The issue, as I've always seen it, is that our notions of waves and particles are simply the best approximations to what things like photons and electrons are actually like. For instance when we talk about an electron orbit, we're actually talking about the shape of the probability distribution of that electron - which is not to say that the electron is somewhere in the cloud, but that the cloud is the electron, until it is interacted with by something else. I mean, we just don't have anything on the macroscopic scale that behaves anything like things on the quantum scale. Shit's crazy.
The flatland analogy fits with string theory, where you could imagine an ant crawling on the surface of a hose, thinking it's a flat two dimensional surface, but looked at from a different enough scale that hose looks more like a one dimensional object (strings in the theory would be coiled around the hose in varying arrangements which define different particles, and from a distance we see only the particle, not the arrangement).
Of course, I would suggest you take anything from the What The Bleep/Law of Attraction people with a grain of salt - they always slip something subversive in their otherwise accurate descriptions of models.
