Fair enough. The point I put poorly there was that many people who like the movie are drawn in/back by the emotive landscape; usually one of the main things they have to say about it. Obviously that's supported by the 3-D, but I have a hunch that it has much more to do w/ my first point re: making the strange familiar. But you're right; that remains to be seen.
Ray missed the forest for the trees. No movie de-others the other more than this one. More importantly, he utterly misses the tonality, as if he were watching without a heart. Ray, how is it that your analysis explains nothing of the continued appeal of this movie?