-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Rottenwatch: AVATAR (82%)
- Thread starter SCULLIBUNDO
- Start date
- Status
Saw it for the second time yesterday, in an absolutely packed (every seat taken) theater in Port Chester, NY. Very nice, very big theater too. Went with my family, and everyone except my 17 year old sister enjoyed it (unsurprisingly, but I told her I'd watch 500 Days of Summer, which was great, if she's give Avatar a chance). The fact my stepmother didn't hate it and gave it a 7 was amazing.
However, for the last, oh, forty minutes of the movie there was a vertical split down the center of the screen... everything to the right looked how it should, and everything to the left had a green hue to it. Very distracting and unfortunate because it really took me out of the experience. Only my brother and I noticed it out of our group of five, but that was disappointing. Anyone else run into this problem in a 3D viewing? This was RealD3D, for what it's worth.
The movie held up well for a second viewing but I think I've seen it enough now for a good long while.
However, for the last, oh, forty minutes of the movie there was a vertical split down the center of the screen... everything to the right looked how it should, and everything to the left had a green hue to it. Very distracting and unfortunate because it really took me out of the experience. Only my brother and I noticed it out of our group of five, but that was disappointing. Anyone else run into this problem in a 3D viewing? This was RealD3D, for what it's worth.
The movie held up well for a second viewing but I think I've seen it enough now for a good long while.
Memphis Reigns
Member
LaneDS said:
How long did you wait before viewings? I saw the midnight showing opening night and went again immediately the next morning. It may have been too quick of a turn around. I loved it the first showing, the second wasn't quite as good but for some reason the 3rd and 4th showings for me were the best.
Time between 1st and 2nd - 7 hours
Time between 2nd and 3rd - 8 days
Time between 3rd and 4th - 5 days
Just saw it last night, 3D Imax thing. Was mind-blown.
Objectively, the movie was only good, not great. The story was extremely linear (in a bad way, as it was very predictable and not really deep at all), but the acting and story telling wasn't awful by any means. Good, not great.
But 3D Imax made it SPECTACUFUCKINGAWESOSUPERGOODNESS. The clarity on such a huge screen was absolutely amazing, and the 3D was subtle, not gimmicky. So damn good. Good enough that I'm going again tomorrow. Contributing twice for the weekend numbers.
I'm basically forcing a friend who is on the fence about this to go, because I think the 3D Imax makes it an experience not to be missed.
Objectively, the movie was only good, not great. The story was extremely linear (in a bad way, as it was very predictable and not really deep at all), but the acting and story telling wasn't awful by any means. Good, not great.
But 3D Imax made it SPECTACUFUCKINGAWESOSUPERGOODNESS. The clarity on such a huge screen was absolutely amazing, and the 3D was subtle, not gimmicky. So damn good. Good enough that I'm going again tomorrow. Contributing twice for the weekend numbers.
I'm basically forcing a friend who is on the fence about this to go, because I think the 3D Imax makes it an experience not to be missed.jett said:
I did say something on the way out and got a few free passes out of it actually. Didn't take much effort so I'm guessing it's a common problem with that theater or print of the movie. Do 3D and/or digital projection screens still use reels? Time to Google for some learnings.
Gui_PT said:
I really hope you're joking, because if not, ugh.
Evlar said:
I assumed as much, but seeing one whole section of the film displayed in that same screwed up manner made me think maybe that wasn't correct. Good to know in any case.
Gui_PT said:
Yes, because nobody uses those laughing icons to mock other posters on here. That never happens!
All good in any case.
Opinions and all. Of all the iterations of this story (Dances with Wolves, etc.) think Avatar pulled it off the best. It was to my disappointment that the arc was so familiar. It was to my delight that it was told so well and set in such a rich universe with great characters and performances.Xrenity said:
On a box office note, with the revised $25m estimate for yesterday, that means Friday #3 was down 7% from it's opening Friday.
And up 8% from last Friday. 0_o
Memphis Reigns
Member
GhaleonEB said:
But not for Quentin Tarentino as he will supposedly quit film making when digital becomes the standard.
Memphis Reigns said:
I highly doubt he will really quit. His problem is he likes traditional film.. if you call that a problem so the day they have a digital filming system that can record at cinema 4k with a simulated film grain filter that looks the same or better then actual film I'm sure he'll make the switch. Also these hypothetical digital cameras would need to work exactly like a real film camera- you can under and overcrank if you wanted to, zooming in and out and all of that wonderful stuff would need to be 100% accurate.
Until then it's not as though regular film will die. You can still get cameras and traditional film despite the huge number of digital cameras in use. It's not easy mind you but it's there.
ryutaro's mama
Member
For it to be a DM-esque post, you need to reverse the order of the pics.Solo said:Since Ive had to endure far too many DM posts like the one Im about to make over the past 2 years, I figure its my turn now
"$1B isn't bad....
....for 17 days"
polyh3dron
Banned
Technicolor just recently developed a 3D polarized film format that will make 3D very inexpensive for theaters.Onix said:Step back and think about that for a second
As fir 3D, it can go either way, but the tech used currently is digital to my knowledge.
jett said:
Seems real full-size models were used for some scenes, neat.
And not _every_ single part of the jungles was CG, either.
digital fo life.
Awesome. It looks like such an entirely different looking experience than THIS. James Cameron just knows how to direct.
Vic said:
What? :lol What matters is the end result. Cameron said he didn't want the audience to know what was real and what was CG by the end of the film. I think he accomplished that for the most part.
I think I liked my second viewing more than my first, even though it was in 2D. It does make me want to see it again in 3D though, Cameron wants all my money. One of my qualms about the 3D turned out to not be the 3D's fault at all, Cameron just likes to make Quaritch's face very shiny.
I think he should have made the 2D version a bit darker to match what it looks like in 3D, I thought everything looked much better when it's not all cartoony bright.
Also, did Cameron make a cameo in the beginning when Grace talks to Selfridge for the first time? I thought saw a guy who looked like him behind the holographic map for a few seconds.
I think he should have made the 2D version a bit darker to match what it looks like in 3D, I thought everything looked much better when it's not all cartoony bright.
Also, did Cameron make a cameo in the beginning when Grace talks to Selfridge for the first time? I thought saw a guy who looked like him behind the holographic map for a few seconds.
Memphis Reigns
Member
fireside said:
I doubt it. Doesn't mean it wasn't though. I just don't think he has ever put himself in any of his movies.
On a related note, Cameron always has stuff going on in the background of scenes that helps add so much realism. After multiple viewings I still catch subtle details in the background that really add to the story. I loved watching the scenes in the labs and in Hells Gate showing everyone going to and fro with a purpose.
Saw it a few days ago and thought it was an incredibly impressive film, at least on the visual side. I did care about the main characters, but couldn't stand most of the secondary cast aside from Sigourney Weaver's character. Michelle Rodriguez pissed me off in practically every single scene she was in, playing the typical "tough as nails no bullshit girl power" stereotype that she's played in every role she's ever been in. And she acted terribly in it.
Also...unobtanium? F U writers.
Regardless of these quips, it was a 9/10 film for me. Very engrossing and engaging, and absolutely wonderful to sit back and watch. I want to see it again, but in IMAX this time.
Also...unobtanium? F U writers.
Regardless of these quips, it was a 9/10 film for me. Very engrossing and engaging, and absolutely wonderful to sit back and watch. I want to see it again, but in IMAX this time.
Alucard said:
It's kind of sad what her career has become. Her debut, Girlfight, involved a "tough as nails no bullshit girl power" type role, but it was anything but a stereotyped character. The depth and realism she brought to the character carried the movie, and the awards she was nominated for and won were entirely justified.
Now, the only work she receives are superficial shadows of the role that started her career. It would be one thing if she was pigeon-holed into into a role that had similar dimensionality as her character in Girlfight ... but that's not what has happened.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unobtainium
It was intentional, and quite fitting.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Just found a new behind the scenes video that shows Cameron directing the actors as well as some more stuff that was cut out of the film.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OjloXVNEbo
Halfway through.
Edit - fucking awesome! You also see the WETA guys showing Cameron the props and weapons they've come up with for him and see Cameron unloading some shots at the end of it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OjloXVNEbo
Halfway through.
Edit - fucking awesome! You also see the WETA guys showing Cameron the props and weapons they've come up with for him and see Cameron unloading some shots at the end of it.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Dead said:
I said more stuff that was cut, so yeah that bit of the dinner scene was cut.
jett said:
Seems real full-size models were used for some scenes, neat.
And not _every_ single part of the jungles was CG, either.
digital fo life.
Loved the film, though it's not one of my all time favorites yet, but will definitely see it again soon.
But I really don't see this as a huge selling point. The Na'vi/Jungle sequences look obviously CG, no amount of live action props will help.
But this was sort of saved by the premise of the movie, which in a way, is very similar to that of MMOs. There's the computer 'Avatar' world that looks one way, and the real world.
I actually am going to credit Cameron for intentionally keeping the very obvious visual differences between the live action and the Na'vi/Jungle/village life sequences so highten the duality of the worlds being showed.
That is not to say the visuals are not stunning. They are amazing.
doktorpeace
Banned
Just saw it (in 3D). Watched Turtles II: Secret of the Ooze last night.
Liked Turtles better. Avatar put me to sleep almost immediately as the entire plot spread predictably before me in minute 5 of 150. At least Turtles blew my mind with some Vanilla Ice.
Not here to get in an argument though. Just tossing in my two cents for the record. Ya'll can go back to your lovefest now.
Liked Turtles better. Avatar put me to sleep almost immediately as the entire plot spread predictably before me in minute 5 of 150. At least Turtles blew my mind with some Vanilla Ice.
Not here to get in an argument though. Just tossing in my two cents for the record. Ya'll can go back to your lovefest now.
RightScullibundo said:
Here is another bit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJKxcbcvxa4
A part of the Neytiri vs Quaritch fight, finished CG and all, yet not in the movie @ 3:26
^^ Quaritch in mirror is priceless
ryutaro's mama
Member
You're so clever.doktorpeace said:
Would like make another comparison to unrelated movie?
Maybe someone will find that funny.
- Status