AVATAR - See it in 3D if you haven't! #1 Movie All-Time Domestic & Worldwide! - Page 10 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Esoteric · 12-19-2009, 01:01 AM

Awesome movie. Absolutely stunning. Though the story wasn't anything ground breaking, I was drawn into the characters.

The world though; my god. I felt like I was there. Stunning really - Cameron is top notch.

burn_this_city · 12-19-2009, 02:55 AM

Just got back from watching it. I'm a pretty cynical movie goer but that was the best movie I've ever seen. It has to be seen in theaters, IMAX 3D was fantastic. I hate waiting in line for anything but it was worth it.

SebC · 12-19-2009, 03:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HPLovecraft

The ones we got at our 3D Experience IMAX weren't the disposable types. You get them at the beginning then give them back at the end. They looked more like these:

Looks like those could be the version of IMAX 3D that uses shutterglasses (the glasses are actually battery operated a flicker between blocking the left eye and right), whereas the disposable ones are RealD which uses polarizing lenses. With RealD, the switch between left and right eye is acheived by swapping the polarizer in front of the projector. The old IMAX3D used two projectors and polarization.

It's weird, somehow I notice the flicker with RealD and I don't at home so I thought the frame rate might be too low. Turns out it's 144 Hz, IMAX3D is only 96 Hz, and my 3D-DLP is 120 Hz. Wierd.

Anyways, I saw it (in RealD). The plot is predictable, there are some really weird plot holes (in white, for the spoiler crowd: arrows that suddenly go through glass, anti-grav mountains, humanoids that make the exact same non-verbal sounds as humans). And yet I loved it. One thing I really want to know though. I didn't like the shallow depth of field on some shots. Depth of field can be used to isolate parts of the frame, it can also be used to show depth in 2D media. IMO blurring layers in 3D is kind of redundant, but I guess Cameron wanted it to work in 2D as well. Personally, I like sharpness from front to back in 3D. Did the blurriness annoy anyone else, or is that just me?

Also, I better be able to buy this and a Blu-Ray drive and watch it on my hardware when 3D Blu-ray gets finalized, or I'm going to be very pissed off at Sony/nVidia.

burn_this_city · 12-19-2009, 03:15 AM

Those werent significant plot holes. See white text.. The arrows only went through the glass on the smaller ships and mobile suits. It could be argued they would have thinner glass. Also they may have used different arrows for the battle. Who knows, it definitely wasnt enough to ruin the movie for me like most gaping plot holes do.

SebC · 12-19-2009, 03:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Those werent significant plot holes. See white text.. The arrows only went through the glass on the smaller ships and mobile suits. It could be argued they would have thinner glass.

Fine, then... (more white) why the heck wouldn't they have mounted the guns on the outside and controlled them from the inside?

burnin_vernon · 12-19-2009, 03:24 AM

It's a story that's been told dozens of times, with stereotyped characters and a real black and white premise.

When I read that line I just wrote , it describes a movie I would have no interest in seeing. I am hardly ever interested in special effects but this was a real, living, breathing world that Cameron has created. It is very easy to forget that the actors were CGI. Despite the flaws, Cameron knows emotions, and can somehow get an audience behind his simple characters.

Recommended.

burn_this_city · 12-19-2009, 03:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SebC

Fine, then... (more white) why the heck wouldn't they have mounted the guns on the outside and controlled them from the inside?

Lives are cheap and those ships could have been used for more than just combat. Besides considering how much depth they put into this movie theres bound to be things people will argue

SebC · 12-19-2009, 03:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Lives are cheap and those ships could have been used for more than just combat. Besides considering how much depth they put into this movie theres bound to be things people will argue

I already had this debate with my friend. People aren't nearly so expendable when it takes 6 years to get new ones.

Hemi-Cuda · 12-19-2009, 05:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Those werent significant plot holes. See white text.. The arrows only went through the glass on the smaller ships and mobile suits. It could be argued they would have thinner glass. Also they may have used different arrows for the battle. Who knows, it definitely wasnt enough to ruin the movie for me like most gaping plot holes do.

the way i saw it, it was simple physics. they were firing the arrows from the ground up to the flying battleship, and they were glancing off the round glass canopy. later they were flying and diving while shooting the arrow, giving it much greater velocity and hitting the square windshield of the smaller craft dead on. wasn't too hard for me to see why they would smash through then

awildermode · 12-19-2009, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

the way i saw it, it was simple physics. they were firing the arrows from the ground up to the flying battleship, and they were glancing off the round glass canopy. later they were flying and diving while shooting the arrow, giving it much greater velocity and hitting the square windshield of the smaller craft dead on. wasn't too hard for me to see why they would smash through then

yep, just what i was going to say.

about the big knife. they are in a forest, you need a big knife to hack through the forest.

agree with most everyone here. visually stunning, but predictable story. it is a fun movie.

Michelle Rodriguez just bugs in general, no matter what she is in. even the 'genius' of Cameron could not make her acceptable. oh, the main guy is JAKE, no Jack

Ashartus · 12-19-2009, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SebC

Also, I better be able to buy this and a Blu-Ray drive and watch it on my hardware when 3D Blu-ray gets finalized, or I'm going to be very pissed off at Sony/nVidia.

I've heard 3D Blu-ray is expected to be available in about a year, but will require a Blu-ray player specifically designed for it and a special TV also designed for it (so a fairly big investment). Can't remember where I saw this though.

Nehkara · 12-19-2009, 02:57 PM

To all those out there who had ANY doubts, take them and throw them forcefully through the nearest window.

I love movies. LOVE movies. I have many hundreds of movies.

AVATAR may just be the best movie I have ever seen. I am still excited about it the next day. The theatre I was in gave the movie a standing ovation. I talked to my friend in LA, the theatre there gave it a standing ovation. I talked to one of my other friends here in Calgary and the theatre she was in gave it a standing ovation.

An amazing film... will win all of the Oscars.

Brilliant CGI. I had to remind myself constantly that what I was watching was in fact computer generated... they have reached photo-realistic.

The acting was fantastic... especially Zoe Saldana as Neytiri!

The story was compelling and wonderful and the effects, as promised, were unlike anything ever seen in any movie.

A movie to talk about for years... a movie to define a generation. Those are my thoughts.

These are my thoughts after going in with huge expectations. I though the movie would be amazing and it was so far beyond that, I am having trouble explaining it.

Anyway... enough gushing. Look at my sig.

CMPunk · 12-19-2009, 03:40 PM

Still don't care

Nehkara · 12-19-2009, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CMPunk

Still don't care

That's understandable. I know a lot of people who don't care much for Sci-Fi and some who just have no interest in this movie in particular.

Just for everyone who was on the fence, I would suggest going to see it because it is a great movie.

CMPunk · 12-19-2009, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nehkara

That's understandable. I know a lot of people who don't care much for Sci-Fi and some who just have no interest in this movie in particular.

Just for everyone who was on the fence, I would suggest going to see it because it is a great movie.

I love Sci-Fi...but nothing about this movie jumps out at me. The effects maybe ground breaking, but if the story is pedestrian like everyone is saying, then the movie is just meh in my books.

It just amazes me how people can call a movie "life changing"

Human Torch · 12-19-2009, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CMPunk

It just amazes me how people can call a movie "life changing"

You'd be surprised how many sizes a heart can grow.

CMPunk · 12-19-2009, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Human Torch

You'd be surprised how many sizes a heart can grow.

Not this one

Nehkara · 12-19-2009, 04:17 PM

Well... The story may not be groundbreaking but few stories are these days. It is more about HOW the story is told and how compelling it is.

The story, in my books, was fantastic in that while not very original it was wonderfully told and had me spellbound.

I would still suggest going to see it.

Go on Tuesday to Chinook when you can see it for cheap if you don't want to spend $15.

I think it is the best movie this year... and everyone here knows my thoughts on Star Trek.

Hemi-Cuda · 12-19-2009, 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CMPunk

Not this one

why do you continue to post in this thread? if you really don't care, can't you find something more productive to do with your time?

CMPunk · 12-19-2009, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

why do you continue to post in this thread? if you really don't care, can't you find something more productive to do with your time?

I could...but I like this better