James Cameron's 'Avatar' - The next gen of cinema
- Thread starter Hen_Dawg
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 10,001
- Location
- Scottish Highlands
Thinking of seeing Avatar at an Imax after Christmas. Is it definitely worth watching in 3D, or should I go an see it in 2D (Is it even shown in 2D?) Also the GF wears glasses, so has anyone else who wears glasses seen it in 3D? Are the 3D glasses annoying with normal glasses as well?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 58,846
- Location
- Surrey
To the first part you have to see this in 3D, it can be seen in 2D but you'd regret it. If I gave you the option to go and see it in black and white or colour what would you do? as important a difference imo
Can't answer the second part I'm afraid!
Yes. Absolutely see it in 3D.
Sorry I can't directly answer your question as I'm not a glasses user but I've watched this film in IMAX 3D as well as RealD and I'd imagine IMAX would be the easiest to work with. Their glassess are much larger and completely flat so should fit easier in front of prescription specs without worry over alignment, curvature, coverage, etc?
For anyone wondering, I had perfect seats for both and the Cineworld RealD experience would have been just as good as IMAX 3D if it wasn't let down by poorer audio. One particular "Holy ****" scene from the IMAX just didn't translate well and I would swear it also missed some subtle nuances to the bass and LFE but that's probably excessively nitpicky.
Just been down to Newcastle to watch it, absolutely loved it, the 3d was amazing, as were the trailers before hand Alice, Shrek, How to Tame Your Dragon...
Unlike Glasgow we had to give our glasses back but they were quite big and would probably easily fit a pair of glasses under, found it a bit sore on the bridge of my nose tho :/
Alice, Shrek, How to Tame Your Dragon...Unlike Glasgow we had to give our glasses back but they were quite big and would probably easily fit a pair of glasses under, found it a bit sore on the bridge of my nose tho :/
Soldato
- Joined
- 16 Jun 2009
- Posts
- 2,566
- Location
- Bucks
I wear glasses and the RealD 'Buddy Hollys' fit over with room to spare.
And the actual visual experience was just perfect for me.
Must watch They Live again by the way.
But hey I was reading earlier that the typeface used for the title and the subtitles is Papyrus (a public domain font), and looking at them I'd say that's accurate. It did look just a little 'cheap'.
Oh and Leona Lewis at the end wasn't so horrific after all. But the orchestral score was odd. When one of the big jungle animals appears, I'd swear I heard a little Jurassic Park motif in there.
And when a walking suit gets attacked by another big animal later on, the music definitely turns into an action theme from Aliens.
And the actual visual experience was just perfect for me.
Must watch They Live again by the way.
But hey I was reading earlier that the typeface used for the title and the subtitles is Papyrus (a public domain font), and looking at them I'd say that's accurate. It did look just a little 'cheap'.
Oh and Leona Lewis at the end wasn't so horrific after all. But the orchestral score was odd. When one of the big jungle animals appears, I'd swear I heard a little Jurassic Park motif in there.
And when a walking suit gets attacked by another big animal later on, the music definitely turns into an action theme from Aliens.
Last edited:
Just saw this film and it was so epic!
Its been a really really long time since Ive come out of a cinema and said "I really enjoyed that".
The 3D was okay but nothing to outstanding. It was more subtle than anything, and the blurring didnt make up for the awe, or lack thereof. I think if the film was just normal 2D I would have enjoyed it just the same or perhaps even more.
Then again I saw it at an Odeon, not IMAX, maybe IMAX is significantly better? Who knows.
Its been a really really long time since Ive come out of a cinema and said "I really enjoyed that".
The 3D was okay but nothing to outstanding. It was more subtle than anything, and the blurring didnt make up for the awe, or lack thereof. I think if the film was just normal 2D I would have enjoyed it just the same or perhaps even more.
Then again I saw it at an Odeon, not IMAX, maybe IMAX is significantly better? Who knows.
Just got back from watching this at the BFI IMAX and it was fantastic.
Pandora really felt like a living place. The story and script aren't going to win awards but that's not to say they were bad at all. The music is hit and miss - sometimes the tribal vibes work, sometimes they are a bit too predominant. The effects in general were the best I've seen and the only issue is slight blurring with the 3d. The best film I've seen in a very long time.
Pandora really felt like a living place. The story and script aren't going to win awards but that's not to say they were bad at all. The music is hit and miss - sometimes the tribal vibes work, sometimes they are a bit too predominant. The effects in general were the best I've seen and the only issue is slight blurring with the 3d. The best film I've seen in a very long time.
Please tell me your signature is some clever intentional play on words? Else Sagan will be turning in his grave!
Caporegime
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 77,764
- Location
- Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
I wore mine over my glasses, must've looked like an idiot but it worked perfectly and soon as the movie started i forgot i had them on.
Its only the odd few lines scattered throughout the movie.
well just got back and i must say i really enjoyed it, story was what i expected but i still got into the pace and charictors and over all pretty impressed.
only things that bugged me was things that will be ironed out as the 3d begins to mature a little. the main problem i had was out of focus movemant seemed at a much lower jerkyer fps than the infocus objects on screen, i know that sounds strainge but it the best way i can describe it.
example, a charictor is in the middle of dialog and is the main focus of the shot, he appears normal, smooth movemant and what you would expect then a extra walks past in the background, they seem to skip frames sort of thing yet as this is going on the in -shot charictor remains smooth.... make any sense or am i the only person that had this?
lastly out of focuse objects too blurry and strain the eyes, i think what was happning to me was the small objects were out of focus/blury as they should be to help create depth of field but the 3d effect was forcing them to be prodominant and my eyes were trying to focus an allready blury image, caused me a soar head a couple of times.
like i say little niggles but they did not get in the way of me enjoying the movie, am i wierd and the only one that experienced this though?
only things that bugged me was things that will be ironed out as the 3d begins to mature a little. the main problem i had was out of focus movemant seemed at a much lower jerkyer fps than the infocus objects on screen, i know that sounds strainge but it the best way i can describe it.
example, a charictor is in the middle of dialog and is the main focus of the shot, he appears normal, smooth movemant and what you would expect then a extra walks past in the background, they seem to skip frames sort of thing yet as this is going on the in -shot charictor remains smooth.... make any sense or am i the only person that had this?
lastly out of focuse objects too blurry and strain the eyes, i think what was happning to me was the small objects were out of focus/blury as they should be to help create depth of field but the 3d effect was forcing them to be prodominant and my eyes were trying to focus an allready blury image, caused me a soar head a couple of times.
like i say little niggles but they did not get in the way of me enjoying the movie, am i wierd and the only one that experienced this though?
Yeah totally agree here, I tried cleaning my glasses twice as I thought they were smudged or something, was a strange sensation.