Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film Handlers' Movie Reviews   » Avatar 2009 (plus lots of off-topic, non-review junk) (Page 5)

 
This topic comprises 19 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  ...  17  18  19 
 
Author Topic: Avatar 2009 (plus lots of off-topic, non-review junk)
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 12-18-2009 09:45 PM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I still really want to see Avatar, but my expectations of the movie have really sank further than their previous "so so" position. "Smurfcats" and "Dances with Smurfwolves" has me worrying a bit.

quote: Claude S. Ayakawa
I understand he is now working on a 3-D version of TITANIC.
Oh good God what the fuck?
[Roll Eyes]

That's worth a face-palm. I guess we'll see that one when we see those Star Wars movies in 3D.

quote: Joe Redifer
I have no clue if the 3D is "Ghost busted" or not. I don't even know what that means despite asking on this forum before. Although I don't know why they would make an inferior 3D version of it and a Ghost Busters 3D version of it. What the fuck?
Digital 3D systems, RealD in particular, apparently must be very carefully aligned. Otherwise you'll see all sorts of strange ghosting, double images, the 3D not working right, etc. The "ghost busting" filtery stuff is supposed to leave a little more room for error so that stuff doesn't appear.

quote: Joe Redifer
Also, what the hell is it with Cameron and women who smoke? Does he think smoking makes women attractive?
It's a fetish. There's porn sites dedicated to it. Just like there's porn sites fixated on panties/pantyhose, "BBW" women, MILFs, hairy women, totally shaved women, women who dress up like school girls, cheerleaders or even chicks who turn out to have dicks. I don't understand the foot fetish thing. I think Quentin Tarantino is a foot fetish guy. At least he loves Uma Thurman's feet.

 |  IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99


 - posted 12-18-2009 09:57 PM      Profile for Joe Redifer   Author's Homepage   Email Joe Redifer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I don't understand how anyone could have a smoking fetish.

quote: Bobby Henderson
The "ghost busting" filtery stuff is supposed to leave a little more room for error so that stuff doesn't appear.
But I saw in the ASSpect ratio thread that there are "GB" files and "non-GB" files indicating the data on the drive is actually different. Why would this be?

 |  IP: Logged

Chris Slycord
Film God

Posts: 2986
From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea
Registered: Mar 2007


 - posted 12-18-2009 10:17 PM      Profile for Chris Slycord   Email Chris Slycord   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Real-D itself doesn't do the filtering. They do the filtering on the file itself to make the ghosting issue not be apparent.

And I imagine the smoking fetish would arrive at it being a phallic symbol. I'm just guessing as I find smoking revolting.

 |  IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004


 - posted 12-18-2009 10:19 PM      Profile for Monte L Fullmer   Email Monte L Fullmer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
nGB would be for the Dolby 3D and the iGB (interop Ghost Busted) for Real "Dumb"

example below:

NAME-OF-MOVIE3D_FTR-2_S_EN-XX_US-GB_51-EN_2K_ST_2009XXXX_FAC-i3D-gb

 |  IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 12-18-2009 10:25 PM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Joe Redifer
But I saw in the ASSpect ratio thread that there are "GB" files and "non-GB" files indicating the data on the drive is actually different. Why would this be?
Maybe some RealD installations are sort of screwed for gaining optimal alignment because the projector is aiming at the screen in some sort of cock-eyed angle. It could be because someone added a d-cinema projector next to a "legacy" 35mm projector in the proper position. Or it could be a stupidly horrible port glass position in one of the rear corners of the auditorium because the room is one half of a formerly larger, twinned auditorium. Or it might be because the movie theater architect or some retard on the happy camp creative committee decided to change and keep changing the theater plans over and over and over again until they realized "holy shit, we have no proper projector angle at the screen because this theater design is so unproperly scewed! Oh, no worries! We have keystone correction! Yay!!!" Cough (Cinemark) Ugh. Eggghhh! Gotta get out that phlegm.

 |  IP: Logged

Tom Mundell
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 120
From: Silver Spring, MD, USA
Registered: Nov 2007


 - posted 12-18-2009 10:40 PM      Profile for Tom Mundell   Author's Homepage   Email Tom Mundell   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Saw this tonight at AMC Mazza Galerie 7 in auditorium #2 - THX/Real-D 3D. This auditorium has a common height screen and they were showing the scope version.

As for the movie, I loved it and give it 10/10! While the 3D was pretty impressive, I think I still would have preferred if they were showing it in 2D instead. Quite a bit of scenery looked to be straight from a Roger Dean painting. This is the first time I've been able to see one of the Sony 4K projectors and the image looked great; noticably a little dimmer with the glasses on, but not enough that it bothered me.

 |  IP: Logged

Joe Elliott
Master Film Handler

Posts: 497
From: Port Orange, Fl USA
Registered: Oct 2006


 - posted 12-18-2009 10:42 PM      Profile for Joe Elliott   Email Joe Elliott   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Hollywood Theaters Pavilion Stadium 14, Port Orange, FL
Screen #7 - 7:30pm
Sold out

Equipment:
Sony 4k w/ RealD

Presentation:
Although they have silver screens, there was an odd color pattern on the screen. Almost like when you wipe down your TV with water, and get multicolor dots all over. Also, they were playing the non-ghostbusted version. Very annoying since Avatar has white subtitles. You would think with this being their opening weekend, and all the big-wigs being there, they would have noticed, and corrected the problem, there are 3 other theaters here in the area, all with RealD, that Deluxe could have sent them to and borrow a drive. I have not heard very promising things about their managers, so I doubt they've noticed.

The Movie:
Awesome. Very good use of 3D, you stop noticing it after a while, because it helps you maintain the suspension of belief. Mr. Cameron was right, he did plan this movie with 3D in mind, not as a gimmick, but to enhance the storytelling. Didn't seem like nearly 3 hours. 5 out of 5.
[thumbsup]

 |  IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001


 - posted 12-18-2009 10:50 PM      Profile for Bobby Henderson   Email Bobby Henderson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Joe Elliott
You would think with this being their opening weekend, and all the big-wigs being there, they would have noticed, and corrected the problem, there are 3 other theaters here in the area, all with RealD, that Deluxe could have sent them to and borrow a drive. I have not heard very promising things about their managers, so I doubt they've noticed.
That may not mean anything. I live in freaking Lawton, Oklahoma and our local Carmike theater (a luckily well managed operation) has had 3 of 8 screens equipped with RealD for a couple of years already. Well before Oklahoma City theaters started getting on the ball.

 |  IP: Logged

Chris Hipp
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1462
From: Mesquite, Tx (east of Dallas)
Registered: Jul 2003


 - posted 12-19-2009 12:30 AM      Profile for Chris Hipp   Email Chris Hipp   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
yeah, I would second what others have said. I enjoyed it, but the story/dialogue was bland and predictable. I'll stick with what I thought after seeing the first trailer "it is basically a 3 hour long cutscene from a video game."

 |  IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99


 - posted 12-19-2009 12:32 AM      Profile for Joe Redifer   Author's Homepage   Email Joe Redifer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Chris Slycord
Real-D itself doesn't do the filtering. They do the filtering on the file itself to make the ghosting issue not be apparent.

Then why would ANY version not have this applied to the file itself? Someone in the know needs to explain this. Unless, of course, nobody on this site actually knows...

 |  IP: Logged

Sally Ann Burgess
Expert Film Handler

Posts: 120
From: Queenstown, New Zealand
Registered: Apr 2008


 - posted 12-19-2009 02:43 AM      Profile for Sally Ann Burgess   Email Sally Ann Burgess   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Caught this at the SkyCity Imax Theatre in Auckland. Was lucky to get a seat, it was sold out just after I got my ticket.
Unfortunately I was on the far left and has to tell these two women behind me to shut up THREE times....but I digress.
I loved this film in 3D although I did get a bit bored at times. The 3D was excellent, though due to where I was sitting, the picture at the bottom quarter of the screen didn't work for me that well.
And the picture didn't fit the whole screen at the top....a good 6 feet of blank screen. Is this normal for Imax? I've never seen an Imax movie before.
The score by James Horner was pretty bland compared to other works he has done.
But I really loved those battle sequences. I noticed little touches of Aliens here and there in some scenes. And hey it's always great to see Sigourney Weaver in anything.
Overall I give this 4/5 just for the visuals. Don't know if this will really change how films are made but I guess time will tell!

 |  IP: Logged

Julio Roberto
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 938
From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2008


 - posted 12-19-2009 07:14 AM      Profile for Julio Roberto     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
OK, finally finished watching this. Actually, I'm missing about 10 minutes of the film towards the middle, but I can pretty much guess what happened.

35mm (2D, of course, no choice there). Scope. The manager (in Spain) said FOX never called and, as far as he knows, only scope prints were handed out for 35mm in the country. SRD sound, DTS also available (but not in the auditorium I saw it). 11.5m wide screen. Nice print, nice colors, nice focus, nice lamp, rock steady (impressive for an old Prevost P70). Sound system is mostly JBL high end stuff. Presentation was fine. No scratches whatsoever. Didn't even noticed the splices, which is unusual.

Theatre was almost empty on the very first show (ever) in this area. This auditorium seats >600 people and is the largest in this 5-plex. There were maybe 100 patrons. There was a second screen from the same chain showing it at another nearby (15 minutes drive) location with a smaller screen (seats 300). Manager said the other location did slightly better. I stayed for the second showing since I had already seen the end of the movie but had missed part of the beginning. The second showing drew a crowd of around 200.

Just my rumbling thoughts. It is not 100% spoiler free, so be warned, although I'll try not to give away any major surprises (except to say that there are none [Smile] ).

First thing that stroke me negatively: what the hell are native american indians doing in space painted in blue? I didn't expect the aliens to be so indian-like in so many aspects ... language, body painting, hunting, warriors, tribes, marriage, etc. I found myself going WTF too often.

The CGI: Much better than I thought it would be. Still, every 5 minutes some creature would walk "wrong" or be obviously composited against another object. We all tolerate "bad effects" if the happen spodarically, but this movie is so long and so much CGIed that once every 5 minutes becomes 30 times through the film. Still, more tolerable and better than I thought.

The story, acting, etc. I fell sleep for a couple of minutes twice during the movie. I could foresee the plot and even the dialog with no effort whatsoever. Boring, self-indulging, going-nowhere. Much (much!) worse than I expected. Even the beautiful music was obstrusive from so much over-the-top use.

The dubbing: I found funny that they made such a big deal of the actors learning the alien's language for months. I wonder if they made the dubbing (to spanish) actors do the same (answer: not). Something sounded fishy with the dubbing as soon as the native alien tongue was spoken. Overall, just confusing and not-that-cool.

I expected to give this film between a 6 and an 8 out of 10. After the incredibly good reviews, I thought maybe it could be a 9. I regret my heart tells me to give it a 6, but if I compare it with other films I consider a 6-out-of-10, which is barely a bit above passable, I guess I have to increase this to a 6.5 out of 10.

The movie was OBVIOUSLY made with lots of scenes which only intent was to place backgrounds at infinity in a 3D show. Those shots are cool. But I saw it in 2D and you can't judge a film by how many shots of full 6.5cm parallalax you can fit in a storyline. I understand people enjoying this film more in 3D as in 2D it's rather dull and in 3D at least you have the "empty space between objects" (AKA "depth") to look at (sort-of, as empty space is basically invisible [Big Grin] )

So I agree with those that say this film is technically correct and well made, impressive at times, but cinematically weak, boring and cliché. And I strongly disagree with those that say this film is the best thing ever-ever-ever since Egg McMuffins by a long shot.

EDIT: kudos to fox for making the 3D on the posters in Spain unobstrusive. They only have a small sign on the bottom right corner that says (in Spanish): "Also available in Digital 3D"

 |  IP: Logged

Michael Barry
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 584
From: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Registered: Nov 1999


 - posted 12-19-2009 07:33 AM      Profile for Michael Barry   Email Michael Barry   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I saw this twice (so far!). I think it's fabulous!

The first screening I saw was in Real D, and the second was Dolby 3D. The Dolby system provided a FAR better 3D effect with no ghosting issues that I could detect at all, even for objects that were really close or right at the edges of the screen. Foreground objects that were simply out of focus in Real D were pin sharp in Dolby.

I've been to many Real D auditoriums now and only one provided what I consider to be a really successful presentation, and that installation was in a long and narrow room with a gentle sloping floorplan (ie. not stadium seating) making it impossible to sit off-axis and probably ensuring accurate alignment. I suspect that Real D really needs an auditorium of this kind to work well. All the stadium style places using Real D I've been to have not been able to reproduce close objects with precise sharpness the way that Dolby can. As a result, nothing gets really 'close' and my feeling of immersion is limited.

I think that Avatar is one of the best - if not the best - live action 3D movie yet! (especially in Dolby).

 |  IP: Logged

Julio Roberto
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 938
From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2008


 - posted 12-19-2009 07:59 AM      Profile for Julio Roberto     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Michael Barry
if not the best - live action 3D movie yet
Except that it's only some 30% live action and 70% CGI [Big Grin]

I agree with your take on Dolby-vs-RealD. RealD works best as you described (long, narrow auditoriums with slope) for a number of technical reasons. Dolby is mostly inmune to most restrictions and problems with few drawbacks (needs even more light, glasses are expensive, colors are a bit limited). Between RealD and Dolby, I'm sure most of the time Dolby would produce better results (far less ghosting, more even illumination).

 |  IP: Logged

Adam Martin
I'm not even gonna point out the irony.

Posts: 3686
From: Dallas, TX
Registered: Nov 2000


 - posted 12-19-2009 09:46 AM      Profile for Adam Martin   Author's Homepage   Email Adam Martin       Edit/Delete Post 
quote: Joe Redifer
Then why would ANY version not have this applied to the file itself?
3D ghosting is caused by high-contrast areas in an image, such as white credits on a dark background, which are difficult to completely filter using standard polarization techniques. The lenses of the low-cost disposable glasses are not able to adequately extinguish the opposing image, exacerbating the problem.

Ghostbusting is a method of comparing pixels in the image and reducing the contrast in these areas which, in turn, reduces ghosting.

So you have a choice of a shitty ghosty image or a shitty low-contrasty image.

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 19 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  ...  17  18  19 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.