Re: James Cameron's Avatar

43
so i'm going to go ahead and guess that:
darkness
o-dot
alexhead
_marcus_
chainsaw
and potentially PZ

have seen this and haven't commented here yet. i have no room to demand you do, as i've been absent the last month. hoping i can turn that around here pretty soon, but i digress...

so i took the family to see this on sunday. not in Imax but in Real 3D. couple of things to get out of the way first: this was the first movie i've seen in 3D since... hm... Friday the 13th 3? i didn't really get all the hype about everything being 3D lately. i mean, i saw that they no longer have the red & blue paper ear-cutters but didn't think much else had probably changed. man do i feel like an idiot. the 3D was amazing. i was blown away by the end of the first trailer. seeing shrek 4, alice in wonderland and... can't remember what else, something else, blew my mind. just depth, not dumb throwing-stuff-at-the-screen gags. true dimension. and, as a bonus, the new goggles work over glasses. chuffed.

of course that carried over into the film. the entire film had this added dimension. i mean, not only did cameron create this entire world of pandora but everything about it had true depth. it took about 10 minutes before i was able to close my jaw from just the true nerdery of 3D and try to watch the film.

as you've read in this thread, i had zero expectations for this one. but really, it wasn't as "video gamey" as i figured it would be. the plot was hackneyed and yes, fern gully and others have done it before. parts of it felt like braveheart, other parts felt like <insert film about the plight of the native americans here>,
particularly after the men from the sky fell the ginormous tree
. i'll grant you all of that. the plot was nothing original, it was taking ideas that had passed before to another level/place. cameron's hardly the first one in hollywood to do that. but that aside, he did adapt it well in my opinion. there was really only one area of the thing where i was looking at my watch. and of course the effects were just amazing.
the big final battle was incredible, with the flying pterodactyl things flinging ships around, eating dudes, etc. the ground attack felt a whole lot like ROTJ with the ewoks, but otherwise....
and yeah, maybe i'm being forgiving because i was really engaged with the 3D, but as someone who really didn't expect to nor want to like this thing, i really did. it was fun as hell and the kids loved it. don't know that i'd go see it several more times or anything, but seeing it in the theater in 3D was quite an experience, one i would recommend.

Re: James Cameron's Avatar

44
TC wrote:so i'm going to go ahead and guess that:
darkness
o-dot
alexhead
_marcus_
chainsaw
and potentially PZ

have seen this and haven't commented here yet.
Not me. I'll likely catch it when it hits our local dollar house.
This is a snakeskin jacket. And for me it's a symbol of my individuality and my belief in personal freedom.

Re: James Cameron's Avatar

46
I commented on this ages ago in the Recent Movie thread:
If you're going to do the whole Avatar thing, by all means go for the 3D. Probably looks good in 2D but without the pretty pretty to distract you, you'll quickly recognize Cameron has turned into another Lucas, hobbling together a story referencing his earlier successes in service of toying with the latest technology. Easily his laziest script ever (and that's saying something if you look at True Lies and Titanic), with some dated Abu Ghraib/Iraq references that only serve to show how long ago this thing was written. The lead is a zero and the other human characters are retreads from his other films.

On the plus side, the towering smurfs are easily the best CGI rendering of another species yet, and some of the sequences on Pandora (strangely, not the combat ones as much as the 'getting to know Pandora' interludes in the middle) are pretty breathtaking in 3D. Worth it for those alone. The final battles are strangely underwhelming.
"I'm like a dog chasing cars, I wouldn't know what to do if I caught one. . . . I'm not a schemer. I just do things."

Re: James Cameron's Avatar

47
I commented on it elsewhere, but I guess I forgot to here.

It doesn't outright suck, but it is the usual Cameron mash of up other people's work. Some of the dialog was outright laughable. I think he wrote the script for this one while sitting on the crapper one afternoon. That said, yeah, it is visually impressive. Though even that novelty wears off after a while. The film should have been about half the length it was. I'm puzzled by the fact that somehow on this world all life, both plant and animal, has somehow managed to evolve with the same tentacle interface. Don't even get me started on the fact that because of this the Na'vi are technically fucking their animals and plants. Ew.
If you're going to see this, 3d is probably the way to go. I can't imagine actually sitting through it in 2d. But again, even the 3d gets old after a while. 3d is still a gimmick and frankly it always will be. The only reason it helps this film is because there's so little to the story, any extra visual distraction is welcome. Okay, maybe the film does suck after all now that I give it more thought.
Just cut them up like regular chickens

Re: James Cameron's Avatar

48
ah. so yeah, 3D. pretty cool.

i had a terrible vision about halfway through this, though - what if george lucas sees this film in 3D? we'll be getting yet another version of fucking star wars.... the Even More Fucked With™ Edition.

Re: James Cameron's Avatar

49
Oh, I've read rumors to that effect, yes. Of course Lucas will want to dither with the new tech, why not trot out his only accomplishment of the last 30 years or so and doll it up some more?
"I'm like a dog chasing cars, I wouldn't know what to do if I caught one. . . . I'm not a schemer. I just do things."

Re: James Cameron's Avatar

50
Ask and ye shall receive. Actually Lucas has been talking about 3d Star Wars for years now.
The Wrap wrote:Lucas: It's Time for 'Star Wars 3D'
Lucas says 'Avatar' has inspired him to update the franchise ... again
By Brent Lang
Published: January 18, 2010

George Lucas just can't stop fiddling around with his galaxy far, far away.

If the inveterate tinkerer has his way, Han, Luke, Leia and Chewie may be headed for yet another makeover.

This time the rebel insurgents and the evil empire may be getting the 3D treatment ... and we have "Avatar" to thank for the upcoming conversion.

At an HBO afterparty following Sunday's Golden Globe awards, the director told Access Hollywood that James Cameron's monster hit has convinced him that the technology has evolved to the point where he was willing to reconfigure the outer space series so it could be viewed in three dimensions.

“We’ve been looking for years and years and years of trying to take ‘Star Wars’ and put it in 3D,” Lucas said. “We’ve been struggling with it, but I think this will be a new impetus to make that happen.”

“Haven’t been a big fan of 3D, but that movie definitely improves in (the field of) 3D," Lucas added.

Before he heads back into space, however, Lucas will film "Red Tails," which tells the story of the Tuskegee airmen, according to Access Hollywood.

This isn't the first time Lucas has re-visited the original trilogy. In 1997, the director spent over $10 million up revising the movies he shot in the 1970s and 80s and inserting scenes and characters that exploited CGI technology.

Though the subsequent theatrical re-releases were box office successes, many of the director's changes were bemoaned by fans who believed that they weakened the arc of central characters such as Han Solo by scrubbing away their harder edges.

Lucas festooned the movie with new digital alien creations, inserted a scene with Jabba the Hutt in the first film, and changed a cantina shoot out to have the alien Greedo fire the first shot at Solo instead of the other way around.

As for the director's other attempt to revisit the Star Wars galaxy some 20 years later, well, that can be summed up in three words -- "The Phantom Menace."
Just cut them up like regular chickens

Re: James Cameron's Avatar

52
I finally saw this in 3D last night. Free babysitting since the in-laws are in town, and I wanted to see it in 3D before it was completely out of the theater. I thought the 3D was cool at times, but many scenes looked fuzzy to me, like nothing at all was in focus. One of my co-workers saw it over the weekend at a different theater and had the same issue. I figured it was due to sloppy projection work or wearing the 3D glasses over my eyeglasses, but he postulated that it could be an eye dominance thing, like your dominant eye is focusing and the other isn't. I don't know the cause, but it detracted from the 3D experience for sure. I probably would've been happy enough to just watch it in 2D really.

The movie was entertaining but nothing special beyond the visuals. The world really was amazing to look at, and the virtual world blended with the real world and actors incredibly well. I'm glad it didn't win Best Picture because the story and dialogue didn't deserve it, but I look forward to other movies taking advantage of the special effects technology and hopefully marrying it to a better script.

Re: James Cameron's Avatar

54
Happy early Christmas, you Avatar fanboys out there!
James Cameron To Return To Pandora
Just as Peter Jackson appears to be a captive of Middle Earth for the next several years, so too does James Cameron appear to be confined to Pandora — for an even longer period. Daily Variety reported today (Wednesday) that Cameron’s next two movies will be Avatar 2 and Avatar 3, the first to be released in December 2014; the second, in 2015. (Jackson’s Lord of the Rings prequels, The Hobbit 1 and 2, are due to be released in December 2012 and December 2013 respectively.) Variety said that the deal with Cameron was confirmed in a statement to the trade publication by Fox Filmed Entertainment chairmen Jim Gianopulos and Tom Rothman and by Cameron himself, who said, “I’m looking forward to returning to Pandora, a world where our imaginations can run wild. … It is a rare and remarkable opportunity when a filmmaker gets to build a fantasy world, and watch it grow, with the resources and partnership of a global media company.” The announcement appears to dash speculation that Cameron’s next film might be a new version of Cleopatra with Angelina Jolie in the title role.
According to Wikipedia, development on Avatar first began in 1994. By the time the third film is released, this franchise will have sucked away two decades of Cameron's career. After which time, he'll probably go the Lucas route and start "improving" the movies to better "match his vision." :roll:
This is a snakeskin jacket. And for me it's a symbol of my individuality and my belief in personal freedom.

Re: James Cameron's Avatar

55
bwahahahahahahaha....
Studio Briefing wrote:What Did 20th Execs Really Think Of Avatar?

It may have turned out to be 20th Century Fox’s most profitable film – what with gross revenue of $2.8 billion worldwide and counting — but studio executives were less than enthusiastic when they screened Avatar for the first time, according to director James Cameron. As reported by the London Independent, Cameron was asked about the studio reaction during an interview with James Murdoch, chairman and CEO of News Corp Europe and Asia, an admitted aficionado of sci-fi films. The director replied that one of the (unnamed) 20th executives asked him, “Is there any way … to reduce this tree-hugging hippy crap?” Cameron also continued to thump for 3D production, insisting that consumers will insist that big movie productions and TV sports specials be offered in 3D “because it is such an exciting and immersive experience.”

Re: James Cameron's Avatar

56
Of course, the source there is Cameron, and he loves to trumpet the I'm always right and the studio is always wrong thought. Not that studio execs are that bright. But any story that comes from him that makes him out to be all wise and knowing I take with a grain of salt.
Just cut them up like regular chickens

Cameron ups frame rates to 48-60fps

57
THR wrote:James Cameron 'Fully Intends' to Make 'Avatar 2 and 3' at Higher Frame Rates

UPDATED: He says at CinemaCon that he is looking seriously at 48 and 60 frames per second.

Championing the digital 3D movie revolution at a joint appearance at the CinemaCon exhibitors convention Wednesday, the high-powered trio of James Cameron, Jeffrey Katzenberg and George Lucas outlined their latest efforts to wow moviegoers.

Cameron said that shooting movies at a higher frame rate than the standard 24 frames per second will give them an added sense of reality. Katzenberg explained how advances in computing power are affecting how computer graphic artists create stories. Lucas related to the packed session that 2d to 3D conversion takes time and creative talent.

As evidence of his belief in increasing frame rates, Cameron said he "fully intends" to make Avatar 2 and 3 at higher rates and is looking
seriously at 48 and 60 frames per second. "When you author and project a movie at 48 or 60, it becomes a different movie," he said. "The 3D shows you a window into reality; the higher frame rate takes the glass out of the window. In fact, it is just reality. It is
really stunning."

Cameron is scheduled to offer a demonstration of the results Thursday during the Las Vegas confab.

DreamWorks Animation CEO Katzenberg revealed that he is working on scalable multicore processing, calling it a "quantum leap" in speed and power. Animators currently wait hours and even days for computers to render full animation based on their initial, low-resolution footage. But with the new processes, Katzenberg said, "our artists will be able to see and create their work in real time. I can't tell you how transformative that will be for our storytelling. ... That is an extraordinary and revolutionary change
in the process."

Discussing the 2D-to-3D conversion process, Lucas said: "We have been working on conversion (for roughly seven years). It's not a technical problem, it's a creative problem getting really talented creative people to work in 3D."

Converting the original Star Wars to 3D will cost more than the original movie's budget, he added, saying, "It is not cheap. It is not fast. If you want do it right, you can do it right."

Cameron said that converting movies shot in 2D to 3D is not practical in terms of normal postproduction schedules. "I do not believe you can effectively create the conversion process into the normal postproduction chain of a movie unless you are willing to take six to eight months to do the conversion," he said. "Who wants to sit on their $100-150 million (movie) for an additional six to eight months? That is going to cost you a hell of a lot more than shooting in 3D?"

Noting that 3D broadcast production is also evolving, Cameron added: "It is going to get harder to sit in a budget meeting and say 'I don't know how to shoot 3D as cost effectively' when the broadcast world is already doing it."

The trio also discussed the theatrical experience. "Movie theaters will never ever go away," Lucas said, noting that theaters offer a social
experience. "You can't get that on an iPhone."

During one of the lighter moments during the discussion, Katzenberg turned to Lucas and asked: "So Chapter 7 will be shot in 3D?"

"Yes," Lucas responded. "But then that will be done as a hologram."

Re: James Cameron's Avatar

58
DH wrote:"Avatar" Sequels To Use Extra Deep 3D

Appearing at London's 3D Creative Summit in a pre-recorded interview, "Avatar" director James Cameron is doubling down on 3D for the "Avatar" sequels as he thinks he was "probably too conservative" with its use in the first film.

Cameron says: "I'm going to open up my depth more on the Avatar sequels. In my defence, I thought I might be making a three-hour movie and nobody had ever gone more than 90 minutes so we didn't know if people were going to go crosseyed and have their eyeballs melt. Now we know good stereo is good stereo and you can watch it indefinitely."

Cameron urged filmmakers to 'go nuts' with 3D and praised the three other films that are generally seen as the benchmark for quality 3D presentations - "Life of Pi," Hugo" and "Gravity".

Cameron says: "Incorporate it into the storytelling in ways that aren't gimmicky but are fun and seductive to the eye. I want filmmakers to embrace this technology as an art form. People like Martin Scorsese, Ang Lee and Alfonso Cuaron are artistically using that third dimension versus studios forcing filmmakers to do post-conversion where the shots weren't composed with 3D in mind and it just doesn't feel right."

He also put some of the burden on exhibitors, saying they should: "make sure the quality is there in the theatre. Until we get laser projection, keep those light levels as high as you can. Don't turn them down to save bulb life because you’re just hurting the experience for the audience."

As for the 3D home market, he thinks the medium will come 'roaring back' once 4K glasses-free 3D hits.