James Cameron's - Avatar 2D vs. 3D

James Cameron's - Avatar 2D vs. 3D

  • Total voters
    95
eizbaer said:
IMDB rates Avatar at 8.9/10 which brings it to #21 of the best movies ever on there...
i struggle to see it at that place.

i admit, i've only seen it in 2D (because 3D was booked solid until next year or whatever). i will also admit that the 2D pictures would be very impressive with a decent 3D effect, i'd actually like to watch it again in 3D. but still... a movie can not turn out to be an 8.9/10 simply from being so impressive to watch, can it?

don't get me wrong, i liked the movie a lot and 3D (would) make(s) it all the more impressive... but still. 21st best film ever? would you all agree with that?


http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0499549/
(interestingly in the top250 chart it's rated as 8.7... some IMDB vote-logic behind that somewhere... but oh well, who cares)
Click to expand...

The Top 250 list only takes the votes from regular voters and doesn't include fanboys giving movies 10s all the time, so it's more balanced that way.

Also, most movies that create a lot of hype tend to start out with ridiculously high ratings and then drop considering how good it actually is. For example, I remember when the new Indiana Jones came out, it had a 9.3 or something (fanboys), now it's at a 6.6.

Yeah, Avatar is pretty high up (I didn't watch it yet, so I cannot comment), but it will drop eventually (probably to around 8.5).

Edit: Speaking of IMDB, I was browsing through the photos for Avatar and I found this...

rw1g6s.jpg


:lmao:
 
Last edited:
Firecat said:
Digital 3D was pretty awesome. I don't know how the Imax would have been, but I'm glad I didn't see it in 2D.

Maybe I shouldn't even call it 3D, because it was nothing like 3D is known to be. It felt so real, I was blown away. By far the best special effects I have even seen....and definitely the future of film making.

As far as the story goes...

I thought it was good, not great. I think the movie was more about the effects than story, unfortunately.
Click to expand...

Agreed, story was pretty familiar and borrowed from a LOT of other movies where 'white opressor changes sides and goes native' with recent examples being Poccahantas, The Last Samurai and Dances with Wolves. Last 40 mins was pretty predictable, Cameron, who i guess wrote the script according to the credits, didn't even try to be remotely subtle dropping forshadowing hints about events in the final act of the movie.

Effects were great and I saw it in 3D, but i'm not compelled to pay $14 in the theater to watch it again anytime soon. Story was too stock and the effects were good for an intial 'wow' but dont draw me in for a repeat viewing.

Star Trek on the other hand, brought me back to the theaters twice because of the pure enjoyment of the movie watching experience.
 
It's a pretty awful movie and is really only worth watching in 3-d for the visuals. AMC movie theaters only charge $9 for IMAX-3D during weekdays, which is the cost of a normal movie on the weekends. I don't know if that's nationwide or only at the one theater that I go to.
 
Saw this last Friday, opening night I think.

Nice 3D, lot's of near sideboob, my director cut version would end at the tree blowing up.
 
Question:

So are we supposed to sympathize with the Na'vi? Are we supposed to root for Jake Sully when he turns on his fellow humans and kills them with the help of the natives? Just wondering.......
 
jetsetter said:
Question:

So are we supposed to sympathize with the Na'vi? Are we supposed to root for Jake Sully when he turns on his fellow humans and kills them with the help of the natives? Just wondering.......
Click to expand...

uh, their homes were being destroyed by the humans, who do you think you're supposed to sympathize with? This movie looked like it was made so 5-year-olds could understand it. If you are looking for some moral ambiguity about how you could sympathize with both sides, like in a decent war movie, you probably won't find it.
 
Seen it yesterday in 3D, and just bought a ticket to go again today. That hasn't happened in a while...

This movie is just great, I think. Story might not be original or mind-blowing, but it's solid and has some very important points to it; and the visuals are mindblowing... I couldn't believe my eyes at first and really couldn't believe the awe would last through almost 3 hours of screen time. The world Cameron created is so incredibly detailed and thought-through, it fascinates me. No wonder it took so long to get made - all the time he was waiting for the CGI to reach the levels he needed, he was working on the idea, on the world... hell, they even created a complete language and almost an encyclopedia for Pandora. This is a sort of thing I really admire.
 
jetsetter said:
Question:

So are we supposed to sympathize with the Na'vi? Are we supposed to root for Jake Sully when he turns on his fellow humans and kills them with the help of the natives? Just wondering.......
Click to expand...

That was my problem with the film. The demonizing of mankind. The na'vi is portrayed as a nearly perfect race without any faults. The story, to me, falls apart on this sort of polarized absolutism. Man is evil; Na'Vi is ideal. It more made me angry at the filmaker than anything else. It of course finishes with Jake abandoning his human form to live as his avatar permanently. It was depressing to me. Give me a film about the celebration of man, imperfections included, instead. (see: heat, gladiator, band of brothers etc)
 
Um, not all the humans in the movie were evil. And yes, you were "supposed" to be in support of the Na'vi. Unless of course you enjoy raping other people of their lands, then the asshole of a Colonel was your man. Not that I supported Jake Sulley, he was a total sellout.
 
Arrived at the cinema half an hour before to find the 3D showing sold out, the 2D 1 hour later had plenty of seats left, but I'm glad I suggested my friend to wait 3 hours for the next 3D showing, because (from my fb):

Wow, Avatar was in a word... BORING.

In more words, the story was as cliche as could be, the acting was nothing special, character development was minimal and the whole thing didn't leave a single impression on me. On the other hand, the CGI was out of this world and the 3D effect was mind blowing.

I know what this movie is. It's an Apple movie. All show, no go. :D
Click to expand...

Also, the 3D ticket was ?5.80, only ?1 more than the 2D. I'd watch it again, but only for the 3D effect, nothing more.
 
Suffice it to say, Terminator and Titanic were about 1,000 times better in terms of story.
 
Firecat said:
Um, not all the humans in the movie were evil. And yes, you were "supposed" to be in support of the Na'vi. Unless of course you enjoy raping other people of their lands, then the asshole of a Colonel was your man. Not that I supported Jake Sulley, he was a total sellout.
Click to expand...

Dude, did you see that alien chick? She was worth it :p
 
Ok, now I'm debating between watching it in either IMAX 3D, or Digital 3D. What are the differences? I'm guessing IMAX is more expensive because of the bigger screen, but maybe Digital 3D is still good enough for the price?
 
I'd say that as long as it's 3D you'll be all right. IMAX might be more "immersive" because of the huge screen, but I don't suppose it's really necessary.
 
CyberMonkey said:
I'd say that as long as it's 3D you'll be all right. IMAX might be more "immersive" because of the huge screen, but I don't suppose it's really necessary.
Click to expand...

Plus, I heard there's more "ghosting" and a more linear viewing plane in IMAX 3D because of the glasses, or something.
 
I loved it in 3D, the CGI was amazing too.... quite a good story, I'm not saying its Shakespeare but I've seen a lot worse come out of Hollywood recently.

Did almost produce a tear at two points... not immersed myself in a film like that for a long time.
 
IMAX normally has a better resolution, it is shot on medium format film as opposed to 35mm, but since your eyes will be working so hard to capture the 3D aspect of it, you won't have time enough to appreciate the higher quality. If there's no difference in price quality, go for IMAX, but the Digital 3D experience won't be any diminished. If you were watching a normal 2D movie, then yes, but in this case, no.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top