There's a handful of movies out there that actually compensate for the glasses by slightly altering the color and brightness of the 3D version so that it looks "correct" when viewed through the glasses. I don't know if there's a definitive list of those titles, though.
The resolution is an interesting one. I'm a passive user myself, so this was of interest to me during my research before buying a passive monitor for my PC. There's a big difference between a loss of resolution on paper
and what your eyes actually see
when you're watching it. Technically speaking, on paper
, my display only shows each eye 540 lines. But, it's seeing both eyes simultaneously, and the brain does a (not-)surprisingly good job of blending those into a single 1080p image when you're watching it. The naysayers would have you believe that your 3D Blu-ray will look like a DVD because of the resolution drop, but what I'm seeing when I watch 1080p content is most definitely NOT half resolution. Believe it or not, your brain's actually pretty good at combining what your two eyes see into a single cohesive image, and the benefit of passive is that you're seeing both eyes simultaneously instead of switching back and forth between them on active shutter glasses. At most, you might end up with some slight aliasing across high-contrast edges, but otherwise it looks just as crisp as the raw 1080p image, and the 3D depth more than makes up for any other shortcomings.
I'm not trying to start a debate, but it is important to hear from both sides of the fence when it comes to something that active and passive users disagree on.