CajoleJuice
Member
Ebert gave Watchmen 4/4 too
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Rottenwatch: AVATAR (82%)
- Thread starter SCULLIBUNDO
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, that was a typo. I meant to say 'you don't need to see it in IMAX'.julls said:
Good to hear it looks good in RealD.
IMAX's massive screens fills your field-of-vision, and some people find that this greatly enhances the immersive effect of 3D.nib95 said:
IMAX is somewhat prone to the problems of old dual-35mm 3D used in the 50s and 80s, though. It uses dual 70mm film strips projected simultaneously. IMAX generally have very good quality measures in place, but the two picture-streams can still become slightly unaligned. This can cause discomfort, as well as artifacts like 'ghosting', where the left image bleeds into the right lens of the glasses, and vice versa, creating a blurry outline around 3D objects. Also, film deteriorates the more it's played, and if there is any difference between the two strips of film it can be annoyingly visible on screen. IMAX film is pulled across jets of air rather than rollers in order to minimize this effect. It shouldn't be a problem if you see it on IMAX soon.
Digital 3D is much more precise. For one, digital doesn't degrade. Secondly, the images are guaranteed to be perfectly aligned with a one projector system (most of them), which rapidly alternates between the left and right images onscreen in order to achieve the 3D effect. Some digital cinemas use a dual-projector system like IMAX, but with digital the images should always be perfectly aligned.
The picture should also be clearer (though much, much smaller) because it's being projected in the same format and resolution it was created at.
Ollie Pooch
In a perfect world, we'd all be homersexual
she's not in it heaps, and has the odd corny one-liner, but i dunno. she just has this warm-hearted sassiness that made me love her character.brandonh83 said:
she comes into her own right near the end. my best comparison would be a mix of starbuck from BSG, vasquez and ferro from aliens. with aviators. shutup, its early.
It means Karma Kramer already stuck his foot too far into his mouth to rescind his commentary now that Ebert has decided to jerk off his sacred cow.
For someone so strongly opposed to the "hack", I'm surprised he let himself get excited over anything that came from his review!
Transparent people are transparent.
For someone so strongly opposed to the "hack", I'm surprised he let himself get excited over anything that came from his review!
Transparent people are transparent.
Karma Kramer
Banned
Amir0x said:
I find it hilarious that you find my opinion about a man so irritating.
I don't care what Ebert said, but the fact that he liked something technological (the 3D), when he has been so against it, has me excited.
Calling me an ignorant asshole, when all I have been doing is sharing my opinion, is kind of fucked up. Do you call everyone who doesn't like what you like, an ignorant asshole?
CassidyIzABeast
Member
liemax is DigitalZeliard said:
Anton Sugar
Member
Blader5489 said:
Deliberate Princess Bride reference or coincidence?
Karma Kramer said:
I don't find your opinion of the man irritating - I find your ignorance and your ability to disregard extremely well regarded people merely for not sharing your opinions to be irritating.
What you did was hardly an "opinion", a word which you try to cleverly shield yourself from criticism with. What you did was hyperventilate over the idea that Ebert might not like this film you've been greatly anticipating and proceeded to - completely without any knowledge of his great body of work, as it is clear from your statements - smear the man as a "hack" and "playing to the masses" or whatever other bullshit you pulled from the bottom of your bullshit well.
You cherry pick specific cases where you found he didn't necessarily articulate his opinion the way you would like, and disregarded what is easily the most important body of work in film criticism there is. The man has wrote countless books demonstrating a knowledge so deep and far reaching that it would put any person on GAF to shame.
So what I find irritating is ignorance.
Anton Sugar
Member
Blader5489 said:
A character keeps saying "inconceivable" for situations that are happening. Someone calls him out and says "You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means."
So.
CassidyIzABeast
Member
I love this thread:lol
faceless007
Member
I thought IMAX 3D required the movie to be filmed on IMAX film. If it's not a real IMAX film, does it matter if I see it on a real ginormous IMAX screen, or a "liemax" screen? What I mean is, if the film's resolution is the same, would the ginormous screen actually be a benefit?Krev said:
This is more or less off-topic, but I have a bunch of questions about the new 3D and don't know where to look for answers. Are 3D films even on film, or just digital files on a hard drive? How do the projection systems work, and how do theaters need to be retrofitted to show them? And how does IMAX fit into all that? I'd be interested to read if anyone has any links on the subject.
Karma Kramer
Banned
Amir0x said:
My disregard for Ebert stems from discussions I have had with professors and others who have been in the film industry longer then you have probably been alive. Can I recall the exact evidence that I heard, no... this was over a year and a half ago. But do I have good reason to believe that Ebert and probably a lot of critics often skew their reviews and scores to appeal to their audience or to get attention? Yes...
Does that make Ebert's opinions on films always wrong or something? No... and I could actually see myself agreeing with Ebert a lot of the time! But that doesn't mean I have respect for him. And that is why I called him a "hack" ... maybe that isn't the right word/term to use, but let's just say I don't take the guys opinion very highly. Thats all my opinion has been, and it hasn't featured one other word of hate or mis-treatment... unlike you... calling me an ignorant asshole LOL.
Can we even call people names on GAF? I thought we were supposed to respect each other mr. mod... even IF we disagree with them...
CassidyIzABeast
Member
saving lives and cinemaDead said:
So even Ebert dug the 3D. I knew I wasn't crazy when I flipped my shit when I saw the footage on Avatar Day. It's really game changing stuff.
Will this be shown only in RealD in non-IMAX screens, or will some be Dolby 3D? I don't want to get blindsided and end up buying tickets for a Dolby 3D screening. And I don't trust the typical customer service dope at the local theaters to give me accurate information...
I knew I wasn't crazy when I flipped my shit when I saw the footage on Avatar Day. It's really game changing stuff.Will this be shown only in RealD in non-IMAX screens, or will some be Dolby 3D? I don't want to get blindsided and end up buying tickets for a Dolby 3D screening. And I don't trust the typical customer service dope at the local theaters to give me accurate information...
Karma Kramer said:
Right, your "professors" which provided "evidence" which you can hardly remember. So, one, you can't formulate your own opinion even if you tried - you simply piggybank on the backs of people smarter than you and then forget what they said anyway.
Karma Kramer said:
List SPECIFIC "good reasons" to believe that Ebert does this at this time.
Karma Kramer said:
I call 'em like I see 'em. No need to sugarcoat. You're being ignorant because you clearly have no idea what you're talking about in regards to Ebert and his work, and you're being an asshole because you allow yourself to be transparent enough to judge someone's entire body of work based on the mere FEAR that he won't masturbate your sacred cow (in this case, AVATAR).
Karma Kramer said:
Respect is earned. You haven't earned it.
Karma Kramer
Banned
Fine, I haven't earned your respect. I seriously do not recall the specifics of the lecture... I honestly do have a very bad memory. I seriously do not care what you think of me, and I am not about to spend time I don't have right now to back up my statement. If you want and everyone else wants to think I am an idiot riding on the smart, or something fine. This is suppose to be a discussion about a movie, and instead you've turned it into some renegade about me and my views on a critic. Send me a PM if you really need to let your anger shine out... I'll be sure to look it over when I want to remind myself how truly hilarious the internet really is.
Amir0x said:
This is rubbish Amir0x. Essentially anyone on the forums could say the same thing. In any case, could both of you possibly cool ir a little with bickering in this thread? In a split second it seems the thread has become an argument fest. And before that it was actually fairly civil. Even Jett ate his crow with etiquette.
Admittedly, the poster above shouldn't have egged you on, but you also reacted surprisingly sensitively.
EDIT: On a side note, I actually agree that the alien designs are rather un-inventive. But Id imagine they work really well within the film with respect to facial expressions and movement/anatomy. Basically, they aren't far off humans.
Snaku said:So even Ebert dug the 3D.
Will this be shown only in RealD in non-IMAX screens, or will some be Dolby 3D? I don't want to get blindsided and end up buying tickets for a Dolby 3D screening. And I don't trust the typical customer service dope at the local theaters to give me accurate information...
They'll be shown in both. Just saw that my theater's gonna be in RealD. Had to go to movietickets.com just to be able to tell.
They've certainly come a long way with those things.
Fix The Scientist
Member
How much do you guys think this will make opening w/e?
Karma Kramer
Banned
Chipopo said:
I agree sadly... I would have never even shared my thoughts on Ebert had I known I was going to be pulled through the mud for pages by a mod. Jeez :lol
LegendofJoe
Member
I'm really excited this movie is getting good reviews. It'd be a terrible shame if it didn't meet expectations considering its incredibly long production schedule. I can't believe Ebert compared his first viewing to when he saw Star Wars in 1977, if Avatar brings in even a tenth of the money SW brought in Fox should be VERY happy.
That's debatable.faceless007 said:
If you're observant of these things and you compare the IMAX version with the digital version, you might find that the picture is blurrier and softer on IMAX. The ginormous screen does not in any way benefit the film on the technical side of things, since IMAX film has a resolution way, way higher than the 2K resolution Avatar was created at.
That said, the blow-up should look much better than 35mm-70mm blow-ups, since digital files scale better than analogue film.
The only benefit of IMAX is that some people prefer having a huge, field of view filling screen to complete their immersion in a 3D space. And of course, some people think that the mega sized screen is a benefit in itself.
Another fact to throw out there: Avatar will be in 2.35:1 on 2D and digital 3D screens, and in 1.78:1 on IMAX (film and digital) screens, since it fills more of their fixed-size screens that way.
These days, 3D films are digital files on a hard drive.faceless007 said:
Usually, one projector is used. It runs at 144fps and rapidly alternates between projecting the left and right images. If you're watching on RealD, the left and right images are filtered through a corresponding polarizer as they appear. The glasses have lenses that match these levels of polarization, so the left image should be picked up by your left eye and the right through your right eye.
Dolby 3D has the same 144fps alternating frame system, but the picture's colours are divided into different bandwidth levels which are picked up by corresponding lenses on the glasses. It's complicated and I don't know a huge deal about it.
Some Dolby 3D and RealD (and all IMAX digital) cinemas use dual projectors instead of the alternating-frame method. This should create smoother movement in scenes of fast-motion.
IMAX use dual 70mm film projectors. I wrote a bit about their 3D in this post.
Expendable.
Member
Ebert gave AVATAR four out of four stars? Even I wouldn't have predicted that. :lol
This movie is going to be huge.
This movie is going to be huge.
LegendofJoe
Member
Koodo said:
I should have worded that a little better. I meant to imply Star Wars as a franchise. I'm not sure what the current figure is, but I read an article in Forbes a couple years ago where they estimated the gross earnings of the SW franchise to be somewhere around $20 billion.
Count Dookkake
Member
Karma Kramer,
Having known Ebert personally for a time in my youth, I can tell you that your professors are full of crap.
There aren't any aliens in AI.
Having known Ebert personally for a time in my youth, I can tell you that your professors are full of crap.
D4Danger said:
There aren't any aliens in AI.
- Status