Checked out James Cameron's Avatar? Epic 3-D sci-fi flick...

[PC Engine Fan X!]

Have you checked out the latest CGI masterpiece from film director James Cameron titled Avatar? The Pace 3D technology used to create the lush 3-D visual effects are truly breathtaking and awe-inspiring. As usual, the ever so impressive special effects wizards at ILM handled the brunt of the CGI and smaller CGI companies were farmed out to do touch-up jobs. With over four years in the making, Avatar truly shows off what CGi is capable given the proper amount of time and budgetary means to pull it off. I definitely got my moneys worth today with the justified asking ticket price of $10.50 USD with a pair of Real-D 3-D glasses.

I'd have to say that some the futuristic hovercraft ships and main dropship carrier strongly reminds me of the dropship designs featured in Aliens. Even the armored mecha suits seems to give a nod to the mecha suits portrayed in the third Matrix Revolutions flick.

Mr. Cameron had a hand in developing this new-fangled Pace 3D technology used in Avatar. I'm sure sooner or later, home theater will embrace RealD so that the home movie euthusiast will be able to enjoy watching 3-D films at home just like how it was on the silver screen.

This film clocks in at a whopping two hours and forty minutes...is usual Cameron standard fare. Quite epic indeed. Should be even better when it is finally released on Blu-Ray and DVD formats with the Director's Cut. The alien landscapes, lush plant life and exotic lifeforms are a marvel to behold -- surely must have taken some time to bring to life from conceptual drawings to full-realized CGI.

I've heard that the proper way to watch this 3-D film is if the theater is equipped with the new Dolby 3D surround setup + digital projection = the best way to view it.

What's your personal opinion about this Avatar film?

PC Engine Fan X! ^_~

[kengou]

3D tends to give me a headache. I'm not too hyped when every review praises the CGI but acknowledges the story is weak and unoriginal. I don't really go to the movies JUST to see good-looking CGI, for the same reason I don't play a game JUST because it has good graphics. There's got to be more to it, and "Ferngully 3: Furries in Space" (stolen from here) doesn't seem like it has much more to it.

[drunkninja24]

Just got back from it, I thought it was freakin' incredible. Yes, the overall story isn't groundbreaking, but it's not bad by any means, and it does a fantastic job of making you feel a connection with the characters. Definitely a must-see, and the 3D was awesome and didn't jar you all the time with a bunch of crap designed to pop out at you for no reason at all.

[PC Engine Fan X!]

If you wear prescription eyeglasses, wearing the special Real-D 3-D glasses won't get in the way. The process of showing 3-D nowdays (via digital projection systems) is quite better (and flicker-free as well) than how it was back in the early 1980s with 3-D films like: Friday The 13th in 3-D, Jaws 3-D, The Man Who Wasn't There in 3-D, Space Hunter in the Fobidden Zone, Metal Storm: The Destruction of Jared-Syn, Treasure of the Four Crowns, etc. Those type of 3-D flims used dual 35mm print projectors + you had to use a special 3-D glasses with gray-colored lenses manufactured by Polaroid to view them properly...otherwise, you'd be viewing double imagery on the movie screen without them. Even StarChaser; The Legend of Orion in 3-D was groundbreaking since it's regarded as the world's first 3-D "hand-drawn" animated film circa 1985.

In some scenes, you can percieve many layers of depth while watching Avatar in 3-D. Of course, some theater chains are showing it presented in both 3-D and non 3-D formats if you want to save a few bucks. It might be a few years down the road when the home theater equipment manufacturers are able to properly display Avatar, Coraline and other 3-D films of this current generation at home. It's coming...there's no doubt that the wave of the future is 3-D for home viewing with state-of-the-art 3-D A/V equipment.

There is even talk about movie studios making 3-D films without the need to resort to using 3-D glasses within the next five to ten years...how cool is that?

PC Engine Fan X! ^_~

[t0yrobo]

How were peoples experience in imax? I saw the last harry Potter in imax and it seemed like the 3d bit was more jerky than what I've seen in normal theaters.

[PC Engine Fan X!]

It would a good hour and half hour drive or two to my closest IMAX theater with Avatar being shown in 3-D. It's best to see in a theater equipped with the new Dolby 3D surround sound system setup + digital projection system. Or if your local theater doesn't have Dolby 3D, then preferably one with THX sound setup.

PC Engine Fan X! ^_~

[Thunder Force]

Saw advance screening earlier in the week. Old fashioned story, well told, effortlessly directed by a master of his craft.

3-D tech is out of this world, provided you are close enough to the screen to feel the effect - the color film vs. black & white analogy, is a fair one here.

And there's at least a few great scenes that fans of Mushihimesama and/or Panzer Dragoon should love...

[Herr Schatten]

I haven't seen the movie, and, as of yet, I'm skeptical. Cameron is a good and creative director, but he desperately needs someone who takes his finished movie and cuts out all the unnecessary crap. (Compare the theatrical version of Aliens to its much weaker director's cut to see what I mean. The same applies to The Abyss, but that one's a terrible movie in either version.) What makes me cautious is that after Titanic, Cameron's obviously in a position to not have his stuff altered anymore, so we only get to see his epic (read: drawn-out) version of the movie.

I'm sure I'll see Avatar eventually, but I don't have very high hopes.

[iatneH]

Wait, so the film is not about kids with kung-fu powers riding self-propelled surfboards?

[CMoon]

Wait, so the film is not about kids with kung-fu powers riding self-propelled surfboards?

It's mildly interesting that that other film had to abbreviate its name to 'The last airbender' to avoid problems with this film. Of course, I'm sure the life action version of Last Airbender will be pretty much terrible anyway, so it's probably of no consequence. I'm also a little skeptical about Cameron's Avatar, but more because the story doesn't look too intriguing to me. Honestly, you can't much from trailers anymore anyway.

[szycag]

I was sort of interested in the film when I realized it would be a decent popcorn sci-fi flick about humans exploiting some indigenous people of a planet just to mine some rock. Earlier trailers only hinted at that and focused more on the fantasy elements which will probably turn most people away. Still don't know if I'll actually make the effort to go see it in theatres.

[Zeether]

Not going to see it. The Navi look fucking ugly and the story's been seen before.

I may seem harsh but it seems too overhyped to me.

[Never_Scurred]

Saw it.

Still tryna figure out where that extra $150 mil went to.
Triple shitty storyline aside, what was James doing for the last 12 years while making this movie? Did he not see the Matrix sequels, LoTR, or the turdtastic Star Wars prequels?
And why didn't anyone pull the man aside and say to him,"hey Jim, I know you think this is a bitchin' idea and all, but why are we spending this all this money to make a ANOTHER goddamned CGI movie?"

I would've preferred him making another Aliens-style hard military sci fi movie like a Halo film or something. That franchise would have been right up his alley.

[Zeether]

I've heard people say that this is pretty much like Phantom Menace.

[kengou]

Kind of like this?

[Khan]

Not going to see it. The Navi look fucking ugly and the story's been seen before.

I may seem harsh but it seems too overhyped to me.

You know I was thinking about Unreal the game (1998) for PC and the alien species like the skaarj but more so the Nali this film reminds of them

It seems alot directors to be coming up with things seen before

[Daigohji]

Saw it today and loved it. There's nothing surprising about the plot, but that in itself is not surprising as this is clearly Cameron's take on the monomyth. It didn't need to be original. Cameron's strengths as a filmmaker are taking a normally cynical genre like the Hollywood blockbuster, giving it a kernal of genuine emotion and likeable characters, then wrapping it up in kick-ass action scenes. By that measure, he definitely brought his A-game to Avatar.

Like so many recent attempts at photorealistic CG characters, the Na'vi look a lot more convincing on the big screen, so downloaded trailers sell it short. Obviously they don't look human, but they're not supposed to. In the context of the alien world depicted, they're convincing. There are times in the movie I forgot I was watching scenes that must be 100% CG, as the CG and live-action sequences were so well matched up. People keep bitching about CG characters' eyes, ignoring the amazing work done on the hands, the feet, the translucency of the skin, the movement of muscles, and so on. The naysayers give reality too much credit, as frankly I've seen many real actors who look less alive than the Na'vi.

As for the 3D, I enjoyed it, but can't help wondering if my astigmatism prevented me from seeing it as intended. Depth of field into the screen was excellent, but the further forward out of the screen something came, the more it seemed like a cardboard cutout. Some foreground 3D elements also looked translucent and sometimes ghosted into two images. Fast moving objects in the far 3D foreground seemed to flicker too, which I'm guessing came from the stereoscopic process of alternated frames. Granted I was wearing prescription glasses under the 3D glasses, but it didn't seem to make much difference when I tried taking them off. So are these limitations of the technology, or was it just my messed up eyesight?

[PC Engine Fan X!]

It's been said that Mr. Cameron came up with the idea/concept for Avatar 15 years ago but the current technology at that period in time was not up to his specs. It has only been within the last five to four years that current CGI effects were good enough for Avatar to get the "green light".

I suppose it depends on where you sit in the theater...I personally did not see any flickering whatsoever since the entire movie theater has upgraded their projection systems to the all-digital Texas Instruments DLP format. In fact, the Galaxy 12 movie theater that I saw Avatar in was only one of a handful of theaters that was given the blessing from Mr. George Lucas himself to show Star Wars Episode III in the all-digital DLP format. It was super razor sharp and crystal clear compared to watching it on the old traditional 35mm print reel format.

PC Engine Fan X! ^_~

[Bkeela]

Why do people complain the story is unoriginal?

There are only about seven story archetypes, and these come from the ancient Greeks and other ancient cultures. Nothing is new under the sun.

Avatar was brilliant.

[Specineff]

Dances with Wolves + Final Fantasy Spirits Within + FFX's Ronso = Avatar?

[kengou]

Why do people complain the story is unoriginal?

There are only about seven story archetypes, and these come from the ancient Greeks and other ancient cultures. Nothing is new under the sun.

Avatar was brilliant.

Go watch Primer and then say there are no new or original story ideas.

I've heard that argument before and I don't buy it. Most of hollywood doesn't think hard enough to come up with any original stories. Doesn't mean it isn't possible.

[Never_Scurred]

Go watch Primer.

And then watch it again to figure out what the fuck was going on.
Great movie, probably the most original time travel flick out there.

[t0yrobo]

Saw it today and loved it. There's nothing surprising about the plot, but that in itself is not surprising as this is clearly Cameron's take on the monomyth. It didn't need to be original. Cameron's strengths as a filmmaker are taking a normally cynical genre like the Hollywood blockbuster, giving it a kernal of genuine emotion and likeable characters, then wrapping it up in kick-ass action scenes. By that measure, he definitely brought his A-game to Avatar.

Totally agreed, the story isn't anything special, but it's totally sufficient. I saw it in IMAX (my nearest theater ) and was pretty impressed. Besides being the first full movie I've seen that actually uses the format. Before this only Batman used it, and that was only in sections. It did take a long time to adjust to the massive screen and 3d though, having glasses didn't help I'm sure. But after a hour it looked really great, with way less horizontal stuttering than I've seen in other 3d movies, which was my main problem with 3d.
Honestly I have a feeling seeing it in 2d would be a total waste of money. I thought it looked like garbage in the clips I saw on talk shows and the trailers didn't really catch my eye either, but it is very impressive looking when viewed as it was intended (3d/imax).



Plus the big red bird thing was totally a dragoon.

[Thunder Force]

It's been said that Mr. Cameron came up with the idea/concept for Avatar 15 years ago but the current technology at that period in time was not up to his specs.

Yep, I read the early script treatment in its entirety in the 1990s, and the majority of the story has stayed the same for the final film. It's now finally been realized in vivid ways nobody could have imagined back then. I kinda feel sorry for folks who somehow miss experiencing this at least once properly in a 3-D screening.

[PC Engine Fan X!]

Am looking forward to Disney's Tron Legacy sequel presented in digital Real-D 3-D format for the 2010 timeline. It's about damn time that it came out...twenty-eight years is too long of a wait for a proper sequel.

The new Syd Mead designed Light Cycles shown in the Tron Legacy HD film trailer look bad-ass. Even the built-in speedometer display is perfectly readable.

You might recall that the original 1982 Tron film was presented in 70mm Super Panavision film format for that super razor-sharp detail & clarity. Should look great if Disney re-releases it in a fully restored Blu-Ray 1080p format.

It's a given fact that most major Hollywood film studios are adding the finishing touches to their Blu-Ray and DVD formatted releases of the film when it finally debuts in the big screen. Avatar's Blu-ray release will no doubt include a 1080p 3-D version to enjoy but with the traditional 3-D glasses format (red & blue colored lenses).

Even when Coraline and My Blood Valentine 3-D were finally released on Blu-Ray format, they came out the traditional 3-D glasses setup.

PC Engine Fan X! ^_~

[worstplayer]

I've only seen trailers, but there's one thing I noticed. This movie is trying to look like Crysis. Same lighting, same colors, very similar interiors and vehicles, and computer screens look suspiciously like Crysis' main menu.

That's right, movies now try to look like videogames. Didn't expect that to happen in my lifetime.

[Daigohji]

It's a given fact that most major Hollywood film studios are adding the finishing touches to their Blu-Ray and DVD formatted releases of the film when it finally debuts in the big screen. Avatar's Blu-ray release will no doubt include a 1080p 3-D version to enjoy but with the traditional 3-D glasses format (red & blue colored lenses).

Even when Coraline and My Blood Valentine 3-D were finally released on Blu-Ray format, they came out the traditional 3-D glasses setup.

So the current home 3D solution would only be the old monochrome standard? That would kill the experience of Avatar more than not having 3D at all, considering how striking the use of colour is in the film.

[EPS21]

Except unlike crysis, this movie can be played with all the effects turned up and at an acceptable framerate

Just saw this the day it came out, really good stuff, even if you don't like sci-fi flicks. I haven't watched too many 3D movies before but it seemed to be used pretty well, not in any gimmicky fashion, and it gets you really immersed into the world.

[t0yrobo]

It's a given fact that most major Hollywood film studios are adding the finishing touches to their Blu-Ray and DVD formatted releases of the film when it finally debuts in the big screen. Avatar's Blu-ray release will no doubt include a 1080p 3-D version to enjoy but with the traditional 3-D glasses format (red & blue colored lenses).

Even when Coraline and My Blood Valentine 3-D were finally released on Blu-Ray format, they came out the traditional 3-D glasses setup.

So the current home 3D solution would only be the old monochrome standard? That would kill the experience of Avatar more than not having 3D at all, considering how striking the use of colour is in the film.

I tried watching Coraline with the 3d glasses at home (on a sd tv), and it was fucking awful. It's a shame to because that movie made really good use of the effect, it's still great looking regardless at least.

[Specineff]

Saw it along with Greg today. Mind-freaking-blowing. The CGI didn't look like such... it was perfectly blended in. This makes Episode III look like a flash animation by comparison. Loved the little Gecko-Copters. For a moment, it felt like it was the second stage of Panzer Dragoon Orta for Xbox.

The story felt a little rushed/hackneyed at some points. And it's obvious many, many ideas were taken from existing works and other movies (Cameron even seems to have been paying homage to his own designs in Terminator 2 and Aliens.), and you can see some things that have been done before coming from a mile or two. A couple of dialog lines were royally out of place.

It's like a patchwork quilt: You can see things that belonged somewhere else, and were transplanted here, but the complete work is nothing short of breathtaking. The bar has been raised several notches, technology-wise. (The story not so much. This has been done to hell and back in fanfiction and other works, but it was still good.) Well worth the price of admission.