AthlonXP
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2001
- Messages
- 20,588
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Avatar Passes the $1 Billion Mark
- Thread starter Terry Olaes
- Start date
You know more about my experience than I do? Interesting, but I must disagree.
The moments that were jarring and disruptive for me, were the moments when there was clearly a conscious decision to jut something out of the screen. Let me highlight the point:
When they were just running through jungle and show the additional depth in the world, I thought the effect was pretty well done and I could just experience/become immersed in the movie. This kind of 3d would not annoy me, did NOT seem gimmicky
But then they would clearly decide it was time to remind everyone that this was a "3D Movie". Then a character would kick dirt at the screen, or a gun/bow would be aimed out of the screen, Or we would enter a field of floating bugs. These were clearly moments designed to highlight the 3d nature of the movie. Thus they are gimmicks.
If the directors could refrain from these gimicks then I wouldn't consider 3d such a gimmick.
I suspect it is in these "poke something out of the screen" events that most of the disagreement stems. A certain chunk of the viewing public would be disappointed if they weren't there, they expect a certain amount of junk sticking out of the screen or coming right at them. The middle group don't require it, but aren't distracted by it and the last group, containing me, are distracted by it's gimmicky nature.
I suspect you are partially right in that I will find all 3d movies gimmicky, but it is because the director will keep including the "3d gimmick" moments, because that is what a certain portion of the audience wants. Leave out the gimmicks and I would find it gimmicky.
So the collective (maybe) 5 minutes of "pop out" stuff ruined the entire 2 1/2hrs for you? Interesting.
ToastyBread
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2009
- Messages
- 368
I can concur with this. Having seen it now in three separate formats (3D IMAX, 3D Harkins, and 2D Harkins), I can honestly say that I do prefer 3D overall.
However, the 3D IMAX implementation caused considerable eye strain (apparently the 3D version of the film for IMAX isn't the ideal method for the movie).
There may only be 5 minutes but they happen probably every 5 or 10 minutes throughout the movie, breaking immersion over and over again. Distracting gimmick.
All I can say is that I didn't notice any drastic in your face intended pop out scenes or components. I only remember a few very deliberate instances of it happening. So again it didn't take away from anything. I also saw it 3 times and was very focused on what was happening visually in the 2nd and 3rd run.
Oh well. Like I said before it's not worth discussing... or arguing over. I'll get my 3D tv this year and plan to enjoy it thoroughly. You can keep watching the archaic 2D you seem to enjoy so much. Muahaha.
I read that Cameron deliberately didn't want the audience to flinch in the 3D pop outs. In the past, film producers went for the wow effect and wanted people to react as if something was coming right at them. But Cameron didn't do that, so that's good. 
But I did like that one bow and arrow scene where it was pointed toward the audience. It was neat and didn't have you diving to avoid getting hit.
But I did like that one bow and arrow scene where it was pointed toward the audience. It was neat and didn't have you diving to avoid getting hit.
I only saw 3D in a regular theater since IMAX was a bit of a drive. I guess I should be glad I didn't. The glasses didn't give me a headache, but it left a little mark on my face after it sat there for 2.5+ hours. No biggie, though.
Refresh my memory. I've seen the film three times and I don't remember a single moment in the movie where something popped out of the screen into the audience. The depth extended outwards, like the screen border was a window into a diorama box, not outwards into the audience.
ToastyBread
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2009
- Messages
- 368
Yeah, afterward the film I went home and did some research (which admittedly I should have done before) where it seemed as if a lot of people had issues with viewing the film at IMAX and dealing with eye strains, headaches, etc., so yeah, I'd say it was probably better that you didn't.
firas
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2006
- Messages
- 2,458
I didnt mean to start the known 3D debate, Its not really bad as some say, the next day I said to everyone I know to go and see it in 3D, but its just me, Im one of those who dont like to wear sun glasses while driving!
just as and additional info, watching a 3D movie with subtitles is a disaster, the subtitle is not in a fixed position, its jumping all around the screen to escape from any 3D elements. sometimes its on the screen or on a separate front layer. and for me having a subtitle even without 3D is distracting because I cant help not reading the subtitle.
I talked to my dad last night. We had seen it together on a real IMAX screen, and it was pretty good. Not as good as RealD, but good enough.
He saw it again with his GF and told me how bad it was. He was saying the glasses basically killed it. They were not the same as the IMAX and certainly not the same as the RealD glasses. So if he had a bad experience in some regular theater imagine how many others might be having the SAME bad experience. Not to mention the LieMAX screens, etc.
So take it as you will but it's obvious here the movie is not the only deciding factor on the experience.
No headaches here.Yeah, afterward the film I went home and did some research (which admittedly I should have done before) where it seemed as if a lot of people had issues with viewing the film at IMAX and dealing with eye strains, headaches, etc., so yeah, I'd say it was probably better that you didn't.
It was my 1st 3D movie, so I didn't know what to expect. I was going to see "Beowulf 3D", but the theater had technical problems, so never got to see a 3D movie 'til last month (excluding the crap I saw in the '80s that required cardboard red/blue glasses).ToastyBread
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2009
- Messages
- 368
Yeah, I didn't have any headaches with Harkins 3D either. Just that damn IMAXNo headaches here.
'Avatar' is No. 1 movie of all time
CNN said:
I wonder why the IMAX 3D is that much worse as far as the headache part. Maybe b/c the screen is so large and there's all that 3D going on that isn't natural? I've only seen 2D movies on IMAX and really enjoyed it.Yeah, I didn't have any headaches with Harkins 3D either. Just that damn IMAX
Most IMAX films such as this are just 35mm film blown up to fit the screen. With the exception of parts of The Dark Knight which had certian sequences shot in IMAX film.
35mm at that size + 3d makes me feel sick as well. but i'm perfectly fine at any other theater
Outamyhead
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2008
- Messages
- 4,263
Have not even watched the movie, I'll wait for the Blu-Ray release, wait, that sounded wrong...I'll wait for the Blu-Ray DVD release.
Unless you plan on watching it in 3D on one of the new 3D tvs with a new 3D blu-ray player... I suggest you hit the theater and watch it on a RealD screen.
How about watching 2D movies on IMAX, does that make you feel sick? In the past few years, I saw "Superman" (2006) and "Transformers 2" (2009) on IMAX and felt just fine, but both were of course in 2D.
XBarbarian
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2006
- Messages
- 1,370
did it hit 2 bill yet?
Yes
Gorankar
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2000
- Messages
- 11,107
And it still has not posted aprofit acording to hollywood bean counters.
I agree 100% on the IMAX experience.. It was awesome.. The glasses were pretty big but I got used to them quickly..
I really enjoyed the movie..
How do you figure?
Gorankar
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2000
- Messages
- 11,107
A joke regarding how studios do their books in order to essentially never show a profit, so they don't have to pay people that were payed based on the films profits, as well as a bit of tax evasion tossed in for good measure. Last I heard, Titanic had still not made a profit according to the bean counters in Hollywood.
Rediculous that they get away with it don't you think?
Yeah, I remember reading about that somewhere. I know that writers went on strike a while back. That was for TV shows, not movies, but regardless, the big wigs always try to screw the little guy out of as much as possible.
Should've figured.
The strike was for all of the writer's guild, not just television. It got very painful for everyone after about three months.
firas
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2006
- Messages
- 2,458
so when is the blue-ray comming out? june?
westrock2000
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2005
- Messages
- 9,433
Especially the part where John Smith was the captain of the army force, and at the end he returns to his home.....possibly with the girl.....oh wait......
Also, somewhere I depth to be really obvious was at the end during the credits where its flying through Pandora. Take off your glasses and of course you see the slighly skewed colors, but the screen in very flat...like looking at an image. Now put the glasses on and suddenly your eyes focus as if the mountains in the background are actually miles away. Its like looking through a big 100 foot window into another world. You don't "notice" the 3D most of the time because your eyes are working in normal mode.
Considering titanic came out on the same weekend that avatar did and it stayed in theatres through the end of September or early October http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?page=weekend&id=titanic.htm I'd say it's not coming out anytime close to June... This may not keep the numbers that titanic did but it's safe to say that it's likely to still be in some theatres through June.
I can't edit my post. I did some further research and the vhs for titanic came out on September 1st 1998. It seems odd that it was still in some theatres after the tape was released but it's true according to wikipedia and box office mojo. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanic_(1997_film)
"Titanic was released worldwide in widescreen and pan and scan formats on VHS and laserdisc on September 1, 1998."
"Titanic was released worldwide in widescreen and pan and scan formats on VHS and laserdisc on September 1, 1998."
I believe I read somewhere that 2D BD will be out in June, and 3D version will hit sometime later.
Phoenix333
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2009
- Messages
- 3,510
Has anyone seen this comic in relation to the movie? I fell over cackling when I read it. I have no opinion toward furries* in general but this gave me an entirely different perspective on the movie.
*I do think furry porn is icky though.
*I do think furry porn is icky though.