Just got back from Avatar in 3D...

I watched it a few nights ago, and i think it was an incredible movie, defiantly a must see.

i read a bit about the history of the movie and i can't believe they have been working on it for 15 years.

Avatar had been in development since 1994 by Cameron, who wrote a 114-page scriptment for the film.[7] Filming was supposed to take place after the completion of Titanic, and the film would have been released in 1999, but according to Cameron, "technology needed to catch up" with his vision of the film.[8][9] In early 2006, Cameron developed the script, the language, and the culture of Pandora.[10] He has stated that if Avatar is successful, two sequels to the film are planned.[11]

en.wikipedia.org...(2009_film)

See that last sentence, 2 sequels on the way I hope I don't have to wait another 15 years!

reply to post by george_gaz


SPOILER ALERT!

Did you miss the part where they blatantly stated that Grace was very weak and that the ceremony would most likely not work? This was said a couple of times by different characters (and during the ceremony). Eywa (the "neural network") did not refuse to move Grace in to her avatar, it was unable to do so because Grace was so close to dying. Understandable. Sam took the same risk when he was being transferred in to his avatar. I also thought the sex scene was tastefully done rather than something raunchy to get an R rating. It lasted, what, 15 seconds?

Other than that, saw it Friday night, was blown away even though it was on a dinky rink Dolby Digital 3D screen. Going again tomorrow with some family, and then driving two hours on Wednesday to catch it on IMAX 3D ! I've only seen one movie multiple times in theaters and that was Titanic, hah! Jim promised to reinvent cinema and he has with Avatar. Just don't go in to the movie expecting anything. It's a visual treat and an amazing story. Was NOT expecting to see ultra-realistic CGI. Grace's face by far threw me off I could have swore I was looking at Ms. Weaver in makeup. Neytiri, when that horrible scene with her dad >.>...... I don't think there was a dry eye in the theater with the emotion that was shown through the CGI.

Though the story was an awesome take on any general Western theme Because that's pretty much what it is, a Western in space!

A+++ Will watch again!

[edit on 20-12-2009 by RcknShdw]

We went and saw it, but we decided to not splurge and we watched it at an old local theater with crappy screens.

I was really impressed and found it be absolutely beautiful, BUT it NEEDS to be watched at a high quality digital theater at least, and I think it is totally worth it to shell out the the money to watch it in 3d.

I was also really pleased to see that while it was violent at times it didn't really on needless sex scenes or gore, I can take my son and feel just fine as he enjoys the movie. The one love scene was super super tame!

I believe they are showing it at the IMAX as well here.
We plan to go see it again with the whole family the week after christmas either 3D or IMAX if possible.

Film of the year as a certainty...

I have absolutely nothing to critique on this...

I would say this is the first real movie to be made with a good story using massive CG

Originally posted by mopusvindictus

I have absolutely nothing to critique on this...

Same. Awesome movie all politics aside.

Bring the politics back into it and its still an awesome movie that just hits the nail on the head and drives it home in one 2.5 hour swing.

I'm taking my kids to see this film, hopefully tomorrow, and I can't wait, it looks absolutely amazing!

My son really wanted to see Chipmunks: The Squeakquel but when I told him that all the cool kids were watching Avatar he relented....YAY!!

James Cameron has jumped the shark.
Wearing special glasses in a special theater is corny.
Stupid movie with wild effects is all.
This is being pushed on the public in an attempt to recoup the hundreds of millions spent on this wank job.

More to the point, the depiction of our national character through the whole course of the film was of a thuggish, cruel, cynical, stupid, detestable, and totally corrupt people bent on the complete destruction of nature. Nice.
And the final irony was that Cameron had used theatrical technology of the latest and greatest kind to depict America's broader techno-grandiosity -- as the army's brute robotic warriors fell to the spears and arrows of the simple blue space aliens.
Altogether, it was a weird moment in entertainment history, and perhaps in the American experience per se. No doubt audiences overseas will go wild with delight, too, but perhaps with a clearer notion of what they are clapping for than the enthralled masses of zombie Americans
The infatuation with technology, and the disgusting cockiness that goes with it (so well-captured in Avatar), is but one facet of the psychosis gripping the nation -- and by that I mean the profound detachment from reality. We have no idea what is happening to us and, naturally, no idea of what we are going to do.

More here: kunstler.com...

I watched it today with my sister at the imax
twas brill, deffo one to go see again.

Originally posted by harrytuttle
Just make sure it's 3D.

I don't want to read too much because I don't want spoilers, but regarding the 3D, are there certain theaters that have special screens or do you wear 3D glasses?

Yet another triumph by New Zealand

Where would you CGI junkies be without WETA workshops?

I haven't seen it YET but will defo after reading your reviews.I must say that since buying a sony 40" sony Bravia over a year ago I have not felt the need to step inside a cinema and thought that most films actually looked far better on my tv in HD or at least upscaled as I haven't got blu ray yet.Then I had some spare time the other week in Croydon and decided to kill some time at the VUE so I picked 2012 and was blown away by the effects that would only have truly worked on the big screen,Therefore I am now looking forward to see in Avatar in 3D at the Vue we have in Thanet Kent.At last the cinemas will have a chance to make money again and drag people away from their plasma and lcd screens.

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by harrytuttle

 

They still used human actors for the Aliens, you know. They used an advanced form of motion capture that managed to grab every facial expression and subtle movement of the actors playing the aliens. It wasn't "100% CGI" in the slightest.

To me, the story seems very bland and relies soley on the special effects to distract you from this, like many other "groundbreaking" films of the past, such as ID4.

You put it out there, so I'll take a bite.

Actually, you are wrong and you need to understand that just because part of the motion (and I mean part - the artists had liberty to adjust motion) was an input from human faces, it's the OUTPUT that is 100% Computer Generated Imagery. Not one single pixel you see on those alien masks is directly output from the human actors. The underlying motion of the masks, sure, but not the skin textures, the colors, the lighting, the reflections, the shadows, the highlights, the structures, none of that is photography of a human actor.

Another way to put it is you could take the same "motion inputs" used in Avatar, apply it to some crappy mask and it's still 100% CGI. The difference with Avatar and that example is the final result looks as if it is real photography - it's so good you seem to be confusing the final result as photography when it is in fact not photography at all.

Agree with you that the story was generic, but the way it was told was so refreshing the end result is it works, and it works well, judging by both film goer reviews and professional critical reviews.

[edit on 21-12-2009 by harrytuttle]

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

I really don't know about all the theater types, but I do know that there is a 2D version (normal film), a normal theater 3D version, and an IMAX 3D version. The IMAX is supposed to be the most impressive, and when I go to visit Portland over Christmas I plan on going to see it at IMAX.

I also noticed over the internet that some 3D glasses look significantly different (shiny reflective lenses, look like Oakly's) than the 3D glasses I used (the plain black Wayfarer style). Not sure if those shiny ones are used for a fourth type of screen I'm not aware of.

reply to post by harrytuttle


"Words are failing me to describe what I just went through. It was an experience I will never forget. This kind of movie only happens 2 or 3 times in your life. It was like a dream that I didn't want to end."

My thoughts exactly. It was one of the movies i have seen in a movie theatre that i didn't feel sorry for buying the ticket.

The 3D and special effects were incredible, if your an FX buff its a must see!

Otherwise, after the first 30 minutes, the ending is pretty obvious and some of the scenes are very cheesy.

Originally posted by djvexd
Everyone whom I have spoken to thus far has said they can't really put into words about the movie. Okay you guys and gals got me convinced. 10$, you were going for beer but I think you shall be retasked.

You won't regret it one bit. It's real, delicious sci-fi.

The 3D was fantastic. Not a whole lot of overdone 'comin at you stuff', and there was true depth to the screen. It is the future of movies, definitely.

I love the part where the one scientist clocked a soldier HARD.

[edit on 21-12-2009 by SpacePunk]

I couldnt agree more about the CHEESE!

Plot - so damn stereotypical
Dialogue - TERRIBLE
Characters - very likable

but still a really good movie.

Spoiler? I guess:

The part where shes like 'only 5 people have ridden the red dragon' Im like oh I really wonder who's going to be the 6th

Originally posted by Ridhya

The part where shes like 'only 5 people have ridden the red dragon' Im like oh I really wonder who's going to be the 6th

I didn't see that coming either, I was really surprised.

I posted my comments on the thread below.

Go See Avatar, Worth the Money, No Political Party Message

That is a link to my direct post, combined with my other three posts.

The reason I posted that is instead of giving creedence to the original poster, I gave my thoughts only, read the rest of the thread if you will, but the original poster is negative, not having seen it yet.