Well, yes and no. Increased framerate and reduced motion blur are a big part of making the picture look more 3D. As I recall, it's the main reason Trumbull increased his framerate to 60fps for the Showscan film format 20+ years ago. I think Ebert's been advocating 48fps film for several years as well.
I was in Best Buy last night to take a look at these sets after reading the threads here. The Samsung one was set up in a split-screen mode showing normal playback on the right and "motion enhanced" on the left. When you see this side-by-side on the same screen it's blatantly obvious that any tweaks to the demo or torch mode in the TV are completely superfluous compared to the motion enhancement trick. The motion enhancer makes a very dramatic and fundamental change to the appearance.
It's just as others have said -- on the left half of the screen (and only the left half) "The Office" looked like a soap opera, and PoTC looked like a behind-the-scenes documentary. The right half, which I assume was doing 5:5 pulldown, looked just like the rest of the TVs around it running the same demo reel. After watching it for several minutes it also became clear that 1) really slow motion doesn't exhibit much change; so slow pans of caves in "Planet Earth" looked the same on both halves; and 2) really fast or blurred motion confuses the hell out of the motion enhancer and the interpolated frames end up full of artifacts, such as blocky elements and pixelated after-images of moving objects. Watching objects right at the boundary, it also seemed that the halves the screen sometimes got just slightly out of sync.
It seems the motion enhancement is still in the early stages, and just like the scalers of years ago it has major problems handling certain types of content. Granted even if they get it working better it'll still cause movies to no longer look like film, so I don't know how much we can expect the tech to advance.