven't, 3D should be relegated to rare science fiction endeavors and gore movie splatter fests. The core audience in a horror movie can appreciate 3D. Random movie audiences sometimes cannot.

Lest people forget, this isn’t the first time 3D has taken the world by storm. It happened in the 1980s, too. Then we were bombarded with ‘Friday the 13^th Part 3’ and ‘Jaws 3,’ among a bevy of others. The thing is, the technology faded away because viewers got tired of it.

 

I don’t know for sure if that will happen this time, but it’s a definite possibility.

So, when George Lucas announced that he would be re-mastering all six of his ‘Star Wars’ films into 3D and re-releasing them into theaters one at a time again I was, to say the least, perplexed.

Now I absolutely love ‘Star Wars.’ I have ‘Star Wars’ shirts, hoodies, belts, socks, shoes, bandanas, purses, yoga pants, shot glasses, bookends and hats. I even have Han Solo frozen in carbonite ice cube trays. I am a true ‘Star Wars’ geek.

That being said, I’m also sick to death of Lucas tinkering with the classics. I personally don’t need new and updated scenes added into the movies I loved as a child. I don’t want a digital Yoda. I happen to like the puppet (the same goes for Steven Spielberg and ‘E.T.’).

 

I know that Lucas likes technology and I acknowledge that they’re his movies to do with as he sees fit, but must he really rape my childhood one more time just to make a buck?

One of the things I find most interesting about ‘Star Wars’ fans is that there are two groups. The first is made up of people my age and older who are “purists.” We like our original ‘Star Wars’ just as it was originally shown in theaters. We don’t want anything else.

The second group is made up of younger kids and teenagers who never got a chance to see the original movies in theaters but revere the prequels like we do the originals. They stand up for their films the same way we stand by our films (even if they are vastly inferior – just saying).

Essentially, it doesn’t surprise me that Lucas went with ‘The Phantom Menace’ as the first 3D release. It hits theaters Feb. 10, by the way, with the other films to follow in order over the next few years.

While the film does have some genuine moments that older ‘Star Wars’ fans can get geeked about, it’s still not the original. I can’t help but wonder if Lucas would have been better served starting with ‘A New Hope.’

Either way, despite all my protestations and complaints, I’ll be at the theater opening day, dorky glasses in hand, to get a glimpse of ‘Star Wars’ on the big screen again.

After all, I am a true fan, and I’ve come to the conclusion that they can slap a ‘Star Wars’ tag on just about anything and get me to buy it -- even Bantha fodder. If you get that joke, you're just as geeky as I am by the way.

What do you think? Should George Lucas have tinkered with ‘Star Wars’ yet again?