James Cameron Explains How Avatar Sequels Will Revolutionize 3D

By now everyone realizes that what James Cameron says is more marketing then anything else.
When your message is as shallow as what every actor produces in every interview saying this movie is his best yet people become weary.
 
James Cameron is the John Carmack of movies. You can't advance your craft without making quite a few enemies. Change is hard, and sometimes, we don't like those who bring it.

JC for the win. Both of them

A bit more off topic: it saddens me we have no viable replacements for Cameron and Verhoeven. I want my quality sci-fi action movies and no one is delivering.
 
Last edited:
dgz said:
James Cameron is the John Carmack of movies. You can't advance your craft without making quite a few enemies. Change is hard, and sometimes, we don't like those who bring it.

JC for the win. Both of them

A bit more off topic: it saddens me we have no viable replacements for Cameron and Verhoeven. I want my quality sci-fi action movies and no one is delivering.
Click to expand...

I think Villanue will do for some of it TBH. I liek the combination of his story telling but he also brings a very good quality of the technical aspect. His team's visual emphasis on BR2049, and his sound in Sicarro, Arrival, and 2049 was steller.

But Cameron and Verhoeven heavy metal style is pretty great. So it will be kinda cool to see a person who replaces them that doesn't have a stupid as hell name like McG :)

What was your opinion of Pacific Rim?
 
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this
vegeta535 said:
Ever since this 3D shit really took off I been going to th movies less. I hate getting stuck in th shitty last run theathers on opening weekend cause the ones with the huge IMAX screen and Atmos sound with recling seats is taken up by the 3D shit. I and other people that wear glasses is uncomfortable. I blurry vision and a headache after an hour. It is something like 25% people out there can't even perceive it h 3D effect. I also get to pay more money fo th privilege too! So yeah 3D can fuck off.
Click to expand...

And from that experience you have disliked it and now want to watch at home, and there are many like you. People fight hard when they don't like shit, and start making experiences that suit others who don't like shit and things like a better 3d experience or 2d experience comes out of it. You may have noticed, I never once said I personally enjoy 3d movies (cause I don't, I've seen maybe 4 since Avatar in 2009), but I can respect some of the benefits we've gotten technology wise that was partially influenced, or fully influenced by companies pushing that shit.
 
I had a 3D tv at one time, it was okay but when it died I didn’t go look for another one. The only reason I got it in the first place is because it was on clearance to begin with. I could use the movie theater glasses so it wasn’t like I was out a bunch of money for those. I think we used it all of a dozen times over the course of 3 years. I see the 3D bits at the beginning of a movie but by the end of it I don’t see it anymore. It’s neat but not something that I care to do again, I don’t even pay the premium to see them in the theaters anymore.
 
sfsuphysics said:
And they're making massive profits on those projectors they bought when the first Avatar movie came out.
Click to expand...
The studios are making massive profits. Many of the digital upgrades in theaters over the last 5-10 years were also financially backed by the studios through various agreements which have or will soon be expiring.

In articles that pop up a few times a year, in various publications when the box office is bombing, it's been reported fairly consistently that theaters are running a razors edge as far as profitability. Many saying the only way they can generate a profit on certain movies is through the sale of concessions of which the studios don't get a cut.

Think of how many movies come out each year that you can't use you reward program points on because the theater would have to reimburse the difference to the studio due to forced caps on the studios cut of the receipts under the agreements. Most of them are 3D and most being shown on the latest GDX screens installed under those strict upgrade agreements forcing an enhanced cut of the receipts from the theater to cover the upgrade costs and supposed increased production costs of the film in that format.

The end of those leveraged upgrade agreements will leave theater owners using their own money for future improvements, yet, also allow them the flexibility to vary pricing on certain films (if the wish) and to show more than standard studio fare on the newer screens and enhanced sound systems.

If Mr. Cameron's new dream is to come true, theater owners will want to know they'll get more traffic than with current 3D/GDX in the form of greater offerings from the studios and studios may have to again put money forward to assist in upgrading theaters to the new format.

Those issues bring the point as to whether or not the studios will commit to producing a greater number of films in the new format, commit to a new round of upgrade agreements and whether theater owners will again be willing to cede control of their ticket sales back to the studios through those agreements.

Getting those issues resolved, and with what will likely be significantly higher ticket prices, it's seems incomprehensible this will be rolled out en masse anytime soon.

Ultimately, it will be the consumer, not Mr. Cameron, who decides whether or not it's a winning technology.
 
Chupachup said:
The studios are making massive profits. Many of the digital upgrades in theaters over the last 5-10 years were also financially backed by the studios through various agreements which have or will soon be expiring.

In articles that pop up a few times a year, in various publications when the box office is bombing, it's been reported fairly consistently that theaters are running a razors edge as far as profitability. Many saying the only way they can generate a profit on certain movies is through the sale of concessions of which the studios don't get a cut.

Think of how many movies come out each year that you can't use you reward program points on because the theater would have to reimburse the difference to the studio due to forced caps on the studios cut of the receipts under the agreements. Most of them are 3D and most being shown on the latest GDX screens installed under those strict upgrade agreements forcing an enhanced cut of the receipts from the theater to cover the upgrade costs and supposed increased production costs of the film in that format.

The end of those leveraged upgrade agreements will leave theater owners using their own money for future improvements, yet, also allow them the flexibility to vary pricing on certain films (if the wish) and to show more than standard studio fare on the newer screens and enhanced sound systems.

If Mr. Cameron's new dream is to come true, theater owners will want to know they'll get more traffic than with current 3D/GDX in the form of greater offerings from the studios and studios may have to again put money forward to assist in upgrading theaters to the new format.

Those issues bring the point as to whether or not the studios will commit to producing a greater number of films in the new format, commit to a new round of upgrade agreements and whether theater owners will again be willing to cede control of their ticket sales back to the studios through those agreements.

Getting those issues resolved, and with what will likely be significantly higher ticket prices, it's seems incomprehensible this will be rolled out en masse anytime soon.

Ultimately, it will be the consumer, not Mr. Cameron, who decides whether or not it's a winning technology.
Click to expand...

I am pretty sure he was trying to be sarcastic with his comment there and basically trying to say what you are right here but as a joke.
 
Being predictable and giving the audience that "deja vu" feeling is not groundbreaking.
 
trentchau said:
I think Villanue will do for some of it TBH. I liek the combination of his story telling but he also brings a very good quality of the technical aspect. His team's visual emphasis on BR2049, and his sound in Sicarro, Arrival, and 2049 was steller.

But Cameron and Verhoeven heavy metal style is pretty great. So it will be kinda cool to see a person who replaces them that doesn't have a stupid as hell name like McG :)

What was your opinion of Pacific Rim?
Click to expand...

Though he seems talented, I am not on the Vlleneuve hype train. He's yet to deliver an action sci-fi movie which is what I am after. While Arrival and BR2049 both look great, neither is a film what I'd consider fun. In fact I went to sleep watching both of them. Give this man better material and see what happens.

Pacific Rim was an ok fun.
 
dgz said:
Though he seems talented, I am not on the Vlleneuve hype train. He's yet to deliver an action sci-fi movie which is what I am after. While Arrival and BR2049 both look great, neither is a film what I'd consider fun. In fact I went to sleep watching both of them. Give this man better material and see what happens.

Pacific Rim was an ok fun.
Click to expand...

Yeah he's pretty serious, but I'm also a Ridley Scott fan. I'm kinda looking forward to his version of Dune. Maybe if Taika Waititi does an over the top sci fi film that is inspired by Michael Bay/Cameron/Goreheovan :)
 
trentchau said:
I've liked a shit ton of his movies. Maybe it's main stream of me, but seemingly a shit ton of people liked his movies also.
Click to expand...
Oh I'm sure it's me but it's OK, I made it through the 90s laughing at Nick Cage back when The Rock was a big block buster.
 
Kinda weird but the best 3D I remember seeing was "Creature from the Black Lagoon" on a Minolta sound projector circa 1980. Good grief that was scary.
 
8k glasses free 3d



4k glasses free 3d

https://www.provideocoalition.com/ultra-d-4k-glasses-free-3d-ces-2018/

I became a fan of it all after going to a midnight opening for the 1st Avengers. Sure it was one of those hybrid movies, some post, some 3d reference cameras, and asst'd other things. Loved it and dropped some serious cash into it but I usually do with many new display tech. As far as home stuff goes, I'm waiting for the glasses free stuff before investing in anything else now. We've already got a nice 1080p/3d t.v., and FHD/3d projector, and 4k non HDR 10 bit 3d t.v., 1440p/144hz/3d monitor, 1080p/120hz/3d. Also got a HDR10 4k tv along with 4k HDR10 projector. Obviously always looking to see things the best they can be. BTW we went and saw Infinity War in 3d and loved it also and yet again a post/hybrid kind of thing but I felt it was mostly up to par.

When most U.S. studios decided to really cut corners with just basic post conversions it really killed the market. I've got a library of around 100+ 3d blu-rays. I do research on the filming specs before purchase and usually wait for the sales(around the $10 mark) for the ones I know are total post. The ones that are purely post are pretty obvious in the lack of depth and pop out and look the worst. It's a shameful cash grab that cheapens all involved with it and the 2d versions often do look better.

I think Marvel really did the best with theirs. Guardians 1 and 2 both look great in 3d. The technique of switching to IMAX and letterbox also gave some headroom for neat tricks. In letterbox they'll sometimes have objects go beyond the letterbox frame for added pop-out effect. The IMAX full frame then brings you back in for added depth. Ragnarok has some great moments like that too. Mad Max Fury road during the storm in the beginning was pretty amazing. Dredd had a lot of cool psychedelic moments along with the gun fights. Special ordered Beowulf and that has some amazing parts too.

Cameron, well its like one of those love/hate things with his stuff. I watch Avatar for the eye candy. My will tell you also, after the 1st time seeing it I actually said we just watched Dances with Wolves in Spaaaaaaacccceeee. Loved T2, Aliens, and The Abyss(extended). I'm happy he's still committing to it but I do have doubts about the potential quality of these forthcoming sequels.
 
The best cinema 3D has been 3D HFR Hobbit, nothing has even come close to comparison.

Avatar 3D in cinema was good. UP! was done very subtle and well when it came to the 3D implementations.

^^^ that is just cinema

Now for the computer 3D Vision is a complete and total game changer (bad pun). I never would want to play Trine 1&2 or Tomb Raider 2013 without 3D Vision; it is that good, immersive and that revolutionary.
VR and AR still won't have depth cues until they implement some form of 3D.
 
How about a New Terminator movie when the terminators come back in time and save us all from James Cameron......
 
So, let me get this straight. He wan't to waste time, money, and resources on a technology no one cares about. TV manufacturers are removing 3D capabilities from their sets as consumers don't care about it. When are they going to get the picture (no pun intended)? We don't care about it. We don't want to pay extra for it. It's a gimmick that they keep trying to resurrect. Just focus on making good movies with good original stories. Oh, and while you're at it, STOP LETTING MICHEAL BAY ruin Transformers.
 
I can't watch 3D movies. Anytime there's motion, or a scene with lots of depth in it, the picture gets blurry. My eyes become tired having to focus and refocus on the content; I'm constantly having to look away. The last time I watched a 3D movie, I simply removed my glasses and watched it without. The movie was completely crap, but my eyes were happier not having to focus and refocus constantly; that movie was Avatar...
 
Last edited:
I'm going to guess the majority of its screenings will be "Non-3D." Poor bastard missed the memo.
 
vegeta535 said:
Ever since this 3D shit really took off I been going to th movies less. I hate getting stuck in th shitty last run theathers on opening weekend cause the ones with the huge IMAX screen and Atmos sound with recling seats is taken up by the 3D shit. I and other people that wear glasses is uncomfortable. I blurry vision and a headache after an hour. It is something like 25% people out there can't even perceive it h 3D effect. I also get to pay more money fo th privilege too! So yeah 3D can fuck off.
Click to expand...
Yup, hey I want to see the 2d version... ok sir we'll send you to theater 32 off to the side, next to the bathroom with the screen that's about half the size of the others, it's so small in fact there's only one entrance to the theater and everyone sits in the same column.

And yeah I don't really get the 3d effect either, the best it works for me is a few distinctive layers, similar to holding things at different levels, but I'll never get the "jump out" feeling that some effects try to do and pisses me off when I hear everyone else in the theater go "Woooooooooo" and I'm like "WTF!? nothing special just happened"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top