|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Avatar 2009 (plus lots of off-topic, non-review junk)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Geoff Jones
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 579
From: Broomfield, CO, USA
Registered: Feb 2006
|
posted 12-19-2009 04:45 PM
I have to agree with Brad's review. I just never cared.
2009 marks the first year that I didn't see a single (new) feature in the theatre that I wanted to see again.
- - - - -
I saw Avatar at the Continental on the Giant Screen on 12/18 at 4:10.
35mm 2D on a 78' wide screen. 7th Row, center.
There was a mild hiss or hum that was audible from the center of the screen during silent moments. I complained to a manager about this during the pre-show video crap, and was assured that it would be gone during the feature. It was still there... but there weren't too many quiet moments in the film.
Other than that, the presentation was excellent. Bright, focused, immersive... I just didn't care.
- - - -
I also asked the manager if the Flashback Features were ever coming back, since those are the only films I seem to like any more. He said no.
The studios and the booker apparently complained because current features were losing too much money when ONE show was cancelled on a Wednesday night. I think this is horseshit because at the flashback features I attended, there appeared to be more people in the flashback than all 9 other screens combined.
Oh well, I guess I'll stay home...
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Aaron Garman
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1470
From: Toledo, OH USA
Registered: Mar 2003
|
posted 12-19-2009 10:26 PM
Cinemark Movies 14, Mishawaka, IN
Auditorium 1
Real D (common height scope)
Short review: nice tricks Jim, but I still hate the glasses.
Long review: Very immersive, great visuals, a true spectacle. However, I really cannot get over the 3D glasses: they just bug the shit out of me. The 3D itself though was well done, used at the precise moments, and made the experience enjoyable.
I may give it another shot in 35mm just to compare. The sound mix was great too, but the fader was a little too low for my tastes.
AJG
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sean Weitzel
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 619
From: Vacaville, CA (1790 miles west of Rockwall)
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 12-19-2009 10:28 PM
I saw it this morning at 9am at the Regal Hacienda Crossing 21 in Dublin, CA. This was a 15/70mm film Imax 3D presentation. The Imax pre-show announcement was interesting. A recording from a local radio host explaining to the audience that we would be seeing an extremely special presentation. He explained that a special process was used to "convert the conventional 35mm and digital prints to a 70mm film that has a image three times the normal size of a conventional movie." The recording also explained that "in order to preserve Director James Cameron's vision, the image will not fill the entire size of the screen." It concluded by inviting anyone with questions about this "amazing process" to please contact a cast member or manager who will be happy to explain the technical details." I thought that was really cool.
As for the film -
I think my thoughts echo a lot of others. In a nutshell, I feel I've seen this story in other form in other movies over the years, but the proverbial "gold plated visual effects" made that easy to ignore. While a weak and or cliched plot, this movie is a technical achievement in movie making. I appreciate how each of Cameron's films really push the envelope on a technical level and end up giving the rest of the world new tools to create with.
I was worried after seeing the 3-plus minute trailer that the whole thing would be ruined by the CGI characters. Thankfully, and for the first time, I found myself easily accepting and believing that the Na'Vi (cat people) were real. Each of the principal cast put forth a truly bang up performance and the quality of 3d photography was unlike anything I have experienced. No eye strain, no headache, and the image was plenty bright. I quickly forgot I was wearing plastic glasses over my own. My only complaint was that the glasses were physically very small. Had the image not been window-boxed, the "lenses" of the glasses would have cut off the edges of the screen.
I think had I seen this on a 2d screen, I would have given 2.5 of 5 stars. Going the extra mile for a giant screen type Imax 3d presentation raises my rating to 4 out of 5.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Frank Angel
Film God
Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 12-20-2009 09:21 AM
Dual Projector IMAX Digital 3D, on a screen size that I would consider larger than most, but not all, "standard" cinemas. Screen was curved. Nice. And for a silver screen, no discernable hotspot.
There was an announcement before the film started, something about the incredible IMAX image (yah, those two 2K projectors showing 2K material) and the great IMAX sound system. Ironically, the level of this announcement was so low that most people didn't even know it was playing; it was barely audible. Gotta set that non-sync level, boys.
A card came on screen indicating we should put on our 3D glasses, but the trailer for the upcoming 3D animated films played in 2D. That alone started the audience to murmuring. Then AVATAR hit the screen, but with one eye dark thru the Fox logo. A woman behind me freaked and started telling her husband in a panicked loud voice -- "I can't see in my right eye...what's happening?!! I can't see!!!" A buzz went thru the rest of the audience. I toyed with the idea of yelling, "IMAX Digital is making us go blind," but thought better of it. They fixed the problem 30 or 40 seconds later.
Unfortunately this IMAX image was NOT bright enough to be acceptable by any standard. In some scenes details just faded away because the entire shot was dull and underlit. At times I couldn't see details of the actors faces. If that is what the future of IMAX Digital 3D is, they are in big trouble.
That said, that was the only flaw in the presentation. What it lacked in image brightness, this IMAX install certainly made up for it with the sound system. There must have been a wall of subs behind the screen. When those man driven robots pounded around, the footsteps shook the room. Same with the explosions and helicopter sounds. Very impressive indeed.
As for the film itself, if art direction does not win for an Oscar, nothing will. Scene after scene were just breathtaking --many looked like futuristic Impressionist paintings. Certainly the visuals alone make it a must-see picture.
There were some elements that I couldn't decide if they were an homage to other films, or just stolen ideas (the floating seeds, stolen directly from FANTASIA; the human enhanced robotic machines, stolen from ALIENS -- Sigorney Weaver along with them. Thank goodness Cameron resisted the temptation to get her up into one of those man(or woman)-driven robots. And unlike Sean, for me the Avatars and the NaVi just stuck in my craw....I could not entirely suspend disbelief; they always remained cartoons for me -- very life-like to be sure, but cartoons none the less and to be honest, just a little too freaky to think of them as real or to be able to attach emotionally to them. It all certainly had the flavor of a Disney animation. But to be fair, that didn't detract in any major way from my overall enjoyment.
As has been said, the story was uninspired but the visuals -- wow. Someone said it was anti-American. Not exactly, but I understand the point. It certainly is anti-military. But like the rest of the heard it before, seen it before story, this is just another cliche where the military is portrayed at best as the bumbling nincompoops and at worst, the macho evil aggressors. This cliche is rampant and nothing new here, although Cameron could have side-stepped the cliche and given his characters more life than the cardboard caricatures we get left with on screen.
The 3D was superbly used. Never converging from extremes, every shot matched the convergence point very closely so the eyes were never strained - NO HEADACHES! Most of the convergence was from the screen beyond, not from the screen forward. And when it was used to get objects into the audience, it was done judiciously and with purpose. This is the kind of 3D that gives 3D a good name. The depth is behind the screen as if you are looking out a huge window.
3.5/5 Had the story been original and the characters engaging, this could have gotten a 4.5/5
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 19 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 17 18 19
|
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.
|
Home
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[beer]](graemlins/beer.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic