Once again; okay.
I thought the movie was a great experience in 3D. Most of the script was familiar from other films, yet they did avoid certain cliches and the story never gets very annoying. The landscapes were great, the animations exceptional and I loved the references to the Aliens movie.
I didn’t want it to end, and the three hours went by really quick. Also, this was the first movie I watched in 3D, so I was constantly distracted by the 3d illusions.
I am a little puzzled with the whole transfer ritual and the technicalities of what works and what does not with the hybrids, but probably these are not things that viewers should bother much with.
Well, the ‘First I came here to spy on you, but then I fell in love with you!’ speach annoyed me quite a bit. I mean, come on…
Agree with you about the rest though.
It annoyed that blue lady too, so I guess the reactions were semi-realistic at least. :retard:
Epic, and I mean EPIC CG scenes.
Character development is great but some of the dialogs were so bad they were funny…
I must admit, Sulley sounded like a complete moron in that scene. Surely even a dumb Marine could handle a situation like that better.
“How do I know if it’s chosen me?”
“It will try to kill you.”
“Outstanding.”
“How do I know if I fail at choosing the right quote?”
“It was intended to actually be funny.”
“Outstanding”
Yeah, that line was supposed to bring laughter.
The only key differences that are shown is their fingers, the hybrids have four fingers and thumb, the Na’vi have three fingers and thumb. Another one I noticed were the noses and eyebrows, hybrids have eyebrows and noses are more pronounced in certain ways.
every na’vi, including the avatars, had large flat noses. sigourney weaver’s avatar was the only one with a caucasian nose. just an interesting observation my dad made. :retard:
She probably had an earlier version of the hybrid.
Norm is the same way.
A shitty plot with half a billion dollars throw into it. Yes it looks very pretty, but I wouldnt watch it twice.
Or the graphic modellers fucked up.
Seeing it tomorrow. Anyone know if there’s a difference between digital 3D and Imax3D? Will I be missing out much if I see digital 3D and not imax 3D?
I believe Digital 3D refers to it simply showing in traditional theaters. The effect is more like you’re looking into a museum exhibit box, while in IMAX it’s a much more immersive/panoramic looking effect.
Same thing, the screen is simply a 4: 3 with the same width of the 16:9. I recommend IMAX for sure. Enjoy.
I watched the movie in IMAX last night. It was the first time I was in an IMAX theater in years, and it was a great experience. All I can say though is that film needs to be shot at a higher framerate. In high action scenes just about all the fine detail you get from IMAX (9.4 megapixels or higher), or even bluray (2.1 megapixels) is lost to motion blur.
There is nothing “cinematic” about 24fps. It is an old through-back to when sound was first added to 35mm prints. If 60Hz is deemed “not cinematic enough/too much like broadcast tv”, go for 72hz or some other multiple of 24.
Cameron strongly advised Fox that the movie should be shot at 48fps.
Saw it in digital3D. I loved it. The plot and the writing were decent, though I expected them to suck, but the visuals were beautiful, and being a hippy-treehugger, I highly approved of the theme. Just a really good movie, I was not disappointed at all.
I just saw Avatar five hours ago and I must say it is one of my favorite films of 2009. The visuals were absolutely beautiful, and I felt deeply immersed in Pandora. The plot was a bit poor for something 15 years in the making, (dances with wolves with blue giant poison breathing indians) but other than that, I really enjoyed it.
cons: the drama felt more like a pixar movie, such as toy story, and less like a mature movie. the story was hyper-unoriginal. it didn’t seem like a sci-fi movie.
pros: excellent visual experience.