Quantcast

I have seen Avatar 3D and...

I have seen Avatar 3D and... (tick all that apply)


  • Total voters
    2,187
Went to see Avatar on friday with a mate and we were blown away by the 3D.
Neither of us had any of the issues observed by others that have posted. No problems with headache or eyestrain. I wear contact lenses and found the effects to be stunning as did my mate who has good eyesight, and also my dad who wore glasses.
No problems with colours, sharpness or depth perception. I guess some of these things will vary from person to person. I said i could of done with being a tad further back in the cinema whilst my friend said his position was ideal (sat right next to me).
I felt fully immersed in the film for the entire duration with no distractions at all. For the most part i even forgot the Na'vi were cgi :eek: i even quite enjoyed seeing a bit of Na'vi 'nips' from time to time :devil: :D just kidding :rolleyes:
We enjoyed it so much that we are going to see every 3D release this year.
As for 3D at home 'YES' ! OH HELL YEAH !! i will certainly be investing in a 3D tv and any other needed equipment.
 

simonblue

Distinguished Member
But did you think the flim plot,story was any good take away the CGI,and the 3D ;).

The week before went to see Where the Wild Thing Are, no fancy CGI or 3D,but for me a lot better film :).

I am not saying there isnt a place for film,like Avatar,i did enjoy it at the time,but its not a great film :(, plot, story.
 

Ripco

Novice Member
I'm sorry, but if you saw this film not it 3D you wasted half your money. The 3D effects were amazing and Im not one to bum up films as I dont suck ass for aintitcool.com. I was one of the lucky few who got to walk the Blue carpet at the premiere and all I can say is it took a bit of adjusting the eyes, but no sickness, headaches and amature dramatics that it appears everyone else experienced. I for one, usually sit in the centre towards the back when watching films and I did feel a bit uneasy watching films like LOTR with the fast moving action and swooping camera angles, due to one weaker eye than the other. However I was fine during Avatar and you could not get a better/worse seat than myself, yup FRONT CENTRE. No not near the front and off centre but slap bang "I can reach out and grab the cast" centre. All I say is those who had problems I can only put down to a bad set-up. Once again thanks to Wee-Neil for the tickets. :thumbsup: Anyone wanting to see my pictures will have to remind me of how to do that "
 

k13 wjd

Active Member
Ok, my input here.

it was a good bit better than the old red+blue 3d - Horizontal+vertically opposed polarization shows a better depth of field.

there were MANY sections of the film that were NOT 3d....remember that !!!

still a long way to go in my opinion.
 

Monster

Active Member
I watched this at the Westfield Marrion Gold Class in Adelaide (South Australia) and both my wife and I thoroughly enjoyed it.

Every now and then something comes along that really does have the wow factor. I'm thinking VHS to DVD, 5.1, affordable home projectors, Jurassic park, The Matrix, LOTR's. To me this was one of those moments.

I know 3D has been around for a long time but if it does get utilised more, like most things, it is something that directors will get better at employing to best effect with practice.

I'm another 20mins to get used to it person, then it was fine. The glasses were Joe 90 style plastic rimmed and for me, very comfortable, although the lenses could have been a bit bigger.

Some of the effects were stunning. The black dog/reptile creature looked shiney and wet and you could almost touch it. Awsome. This effect used in horror would be class.

There were also some realy 'out of the screen' effects that whilst clever, did distract me and brought me out of the immersed state I like when watching a good film. For example the ash that looked like it was landing on my legs after the tree has been incenduried.

I think there is a real future for this style of3D. Will it make it into Home Cinema? For Projectors I am sure it will. For TV I am not so sure.

As for wearing glasses, I don't thikink this will be a problem (for me) for watching a film. And I am sure there will be many sizes, styles etc made available that are considerably better than the public cinema versions.

Russ Andrews will maybe bring some out that will also improve the sound quality :devil:

All in all a groudbreaking experience.

PS: only 3D I had seen before was anaglyph.
 

Ripco

Novice Member
Ok, my input here.

it was a good bit better than the old red+blue 3d - Horizontal+vertically opposed polarization shows a better depth of field.

there were MANY sections of the film that were NOT 3d....remember that !!!

still a long way to go in my opinion.
Yeah but that is just too big a difference to make comparisons. Thats like comparing a Fiat Panda to a Lamborghini. PS the reason the Blue and Reds dont work as 3D used to always be Red and Green which was better than Red Blue. Also it depended on whether the film was made as red/blue or red/green and glasses had to match.

Yeah alot of the film were not 3d but in those parts you were either looking at the amazing colours which you didnt get in the old 3D or you were hanging off or flying over cliffs. There were also parts where the explosions were not as 3D heavy. Also the point of Avatar was not 3D it was to show how far from the Spiderman and Blade 2 Bendy torso animations we have come. So to spend $400 million to get amazing effects that have you showing emotions towards them IS a giant leap of you ask me. Now to devolve to VR 3D Porn for the home :rotfl:
 

EwanSuttie

Standard Member
I have seen Avatar 3D and...

...the amazment of 3D had worn off after about ten minutes and I only noticed little bits after that. Which isn't a particullarly bad thing as i'd rather it feel natural than to be constantly distracted from the story by the visuals.

All though a lot of the time I did want to be distracted from the story, I though it was a god awful and cheesy at times, plus the story was too similar to Tarzan...but much longer.

The lighting effects were nice though.
 

asabar

Standard Member
I was waiting for this film ever since I saw the trailer at the cinema (whilst watching district 9), I was totally amazed with the graphics and can easily say it is the best film of the year!
 

freeflute

Standard Member
:thumbsup:Avatar 3D - BRILLIANT and BEAUTIFUL. My (non sci-fi, non-gadget) wife and I saw it and it blew us BOTH :clap:away . :lesson:The secret to comfy watching is to relax the eyes, and move your head around as you would in real life, then afterwards, take a few min's to allow your eyes to adjust back.
 

Alperian

Standard Member
Having seen Captain EO at Disneyland and later the utterly amazing 'Encounters in the Third Dimension' on IMax in the 90s, I was underwhelmed by Avatar3D. There is no substitute for good film-making once you are used to the stereo vision of it all.

In 'Encounters in the third dimension' we witnessed the effect of the left and right cameras being moved further apart in front of our eyes which made the background and foreground do some wacky things. Of course Elvira, mistress of the dark was good too ;).

I really want to see a film with the active glasses in action now.
 

Krullhero

Member
I enjoyed Avatar (my fav sci-fi film is still Serenity though!) Watched it in both 3D and 2D and, to be honest, enjoyed it in 2D more. Both I, and the missus, thought that the overall picture in 3D was quite blurry, in that it seems to only focus on one thing at one time, while the rest looks very soft, if that makes sense?

In 2D, at Cineworld Edinburgh, everything looked sharp as a knife. However, I have watched Beowulf and A Christmas Carol in 3D which I thought were much better, in terms of the way the 3D looked. Maybe because it was animated?

Beowulf was the first 3D (or real D) film I ever watched and it just blew my mind, but never had that feeling again. Maybe because I was less aware of the flaws of 3D. Who knows.

Krullhero
 

vbrown

Novice Member
I saw Avatar last night and I must admit, it was was an alright film. Very grand in it's scale and you can see that it was one heck of a project to put together.
I suppose the 3D helps in masking some of the flaws that may be more apparent if watching the mix of animation and real images in 2D (or when it gets a blu-ray release).
Nevertheless, I enjoyed it all the same. I just hope that the film that replaces it as the 'must see' highest grossing film in cinema history is not another 3 hour watch-a-thon!
 

IronGiant

Moderator
Did you see it at the Vue? We've just booked to see it on my birthday in the upcoming half term. Seemed like a good way of seeing out my first Half Century :)

Dave
 

Jazz Monkey Jr

Distinguished Member
I went to see avatar yesterday, it was good but I was sat too close to the screen and having a pint or 2 before going in isn't a good idea. Cinema isn't that grat at the fast moving scenes but to home 3D should be awesome on the Panny V series which I am going to purchase.
 

Ian J

Banned
Went to see Avatar Friday night at the Birmingham IMAX. Walking into the place and into the cinema itself certainly was full of wow factor. Unfortunately due to traffic we arrived late (took almost 2 hours from Peterborough!) so my wife took an outside seat and I was one seat in.
Having seen the film a couple of weeks ago at the local Odeon we went again yesterday to see it again at the Birmingham Imax but we got in the queue early and got the best seats in the middle in the back row which probably makes a huge difference.

But what really shocked me was the sound. I haven't heard a cinema like this in a long time. Simply put, LFE moved you whist centre dialog was clear, and the soundtrack and surround effects brought you right into the action with emotion, never seeming out of breath, boomy or lacking detail. In the end, this had more of an emotional effect on me than the 3D visuals
The LFE was quite stunning throughout the film with the attack on Hometree being quite outstanding

Getting closer to the end of the film, the glasses were taking their toll. I take a 57/58cm (medium) motorcycle helmet so don't have a large head, but the glasses were biting at the back of my head and my nose. I where prescription glasses too, but don't think it would have mattered if I didn't.
The glasses weren't particularly comfortable but the ones that were given at the Odeon were much better and you even got to keep them afterwards.

Overall I was very impressed with my first visit to the Imax and will probably go again next month to see Tim Burton's new film which is also in 3D
 

Johnmcl7

Distinguished Member
I did wonder if the cinema (Vue) I saw Avatar at wasn't set up properly as I wasn't impressed with the 3D effect which seemed inconsistent, the picture generally seemed soft, the depth of field effects looked wrong at times and overall I found it more of a strain watching the film Eventually I just wished I was watching a supersharp 2D film instead, I don't wear glasses and no problems with my eyesight.

In terms of the film I wasn't expecting much in the way of story which I knew was poor anyway but I think it spent way too much time in the depths of Pandora in full CG. While the CG was technically very good but it was too in your face/show off which in turns made it more fake. The sections in the human base even from the start as the shuttle descended through the atmosphere then had its passengers was just fantastic as were many of the flying vehicles. The mix of human and CG such as with the Navi/humans or the humans in the CG mech cockpits was also particularly good but under utilised. I loved the brief scene where the hornet style copter turned against the mothership and they briefly shot away at each other, I would have preferred to see more of that than Jake being brought up as a Navi.

The bulk of the film on Pandora I wasn't that keen on nor did I like the mechs either, technically they looked incredible especially moving in and out of the cockpit but mechs are not particularly feasible anyway and these ones just looked wrong as they were too agile. Some sort of powered armour would have worked better visually with a neural interface for the wearer especially as their neural interface technology must have been very advanced for the avatar system to work.

John
 

kempez

Well-known Member
The whole thing's not very feasible right now but as for the agile mech's: the gravity is supposedly lower on the planet, reference the Colonol doing weights to keep himself 'sharp'.

I thought the design of the equipment was pretty good, apart from the large chopper which looked far too bulbous to be able to fly.
 

Johnmcl7

Distinguished Member
The whole thing's not very feasible right now but as for the agile mech's: the gravity is supposedly lower on the planet, reference the Colonol doing weights to keep himself 'sharp'.
I did pick up on that but even they still looked to be moving too quickly in comparison to other equipment particularly the helicopters. The handheld gun seemed odd as did the controls given the advanced neural technology they had.

I thought the design of the equipment was pretty good, apart from the large chopper which looked far too bulbous to be able to fly.
I thought it looked wrong as well but that it could be explained due to the lighter gravity, I assume it had been designed for Pandora whereas the helicopters were stock models hence them having much larger blade sets proportionately. I still think visually it would have looked a lot better with the VTOL style engines the shuttle had, aside from looking too small the blades had no redundancy and would make it very easy to take down. Was it just me or did all the helicopter engines sound like a large single rotor design rather than four small sets of blades they were actually using?

John
 

geoplymouth

Standard Member
I thought the 3D was OK would like to see more to form better opinion.

Thought Avatar was very good took my kids and they both thought it was brilliant my 12 yr old Son sat through the whole movie without moving ( being a 12yr old boy he can get fidgety somtimes !) but not with this film.
 

goatman

Novice Member
I've seen Avatar in both 3D and 2D (3D first, then 2D a week later)
I enjoyed 2D much more.

Watching in 3D I just found hard work, and the colours were VERY desaturated. The 3D in the organic Na'avi environemt was good, but in the more angular human environment it just seemed forced and unnatural.

But in 2D - the colours were so vibrant and the motion just seemed so much more fluid. The whole movie came to life in 2D, it made the 3D experience feel drab.

When I can watch a 3D film and not be consciously aware that it's 3D, then I'll say that 3D is coming of age. Any "special effect" that draws your attention to the fact that it is there has failed.
 
Last edited:

Emno

Standard Member
When I can watch a 3D film and not be consciously aware that it's 3D, then I'll say that 3D is coming of age. Any "special effect" that draws your attention to the fact that it is there has failed.
Maybe its just me but i didn't notice it drawing my attention to it being 3D apart from 1-2 scenes i can clearly remember as being a bit annoying

Overall i quite enjoyed the 3D as adding something to the movie not a huge ammount but worth the extra i paid and i would pay the extra again.
 

boardingdan

Novice Member
I've seen Avatar in both 3D and 2D (3D first, then 2D a week later)
I enjoyed 2D much more.

Watching in 3D I just found hard work, and the colours were VERY desaturated. The 3D in the organic Na'avi environemt was good, but in the more angular human environment it just seemed forced and unnatural.

But in 2D - the colours were so vibrant and the motion just seemed so much more fluid. The whole movie came to life in 2D, it made the 3D experience feel drab.

When I can watch a 3D film and not be consciously aware that it's 3D, then I'll say that 3D is coming of age. Any "special effect" that draws your attention to the fact that it is there has failed.
I totally agree with you on this, i felt the emotion more in the 2D version especially how excited Jake was to feel and move is legs in the avatar body. I genuinely felt happy for him after he ran for the first time, which i didn't get in the 3D version because i was too busy looking at the mud flicking up and all the vegetation. that said the 3D was visually impressive in slow moving scenes but fast action scene's felt too busy and hard to follow. I also found at times the human actors sometimes looked like card board cutouts against the backdrops. The first half of the 3D film I spent most of the time looking around the screen at different objects trying to focus on things that weren't filmed in focus if you get what i mean, but then the 2nd half I settled down and just enjoyed watching the film. There were some amazing parts in the 3D version like the ash after avatar Jake sully wakes up and is all around him, very impressive like the room was filled with the stuff.
No doubt that this is still new technology and needs to be improved as far as the fast panning scenes go. But I'd advise any one who enjoyed the 3D version to also watch the 2D its just as much a treat for your eyes as the attention to detail in the skin textures and landscapes are the best ive seen in any film, but because your not all tied up in the 3D'ness the emotion just comes through.
 

Rich Marshall

Well-known Member
Just been to see Avatar in 3D.

Thought the movie was visually beautiful and the 3D did add depth to the image in most parts.
Stand-out scenes were those in low light in the forest, just stunning visuals:eek:
But I think the movie itself was only average at best, there was nothing original in the good-old story of 'good v's evil' which made it very predictable and it was about 30 minutes too long.

Overall 6.5 / 10

3D seems to be working as a marketing exercise, I wouldn't have bothered seeing this kind of movie at the cinema normally but wanted to witness it in 3D on the big screen.
 

Latest News

Disney CEO Bob Iger steps down
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Quantum Dot development could mean cheaper displays
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Netflix launches daily top ten rankings
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
OLED TV sales exceed one million in Q4 2019
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Bowers & Wilkins CEO leaves amid restructuring
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom