Support NeoGAF

[Zoe]

Anyway, just wondering if they CGed Sam Worthington's skinny legs.

That part was pretty shocking. I know it's to be expected given his injury, but man.

 

[ymmv]

That part was pretty shocking. I know it's to be expected given his injury, but man.

Those skinny legs were prosthetics done by Weta.

 

[rhino4evr]

http://perezhilton.com/2009-12-21-avatar-has-a-disappointing-opening-weekend

Perez Hilton calls Cameron's film a failure.

 

[Salty]

Those skinny legs were prosthetics done by Weta.

Amazing work

 

[Dead]

http://perezhilton.com/2009-12-21-avatar-has-a-disappointing-opening-weekend

Perez Hilton calls Cameron's film a failure.

lulz

almost all the comments are attacking him

 

[Zeliard]

Honestly it does feel like this movie is missing quite a few scenes, despite its lengthy run-time. It feels like the development of a few things ended prematurely.

There's one thing in particular that would have made the movie more powerful, especially when it comes to Jake using the Avatar system, and that's to have given him more screen-time as a cripple to convey to a greater degree just what a hardship that is. No reason to be incredibly overt with it, since it should be obvious what a detriment not having use of your legs is, but I think if there had been more of a emphasis on that it would have lent later scenes more power.

One scene in specific is the one where Jake first becomes an Avatar and runs around freely, enamored with his newfound ability to use his legs - that scene would have carried far more weight in my view if it hadn't happened so early on in the film, and we'd spent a bit more time with Jake in the wheelchair prior to it.

I also hold this opinion when it comes to the Jake/Neytiri relationship as a whole. The transition from "they have no idea who the other person is" to "they are madly in love with each other" happens very quickly, and it feels like the pacing was a bit off there. If there had been more of a build-up to it, there would've been a greater sense of poignancy, especially given how significant it is when it comes to the plot.

 

[Salty]

Agreed^

also, I think it was weird that they didn't include the thing where he

Spoiler

bonds with that giant dragon thing

It should have been an epic scene where he battles it, hanging in the air with one arm etc etc. It was basically the turning point of the movie...but wasn't there.

 

[Stinkles]

Agreed^

also, I think it was weird that they didn't include the thing where he

Spoiler

bonds with that giant dragon thing

It should have been an epic scene where he battles it, hanging in the air with one arm etc etc. It was basically the turning point of the movie...but wasn't there.

But he did that spoilered part with the smaller thing. So it would have been redundant. And he couldn't have done the earlier thing without that kind of breaktrhough. He couldn't just casually do it first time. I liked that it cut away and let him be all

Spoiler

Moses and shit

.

 

[JGS]

Honestly it does feel like this movie is missing quite a few scenes, despite its lengthy run-time. It feels like the development of a few things ended prematurely.

There's one thing in particular that would have made the movie more powerful, especially when it comes to Jake using the Avatar system, and that's to have given him more screen-time as a cripple to convey to a greater degree just what a hardship that is. No reason to be incredibly overt with it, since it should be obvious what a detriment not having use of your legs is, but I think if there had been more of a emphasis on that it would have lent later scenes more power.

One scene in specific is the one where Jake first becomes an Avatar and runs around freely, enamored with his newfound ability to use his legs - that scene would have carried far more weight in my view if it hadn't happened so early on in the film, and we'd spent a bit more time with Jake in the wheelchair prior to it.

I also hold this opinion when it comes to the Jake/Neytiri relationship as a whole. The transition from "they have no idea who the other person is" to "they are madly in love with each other" happens very quickly, and it feels like the pacing was a bit off there. If there had been more of a build-up to it, there would've been a greater sense of poignancy, especially given how significant it is when it comes to the plot.

I agree with the legs. I think they tried to show it by the colonal promising to get them back for him. However, I still loved the scene with him running off.

However, I thought the realtionship was handled nicely, especially fr this type of movie where the typical thing is to hate each others guts up to the time you relaize you love each other. It was clear by the time he made his first clean kill that they were best friends. Plus being a native really indicates to me that courtship is not a big thing there, so the fact it took 3 months to get to the romance stage is understandable.

I can't explain it too well, but the fact that it took 3 months kind of shows she was struglling with it. I understand Jake's side too since he only had Neytiri as a friend so he spent all of his waking time with her.

Spoiler

As a side note and to save postings, I don't think Jake turned traitor as much as he actually became a Na'vi. It was more than just saluting a flag, he actually felt the same connections to Pandora as the rest of them did. I would be hard pressed to turn my back on that too, especially to go back to a life that wasn't that great even when he could walk.

 

[JGS]

Agreed^

also, I think it was weird that they didn't include the thing where he

Spoiler

bonds with that giant dragon thing

It should have been an epic scene where he battles it, hanging in the air with one arm etc etc. It was basically the turning point of the movie...but wasn't there.

Spoiler

One time was enough and the second time would have been easier since the big guy didn't see him coming. It would have been anti-climactic and redundant to me. It may have been better but more unlikely for him not to have caught a banshee at all until he got the big guy since there was supposed to be a connection between them anyway.

 

[Zeliard]

I agree with the legs. I think they tried to show it by the colonal promising to get them back for him. However, I still loved the scene with him running off.

However, I thought the realtionship was handled nicely, especially fr this type of movie where the typical thing is to hate each others guts up to the time you relaize you love each other. It was clear by the time he made his first clean kill that they were best friends. Plus being a native really indicates to me that courtship is not a big thing there, so the fact it took 3 months to get to the romance stage is understandable.

I can't explain it too well, but the fact that it took 3 months kind of shows she was struglling with it. I understand Jake's side too since he only had Neytiri as a friend so he spent all of his waking time with her.

Well, that's the issue I had with it. They said it took 3 months but I never really got that feeling from it from the way their relationship was paced in the movie. I thought the whole Jake/Neytiri introduction happened a bit too quickly. Quite possibly my favorite part of the movie, even above the action scenes, was that interlude towards the middle with Jake and Neytiri just wandering around the Pandoran jungle. I was seriously like in a state of bliss during those scenes and really wanted there to be more of that.

Spoiler

As a side note and to save postings, I don't think Jake turned traitor as much as he actually became a Na'vi. It was more than just saluting a flag, he actually felt the same connections to Pandora as the rest of them did. I would be hard pressed to turn my back on that too, especially to go back to a life that wasn't that great even when he could walk.

True. The movie seemed to be headed to a situation where

Spoiler

Jake becomes psychologically confused as to whether he's a human or a Na'vi, and there were a couple of hints of that in there, but the movie never really built on it. I wish they had. Could've been very interesting and potentially deep.

 

[y2dvd]

Nice read on the science behind Avatar. I wonder how much homework the Avatar team did to cover the science aspect.

 

[JGS]

Well, that's the issue I had with it. They said it took 3 months but I never really got that feeling from it from the way their relationship was paced in the movie. I thought the whole Jake/Neytiri introduction happened a bit too quickly. Quite possibly my favorite part of the movie, even above the action scenes, was that interlude towards the middle with Jake and Neytiri just wandering around the Pandoran jungle. I was seriously like in a state of bliss during those scenes and really wanted there to be more of that.



True. The movie seemed to be headed to a situation where

Spoiler

Jake becomes psychologically confused as to whether he's a human or a Na'vi, and there were a couple of hints of that in there, but the movie never really built on it. I wish they had. Could've been very interesting and potentially deep.

True on both points, but it would have required an additional hour and been more complex than (I think) Cameron wanted it to be. I guess I think that it was edited in the best way possible to convey the relationship in the short running time ...of slightly less than 3 hours :lol .

 

[LeMaximilian]

Also just noticed another shot missing...the part where Sam is in his wheelchair with his arm around the Link machine. Showed up in the trailers and the 'I See You' music video.

 

[kaching]

I don't think this criticism makes much sense. Earth likely went "brown" due to a continuation of pollution, resource consumption and global warming. Leaps in the biological sciences would be unrelated to these events.

Looking at how, today, our understanding of the genome and the ability to create clones stands sharply at odds with other technological developments. Look at what's happened to automobiles in the past 30 years, compared to life sciences. Not all technology moves in lockstep.

How could leaps in biological sciences NOT be related to the events caused by a biological system (humans and our ecosystem)? The kind of massive advances that would have to occur in genetic engineering to make even a rudimentary Avatar program possible would lead to some widely applicable solutions. Even now, we see the beginnings of this - genetically engineered bacteria that can digest certain forms of pollution and render it into harmless byproduct, plants bred to be hardier under more extreme climate conditions, etc. 150 years into the future with the kind of advances that the Avatar program would necessarily require to precede it, there's no reason why we should simply accept as wrote that the Earth went brown.

No, scientific discovery doesn't move in lockstep across disciplines, but the gulf that would have to have occurred here is GINORMOUS. And I'm not even talking about applying what's learned between two completely disparate disciplines like mechanical engineering and genetics. I'm talking one area of genetics to another area of genetics.

I didn't see this as a gap. The Avatar program was clearly new. It takes years to grow avatars - Norm says they mature over the course of several years before they can be used. So they had to either a) develop and grow a new avatar, which takes years, or b) get Jake to step in, which also takes years but is much less expensive.

Cameron's trying to have his cake and eat it too. I'm not really sure how you can say the Avatar program was "clearly" new. It showed none of the real teething pains of a new, untried program. Even a completely inexperienced operator who hadn't RTFM could easily slip into an avatar with just a few minutes of adjustment. There was no attempt to portray bugs/glitches in the system. As portrayed in this movie the avatar system is mature and has clearly overcome much bigger challenges than the force growing new tissue.

It just ends up being a conceit to introduce Jake's sob story background which didn't do much for the movie anyway.

Clearly, the science team there was part of a PR effort to make it appear that they were there advancing causes other than just raping the land for resources.

Which they could have accomplished much more cheaply just by producing a bunch of documentaries about the science team's work on Pandora without the expenditure of getting dolled up as Navi.

It was established (several times) that the preferred approach by the corporation was to move the natives off that land peacefully. Plan B was to force them off. Jake was working for Grace on the former and Quaritch on the latter.

I know, but neither plan was really helped by having humans in Navi form. Sully's "intel" obtained in Navi form amounted to, no, they won't leave and shoot the base of the tree to take it down. Duh. They could have gathered both of those valuable pieces of intel with a couple of diplomatic missions to the great tree.

 

[Zaptruder]

If we're going to start criticising the details of Avatar, then we might as well also criticize the lack of monitoring going on with the Avatar.

If the pod can recieve the visual data from the body, then it can also split it and send it to a monitor.

As a result, the people in the program would've known they were been monitored... but also the corporate and military people would've been able to monitor interactions to make sure they're not screwing with them.


If we go through the movie with a fine tooth-comb, it would be torn to shreds... I just feel that this isn't the type of movie for that kinda stuff. Because indelibly, if you watch it for what it is... big, bright, colourful, adventure... it's thrilling, momentous and enthralling.

You just can't achieve that with most other movies, even if you attempt to watch them uncritically. Because the rest of your brain is still telling you 'it's shit!'
Especially the case when you're watching shaky cam action and can't tell what the hell is going on.

 

[BruceLeeRoy]

Kaching your getting a little overboard with this stuff man.

 

[JGS]

I know, but neither plan was really helped by having humans in Navi form. Sully's "intel" obtained in Navi form amounted to, no, they won't leave and shoot the base of the tree to take it down. Duh. They could have gathered both of those valuable pieces of intel with a couple of diplomatic missions to the great tree.

Sure it did. They would have never even seen the Na'vi under normal conditions had it not been for the Avatar program. Grace said early on the were already being watched, they just couldn't see them.

Spoiler

They could have eventually blown up the tree, but it would take much more firepower because the did not know where to look, another clear point brought out in the movie. It was also clear that the scientists were working against the wishes of the corporation (Which is why there was initial disdain for Jake) so they needed an insider to give them a heads up of what the lab people were doing, something Jake helped with too.

The Avatar program was a cheaper alternative to going in guns blazing in an environment they knew nothing about. They established repeatedly that Pandora was a hard place to survive in and the Na'vi's could help with that, especially if they stayed on friendly terms. It had the added benefit of giving an air of research to the project.

 

[LeMaximilian]

Oh shit, story elements in heated discussion, tons of crow being eaten...rage imminent...

MASKS ON!

 

[GhaleonEB]

Kaching I really don't think you're making much sense at this point. I'll just do one instance this time around:

How could leaps in biological sciences NOT be related to the events caused by a biological system (humans and our ecosystem)? The kind of massive advances that would have to occur in genetic engineering to make even a rudimentary Avatar program possible would lead to some widely applicable solutions. Even now, we see the beginnings of this - genetically engineered bacteria that can digest certain forms of pollution and render it into harmless byproduct, plants bred to be hardier under more extreme climate conditions, etc. 150 years into the future with the kind of advances that the Avatar program would necessarily require to precede it, there's no reason why we should simply accept as wrote that the Earth went brown.

So you are saying that breakthroughs in genetic engineering - which is what the Avatar program is based on - should be enough to cure or mitigate global warming, pollution and natural resource depletion. (All of which can and likely will contribute to Earth "going brown" in 150 years). I have no idea how you make that leap - it makes no sense at all - but let's grant it for a second. How on earth could that be deployed in a global manner quickly enough to reverse those factors? Think about the political and military gridlock that would prevent such a unified global response from happening, and fast enough to reverse trends generations in the making.

Basically, you're saying the genetic breakthrough that created the Avatar program should lead to - or occur in tandem with - the curing the world's problems. Um, okay.

Kaching your getting a little overboard with this stuff man.

Pretty much.

 

[Defcon]

http://www.filmtracks.com/titles/avatar.html

In sum, it's been difficult determining what overall rating to give this score. The minimum it deserves is four stars; there is no justification for going lower than that, because despite any concerns over the re-use, the assembly of the parts for this truly epic cinematic event makes for a formidable product. Sure, Horner's forcing of themes from The Four Feathers and Glory into obvious roles in Avatar is awkward (and a continued disappointment), but for those without those CDs on their shelves, does it really make that much of a difference in a context such as this? If you compare Avatar to the other scores of 2009, there's really nothing that can touch it in terms of ambition. This is a powerhouse of a score that ranks among the most diverse and thoughtful in Horner's career, poised to make the kind of waves last caused by Howard Shore's The Lord of the Rings music.

Great review on Horner's score that I happen to agree with. Hopefully they release it in it's entirety at some point in the future.

 

[aoi tsuki]

Probably posted already (quick search pulled up nada), but Cameron was interviewed for the December issue of Playboy:

http://www.playboy.com/articles/james-cameron-interview/index.html?page=1

PLAYBOY: How much did you get into calibrating your movie heroine’s hotness?
CAMERON: Right from the beginning I said, “She’s got to have tits,” even though that makes no sense because her race, the Na’vi, aren’t placental mammals. I designed her costumes based on a taparrabo, a loincloth thing worn by Mayan Indians. We go to another planet in this movie, so it would be stupid if she ran around in a Brazilian thong or a fur bikini like Raquel Welch in One Million Years B.C.

 

[jett]

With its advanced 3D presentation as a key selling point, Avatar handily set a new 3D opening weekend benchmark. Showing on 3,129 3D screens at 2,038 sites, the format accounted for an estimated $55 million of the gross.

I'm somewhat surprised by this figure. Considerably more people watched it in 3D than 2D, despite the number of 2d screens Avatar is playing in is double that of 3D screens. It'll be interesting to see what the final breakdown will be once Avatar's run is over.

 

[Meier]

Looks like it was severely underestimated -- did $77m.. just missed the December record by $150k. Bummer.

Evidence that the legs will be amazing... it did $24 on Sunday which was just a 3% drop from Saturday which fell 4% from Friday despite the snowstorm closing a ton of theatres. Typically the Sunday drop is about 15-20% from Saturday which was why the original estimate of $73.

 

[∀ Narayan]

Just got back from the LieMAX show. I actually enjoyed this one more than the IMAX show. Got the best goddamned seat in the theater and there weren't any dirt artifacts thanks to the theater's use of a digital projector.

I don't like this film's score very much. Especially when

Spoiler

Eywa goes apeshit on Quaritch and his lot

. It sounded too childish; as if it came directly from a Disney film or something. I wish there was more focus on making the score sound as if it were made by the inhabitants of Pandora. Like Panzer Dragoon, for example. A lot of the music in the PD series (aside from Orta, which is pretty shit all around) is pretty exclusive to the environment. The music always sounded as if came from that world directly. There were a couple tracks throughout the film that definitely worked though. The introductory music was good stuff, and the tracks that played when Jake and Neytiri were prancing around the jungle at night were atmospheric and solid pieces that pulled me into the film.

There were more than a couple instances where I felt the dialogue could have used some improvement.

Spoiler

"Eywa heard you!"

is one of those instances.

I wish the antagonists (humans) weren't so one-dimensional in the film.

I guess that's all I've got. Hopefully Cameron addresses these things in the sequel.

 

[Brimstone]

You told us 35mm has less than 2K resolution, all I want is a single shred of evidence to back up this bold claim. I wasn't doing it to be a dick, I want to know if it's true, I suspect it's not, but I wanted to know, and if it was, why. Sorry for my curiosity.

Tests were done and the average resolution measured from six movie theaters was 685 lines/PH. They were located in Orlando, Florida, in Los Angeles, California, in New York, NY, in Montreal, Canada, in Paris, France, and in Milan Italy.

http://www.motionfx.gr/Files/35mm_resolution_english.pdf


Read the summary on page 11.

In the current enviroment, a 2k Digital Projector will exhibit higher resolution than is currently delivered in release prints and will exhibit substantial image sharpness and clarity due to the better system MTF that preserves higher contrast in the mid frequencies.

http://www.etconsult.com/papers/Technical%20Issues%20in%20Cinema%20Resolution.pdf

 

[Captain N]

This movie was great. I enjoyed every second of it and it makes me want to learn more about the world and see an Avatar 2 / 3 / etc.

The only sad part is they put so much care in creating this world and I feel like the game get rid of all life from the world and characters. It shows we've got a long way to go in terms of video games and at the same time I understand the game didn't have nearly the same budget.

 

[∀ Narayan]

The only sad part is they put so much care in creating this world and I feel like the game get rid of all life from the world and characters. It shows we've got a long way to go in terms of video games and at the same time I understand the game didn't have nearly the same budget.

They should have gotten Michael Ancel to work on the game. He did wonders for the King Kong game. (I liked the game more than the movie.)

 

[StuBurns]

Tests were done and the average resolution measured from six movie theaters was 685 lines/PH. They were located in Orlando, Florida, in Los Angeles, California, in New York, NY, in Montreal, Canada, in Paris, France, and in Milan Italy.

http://www.motionfx.gr/Files/35mm_resolution_english.pdf

Read the summary on page 11.

http://www.etconsult.com/papers/Technical%20Issues%20in%20Cinema%20Resolution.pdf

Really interesting read, thanks for posting.

 

[Relix]

just saw it. Amazing movie with great effects. Truly impressive! Loved it. I think i'll watch it again. I have some minor qualms, some posted them already, but nothing that takes the fun out of it.

 

[Brimstone]

Eh....the 35mm showing I went to of Basterds looked a hell of a lot sharper than Avatar in RealD.

2k is crap.

James Cameron doesn't agree with you. He wants 2k @ 48 frames per second.

I'm hearing that there are already calls to increase the frame rate to at least 30 fps for digital 3-D because certain camera moves, especially pans, look jumpy in 3-D. I saw that in the Imax 3-D "Beowulf." You've been an advocate for both 3-D and higher frame rates. Have you seen the problem and do you have any thoughts on it?


For three-fourths of a century of 2-D cinema, we have grown accustomed to the strobing effect produced by the 24 frame per second display rate. When we see the same thing in 3-D, it stands out more, not because it is intrinsically worse, but because all other things have gotten better. Suddenly the image looks so real it's like you're standing there in the room with the characters, but when the camera pans, there is this strange motion artifact. It's like you never saw it before, when in fact it's been hiding in plain sight the whole time. Some people call it judder, others strobing. I call it annoying. It's also easily fixed, because the stereo renaissance is enabled by digital cinema, and digital cinema supplies the answer to the strobing problem.

The DLP chip in our current generation of digital projectors can currently run up to 144 frames per second, and they are still being improved. The maximum data rate currently supports stereo at 24 frames per second or 2-D at 48 frames per second. So right now, today, we could be shooting 2-D movies at 48 frames and running them at that speed. This alone would make 2-D movies look astonishingly clear and sharp, at very little extra cost, with equipment that's already installed or being installed.

Increasing the data-handling capacity of the projectors and servers is not a big deal, if there is demand. I've run tests on 48 frame per second stereo and it is stunning. The cameras can do it, the projectors can (with a small modification) do it. So why aren't we doing it, as an industry?

Because people have been asking the wrong question for years. They have been so focused on resolution, and counting pixels and lines, that they have forgotten about frame rate. Perceived resolution = pixels x replacement rate. A 2K image at 48 frames per second looks as sharp as a 4K image at 24 frames per second ... with one fundamental difference: the 4K/24 image will judder miserably during a panning shot, and the 2K/48 won't. Higher pixel counts only preserve motion artifacts like strobing with greater fidelity. They don't solve them at all.
If every single digital theater was perceived by the audience as being equivalent to Imax or Showscan in image quality, which is readily achievable with off-the-shelf technology now, running at higher frame rates, then isn't that the same kind of marketing hook as 3-D itself? Something you can't get at home. An aspect of the film that you can't pirate.


Other than that, for digital 3-D, would you rather see energy going into moving from 2K to 4K, or into moving from 24 fps to 48 or 72 fps, and why?


4K is a concept born in fear. When the studios were looking at converting to digital cinemas, they were afraid of change, and searched for reasons not to do it. One reason they hit upon was that if people were buying HD monitors for the home, with 1080x1920 resolution, and that was virtually the same as the 2K standard being proposed, then why would people go to the cinema? Which ignores the fact that the social situation is entirely different, and that the cinema screen is 100 times larger in area. So they somehow hit on 4K, which people should remember is not twice the amount of picture data, it is four times the data. Meaning servers need to be four times the capacity, as does the delivery pipe to the theater, etc.

But 4K doesn't solve the curse of 24 frames per second. In fact it tends to stand in the way of the solutions to that more fundamental problem. The NBA execs made a bold decision to do the All Star Game 3-D simulcast at 60 frames per second, because they didn't like the judder. The effect of the high-frame-rate 3-D was visually astonishing, a huge crowdpleaser.

I would vastly prefer to see 2K/48 frames per second as a new display standard, than 4K/24 frames per second. This would mean shooting movies at 48 fps, which the digital cameras can easily accommodate. Film cameras can run that fast, but stock costs would go up. However, that could be offset by shooting 3-perf, or even 2-perf, because you'd get the resolution back through the higher display rate. The 48 fps negative or digital master can be skip-printed to generate a 24 fps 35mm DI negative for making release prints, so 48 is the magic number because it remains compatible with the film-based platform which will still be with us for some time, especially internationally. 30 and 60 fps are out for that reason. Anyway the benefit of 30 is not great enough to be worth the effort, especially when 48 is so easy to achieve. SMPTE tests done about 15 years ago showed that above 48 frames the returns diminish dramatically, and 60 fps is overkill. So 48 is the magic number.

Of course, the ideal format is 3-D/2K/48 fps projection. I'd love to have done "Avatar" at 48 frames. But I have to fight these battles one at a time. I'm just happy people are waking up to 3-D.

Maybe on "Avatar 2."

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117983864.html?categoryid=1009&cs=1

 

[mrkgoo]

Agreed^

also, I think it was weird that they didn't include the thing where he

Spoiler

bonds with that giant dragon thing

It should have been an epic scene where he battles it, hanging in the air with one arm etc etc. It was basically the turning point of the movie...but wasn't there.

Plain storytelling suspense. He leaps, then it cuts away, like a cliffhanger. Later on, (dispensing with spoilers, as most here have seen it, and those that haven't and don't want to be spoiled are probably avoiding this thread anyway. Also the movie moves a long predictably), he rides in on the beast as a climactic moment. It's not about redundancy.

 

[StuBurns]

James Cameron doesn't agree with you. He wants 2k @ 48 frames per second.



http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117983864.html?categoryid=1009&cs=1

Does he disagree? Or does he just think doubling the framerate is more beneficial than quadruplicating the resolution?

 

[ianp622]

Has anyone seen the movie in both real IMAX 3D and regular RealD3D? I saw it in D3D, and I'm going to see it again sometime. I'd heard the picture quality is better with Digital, but is that because of the digital quality or because the screen is smaller? I would imagine the size of the IMAX screen would make it a better experience, but I wanted to make sure.

 

[Brimstone]

Does he disagree? Or does he just think doubling the framerate is more beneficial than quadruplicating the resolution?

IMAX did tests at 4k.

The 4K system that most people know is IMAX -- and it doesn't quite make 4K, which is a surprise to people. “How can that possibly be?,” you say. “It's an enormous big frame.” Well, because of what I was talking about earlier: the physics of optics. When you take the entire system into account – from the lens of the camera, to the the movement of the light through the projector, all slightly reducing resolution -- you wind up with less than the full resolution you started with.

A number of years ago some IMAX engineers – and I don’t think IMAX ever let these guys out of their lab again -- did this wonderfully elegant experiment at the Large Film Format Seminar at Universal Studios Imax theatre. They showed this film they made that began with 2 rows of 2 squares: black white, white black, as if you had 4 pixels on the screen.

Then they started to double and double and double the squares. Before they got to 4K the screen was gray. Do you know what the means? There was no longer any difference between black and white, which is what allows you to see sharpness. It's the contrast that we see, not the actual information. Technically, the MTF (Modulation Transfer Function) was zero at 4K!

Let's just pretend for a moment that IMAX truly is 4K. You watch IMAX at between one and one and a half picture heights from the screen. But in order to get to appreciate 4K on a regular movie screen, you would have to sit much closer than normal. In other words, when you go to a movie theater, and most of the modern theaters with stadium seating are designed so that the middle of the theater is 2 ½ to 3 picture heights from the screen, for most of us who watch movies, that’s pretty where we want to be sitting. Maybe just a little bit closer from some of us who do this for a living, because we're maybe looking for artifacts or issues. If you sit much closer than 2 ½ picture heights, that's what you're seeing, artifacts, not movies!

So if you had true 4K resolution in your local theater, everybody would have to sitting in the first 6 rows. Otherwise they wouldn't see any extra detail. Their eyes wouldn't LET them see it. You know this intuitively from passing by these beautiful new monitors at trade shows. You find yourself getting absolutely as close as possible to see the detail, and to see if there are any visible artifacts. At normal viewing distances, you can't.

So the whole 2K 4K thing is a little bit of a red herring.

http://magazine.creativecow.net/article/the-truth-about-2k-4k-the-future-of-pixels


More resolution won't hurt image quality, but the real bottleneck now is frame rate.

 

[StuBurns]

More resolution won't hurt image quality, but the real bottleneck now is frame rate.

I totally agree, nor do I think 2k is crap. I was just saying what you posted does not prove Cameron disagrees with jett.

I actually noticed a lot more with Avatar (probably the 3D) that 24fps is becoming a bit of a joke, it cripples with pretty much every pan in that film.

 

[Akira]

anyone have any clue about this X3D garbage before I buy my ticket?

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=18983774&postcount=6125

Where do you live? I believe your theater might be an XpanD Cinema theater, judging from the logo. Check out their website and see if your theater is on their list.

http://www.xpandcinema.com/

Someone commented on a a blog post and actually said that XpanD is the best 3D system because of its active 3D glasses.

XPAND: this is my current favorite system, but is hard to find (http://www.xpandcinema.com/). I saw AVATAR at the Cinerama Dome this way last night, and it was simply the best 3D I’ve ever seen. It’s a new generation of active glasses, with lighter frames and no flicker whatsoever. It’s the system of choice for all of the high-end screening rooms at the studios (Disney, ILM), and it’s pretty expensive for public cinemas to install, but if you see a theater with it, GO — it’s amazing.

 

[Askani]

Has anyone seen the movie in both real IMAX 3D and regular RealD3D? I saw it in D3D, and I'm going to see it again sometime. I'd heard the picture quality is better with Digital, but is that because of the digital quality or because the screen is smaller? I would imagine the size of the IMAX screen would make it a better experience, but I wanted to make sure.

I saw it first on Saturday night and then again a couple hours ago. Went to the IMAX screen first and the Real3D the second time. As far as the sound, I'm not a real audiophile guy though, so as long as I hear reasonable 3D sound I'm usually okay with the audio. I will say that overall, the sound is much better in the IMAX than the Real3D one, as I expected. In regards to the video, the Real3D screen was wider and had the better 3D pop IMO. Some people here complained about the IMAX glasses, but I actually liked them more than the Real3D Ray-ban things. The Real3D ones don't cover up as much of your eyes and peripheral vision. Also, they pick up lots of reflections.

I don't know if that helps you or not, but there you go.

 

[JB1981]

Honestly it does feel like this movie is missing quite a few scenes, despite its lengthy run-time. It feels like the development of a few things ended prematurely.

There's one thing in particular that would have made the movie more powerful, especially when it comes to Jake using the Avatar system, and that's to have given him more screen-time as a cripple to convey to a greater degree just what a hardship that is. No reason to be incredibly overt with it, since it should be obvious what a detriment not having use of your legs is, but I think if there had been more of a emphasis on that it would have lent later scenes more power.

One scene in specific is the one where Jake first becomes an Avatar and runs around freely, enamored with his newfound ability to use his legs - that scene would have carried far more weight in my view if it hadn't happened so early on in the film, and we'd spent a bit more time with Jake in the wheelchair prior to it.

I also hold this opinion when it comes to the Jake/Neytiri relationship as a whole. The transition from "they have no idea who the other person is" to "they are madly in love with each other" happens very quickly, and it feels like the pacing was a bit off there. If there had been more of a build-up to it, there would've been a greater sense of poignancy, especially given how significant it is when it comes to the plot.

Are you me? I have been thinking about this today as well. It would have given the audience a much greater emotional connection to the character, something that I felt was very much lacking from the picture. I also did not like Jake in his Avatar body. He had a lot of cringey dialog, and he said a lot of things that made him come across as an ass.

 

[Timbuktu]

Plain storytelling suspense. He leaps, then it cuts away, like a cliffhanger. Later on, (dispensing with spoilers, as most here have seen it, and those that haven't and don't want to be spoiled are probably avoiding this thread anyway. Also the movie moves a long predictably), he rides in on the beast as a climactic moment. It's not about redundancy.

I didn't feel it was suspense at all, I thought it was cut because it would have been a repeat of an earlier scene and you sort of know that he is going to succeed. For a moment I felt bad for his old ride though, being abandoned like when they're so loyal just because the village people would only respect him if he showed up in a red Ferrari.

 

[ianp622]

I saw it first on Saturday night and then again a couple hours ago. Went to the IMAX screen first and the Real3D the second time. As far as the sound, I'm not a real audiophile guy though, so as long as I hear reasonable 3D sound I'm usually okay with the audio. I will say that overall, the sound is much better in the IMAX than the Real3D one, as I expected. In regards to the video, the Real3D screen was wider and had the better 3D pop IMO. Some people here complained about the IMAX glasses, but I actually liked them more than the Real3D Ray-ban things. The Real3D ones don't cover up as much of your eyes and peripheral vision. Also, they pick up lots of reflections.

I don't know if that helps you or not, but there you go.

Yeah that helps, thanks. I've heard complaints about the IMAX too, so I think I'll stick with the Real3D. I do like good audio but I've also heard that the IMAX one is louder - I don't want loud, I just want fidelity and good soundspace. The 3D effect is more important to me.

 

[StuBurns]

Where do you live? I believe your theater might be an XpanD Cinema theater, judging from the logo. Check out their website and see if your theater is on their list.

http://www.xpandcinema.com/

Someone commented on a a blog post and actually said that XpanD is the best 3D system because of its active 3D glasses.

You've got me a little hot with this post. Been to the LieMAX twice, RealD tomorrow, and was planning the real IMAX when I get back to London, but now I'm tempted by this XpanD thing. There is a cinema in central I could go to.

IMAX or XpanD... No idea now.

 

[marc^o^]

Just saw it in IMAX 3D in Disney Village, Paris. They fucked the beginning of the movie: they had just received the english copy, and the sound was not synchronized! So they had to put it back in french after the whole audience screamed and insulted the cinema owner, who apologized with a mic. Actually they panicked and gave away free tickets in compensation. I got 3 in the process! One hour later the movie finally started...

and I loved every second of it. What James Cameron did there is nuts.
Most impressive special effects ever seen.

I give it a A+, and I can't wait to see it again.

 

[Lagspike_exe]

So, I just watched AVATAR in XPAND.

This is my first ever 3D projection I went to and I have some mixed feelings about it.

The 3D effect is awesome. There is this awesome sense of depth that really enhances the viewing experience. With the awesome sound, it's really a ton better than the 2D projections IMO.

Now, there are some certain problems. First of all, THE FUCKING GLASSES. My copy was all messy and the picture was... blurry, in a sense that the light was kinda of a going places. The best way I can describe this is like when you have eye correction glasses and you don't clean them up. Everything seems kinda fuzzy... Not really blurry, just kinda messes up, with the light breaking through edges and stuff. I tried cleaning the bloody things but it just wouldn't go away.
They are also very heavy. All 4 of us had the marks on our noses after the end.
The third thing is that they are very dark. Like very dark. When you put them off, you can clearly see that the details in the dark areas are crushed. The film is SOOOOO MUCH more vivid without them and it's kinda hard putting them back on after you've seen all the lush green stuff in a much more colorful and cheerful environment.

Regarding the film itself - it's a solid 4 out of 5 for me. Pandora looks amazing. CGI is amazing. The music is amazing... But the dialogs... Jesus Christ, what the hell was Cameron thinking? Some of it is ok, but some of the dialogs are a plain joke. Also, forced humor can be observed several times during the film and it sounds just plain weird. Many jokes simply aren't funny. The G.I. Joe Colonel is the biggest LOL though. He had NO PLACE in this film and his existence is probably the biggest deal breaker for me. He just ruins the entire atmosphere and he looks more like the main villain from some C-class RAMBO-STYLE film from the 80s. Still, an awesome film. I won't go to see it again, but I'll probably grab the 3D Bluray when I get access to a 3D home theatre.

 

[RoadHazard]

Now, there are some certain problems. First of all, THE FUCKING GLASSES. My copy was all messy and the picture was... blurry, in a sense that the light was kinda of a going places. The best way I can describe this is like when you have eye correction glasses and you don't clean them up. Everything seems kinda fuzzy... Not really blurry, just kinda messes up, with the light breaking through edges and stuff. I tried cleaning the bloody things but it just wouldn't go away.
They are also very heavy. All 4 of us had the marks on our noses after the end.

Don't you get a completely new and unused pair of glasses with Xpand? You do with RealD (cheap and recyclable plastic glasses). The RealD glasses are also very lightweight, you really don't feel that you're wearing them.

EDIT: Oh, Xpand uses active shutter glasses? Well, there are positives and negatives about that, I guess.

 

[pringles]

Saw it tonight, on a 2d screen. Not only that, but because of some stupid issue with the curtain we had to watch the movie on a smaller screen than what was originally intended.
Still thought it was an awesome experience. Visually probably the most amazing shit I've seen. I would have liked to have a button during the movie that created a desktop wallpaper every time I pushed it.

As far as the actual movie goes, it was really good but too uneven for me to place it in the same league as Cameron's masterpieces Aliens and T2.
Cringe-worthy dialogue at times, too much new-age/religious mumbo-jumbo, it beat you over the head too much with the save-the-environment message, and it was kinda predictable. And it didn't have enough Sigourney Weaver.

Was an awesome ride though. Wish I could see it on a 3d screen.

 

[Particle Physicist]

Probably posted already (quick search pulled up nada), but Cameron was interviewed for the December issue of Playboy:

http://www.playboy.com/articles/james-cameron-interview/index.html?page=1

PLAYBOY: Have you since run into any of those guys?
CAMERON: Yes, and if you ever go to a 25th high school reunion, make sure that in the previous two months you’ve made the world’s highest-grossing movie, won 11 Academy Awards and become physically bigger than most of those guys who used to beat you up. I walked up to them one by one and said, “You know, I could take your ass right now, and I’m tempted, but I won’t.” Actually, they were all nice guys except for one who was still big and mean. I left him alone.

cameron sounds so awesome.

 

[StuBurns]

Now, there are some certain problems. First of all, THE FUCKING GLASSES. My copy was all messy and the picture was... blurry, in a sense that the light was kinda of a going places. The best way I can describe this is like when you have eye correction glasses and you don't clean them up. Everything seems kinda fuzzy... Not really blurry, just kinda messes up, with the light breaking through edges and stuff. I tried cleaning the bloody things but it just wouldn't go away.
They are also very heavy. All 4 of us had the marks on our noses after the end.
The third thing is that they are very dark. Like very dark. When you put them off, you can clearly see that the details in the dark areas are crushed. The film is SOOOOO MUCH more vivid without them and it's kinda hard putting them back on after you've seen all the lush green stuff in a much more colorful and cheerful environment.

You pretty much just solved my big conundrum, you are awesome. Sorry you had a mixed experience though.

 

[Lagspike_exe]

Don't you get a completely new and unused pair of glasses with Xpand? You do with RealD (cheap and recyclable plastic glasses). The RealD glasses are also very lightweight, you really don't feel that you're wearing them.

Noup. You actually have to pay extra to get the 3D glasses before the projection (yeah, they don't include the price of renting 3D glasses during a 3D projection into the price of the ticket itself :lol) and you have to return them after the projection. They are very heavy and mine were fucked up. I haven't asked my friends about theirs, but they all complained about the freaking weight.

You pretty much just solved my big conundrum, you are awesome. Sorry you had a mixed experience though.

No problem man, I'm glad I helped!

Yeah, the experience was kinda of a mixed. The picture itself was fine (except the light bleed, but that's up to the glasses, not the projector I believe), the sense of depth was fine, but the bloody glasses kept me from completely enjoying the film.

 

[Dead]

cameron sounds so awesome.

PLAYBOY: You’re a major techie, but does any current tech toy elude you?
CAMERON: On Twitter, a tweet has to be less than, what, 25 words? [Editor’s note: It’s 140 characters maximum.] There isn’t one concept I would be interested in discussing with anyone that could be summed up in 25 words or fewer. I’m totally not into Facebook or Twitter, so that makes me a dinosaur right there.

yes, yes he does