The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Avatar!!! (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5 [Next]
Payne
View Profile
Inner circle
Seattle
4572 Posts

Profile of Payne
Quote:
On 2009-12-21 14:27, Clock wrote:
As for Avatar, I pretty much have the same view as everyone else. Going to see it again in IMAX 3D tomorrow... maybe I'll get a different perspective.


But for me it would be the exact same experience except for the fact that I'd have to sit inside a theatre wearing sunglasses.

I heard they keyed all the colours up to compensate for the fact that you have to wear the polarized glasses to see it in 3D. Did they correct for this in the 2D version or is it in real intense cartooney looking colours?
"America's Foremost Satirical Magician" -- Jeff McBride.
Payne
View Profile
Inner circle
Seattle
4572 Posts

Profile of Payne
Quote:
On 2009-12-21 14:25, Clock wrote:

Didn't bother me. The idea is so ridiculous in the first place. The performances, directing, and dialogue sold me. Such a powerful film... please give it another chance!



What did I ever do to you that you'd make me sit through T2 again? Smile
"America's Foremost Satirical Magician" -- Jeff McBride.
critter
View Profile
Inner circle
Spokane, WA
2551 Posts

Profile of critter
Well I am glad I gave Avatar a chance. I wouldn't have gone based on the previews but I trusted some opinions of people who tend to share my tastes and it turned out to be a good decision.
Can't convince everybody though.
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers
EsnRedshirt
View Profile
Special user
Newark, CA
895 Posts

Profile of EsnRedshirt
Quote:
On 2009-12-21 14:45, Payne wrote:
Quote:
On 2009-12-21 14:27, Clock wrote:
As for Avatar, I pretty much have the same view as everyone else. Going to see it again in IMAX 3D tomorrow... maybe I'll get a different perspective.


But for me it would be the exact same experience except for the fact that I'd have to sit inside a theatre wearing sunglasses.

I heard they keyed all the colours up to compensate for the fact that you have to wear the polarized glasses to see it in 3D. Did they correct for this in the 2D version or is it in real intense cartooney looking colours?

Okay, you've confused me. Is movie theater 3D still the old green and red glasses? Or have they shifted to the more color-accurate polarized (Captain EO style, I guess)? I'd hate to see a movie ruined by muddied colors.
Self-proclaimed Jack-of-all-trades and google expert*.

* = Take any advice from this person with a grain of salt.
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27145 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Polarized so you get color.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
critter
View Profile
Inner circle
Spokane, WA
2551 Posts

Profile of critter
Yeah, new 3D is awesome. I had seen some terrible 3D before and when my buddy took me to "Bloody Valentine" I thought it was going to be irritating because I hated 3D, but it was the new 3D which surprised me by not being simply horrible and blurry.
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers
kcg5
View Profile
Inner circle
who wants four fried chickens and a coke
1875 Posts

Profile of kcg5
Going tonight. Payne, watch out-clock knows his movies... Grant, I always had an issue with the whole time travel thing in the first one, but then I did some reading on causality and stuff... you never know, I guess.

...Still-send back arnold to kill sarah. the rebels send back someone to protect sara, who gets her pregnant-with John Connor.. So, no terminator... no john connor?
Nobody expects the spanish inquisition!!!!!



"History will be kind to me, as I intend to write it"- Sir Winston Churchill
Payne
View Profile
Inner circle
Seattle
4572 Posts

Profile of Payne
Quote:
On 2009-12-21 17:58, kcg5 wrote:
Going tonight. Payne, watch out-clock knows his movies... Grant, I always had an issue with the whole time travel thing in the first one, but then I did some reading on causality and stuff... you never know, I guess.

...Still-send back arnold to kill sarah. the rebels send back someone to protect sara, who gets her pregnant-with John Connor.. So, no terminator... no john connor?


Wasn't the whole causality thing I had issue with. It was the "can't send inorganic material back unless it's coated in flesh" also clothes don't seem to make it back either. Has no one heard of natural fibers?

It was only a weak plot device because their special effects budget wasn't sufficient to allow them more screen time for the killer robot shots and if they did have enough budget to give the robot more screen time they wouldn't have needed Arnold. Without Arnold the movie wouldn't have made much as there would have been no reason for most people to go and see it.

The first one was a fun and forgettable little action pick. The second was just the same movie all over again with a ginormous budget and very little new to add to the overall story line.
"America's Foremost Satirical Magician" -- Jeff McBride.
kcg5
View Profile
Inner circle
who wants four fried chickens and a coke
1875 Posts

Profile of kcg5
Saw it. Very good. VERY long. story lagged at parts, but made up for it in other ways. IMAX,3d.

in terms of changing movies, I think the "matrix" did more. You don't see a fight scene now with out seeing it affected by the matrix
Nobody expects the spanish inquisition!!!!!



"History will be kind to me, as I intend to write it"- Sir Winston Churchill
Dennis Michael
View Profile
Inner circle
Southern, NJ
6018 Posts

Profile of Dennis Michael
I read some where where this is a 230 million Cartoon. An interesting perspective.
Dennis Michael
Scott Cram
View Profile
Inner circle
2677 Posts

Profile of Scott Cram
I like how the war was fought over "unobtanium". I can't wait for the sequel, where the existence of the Na'vi will no doubt be threatened by a spill of deadly Pandemonium Chloride.

(They made the scenery in 3-D. Why couldn't they do the same for the plot and the characters?)
Pakar Ilusi
View Profile
Inner circle
5715 Posts

Profile of Pakar Ilusi
Omg, from the all the replies here and all the over-analyizing of story and plot etc.. I just have to say..

Smile

WTF?! Really, it's just a freaking Movie people!
"Dreams aren't a matter of Chance but a matter of Choice." -DC-
Doug Higley
View Profile
V.I.P.
Here and There
7173 Posts

Profile of Doug Higley
ESNREDSHIRT: 3-D in theater was NEVER really anaglyph red and green glasses except in a FEW rare cases like the Canadian mess called The Mask. In 1953 when the 3-D craze was in forefront it was ALWAYS the Poloroid type using two projectors. The Red and green glasses were for PRINT media like Comic books etc. (and a couple of obscure films like Mask etc.) 3-D was first used in 1922 and the anaglyph was used back then. Red and Green was also used on TELEVISION prints of 3-D theatricals like Creature From the Black Lagoon (Poloroid in theaters).

2009: The current REAL 3-D system (polorization) works on TV as well as it does in theaters. (The demo was awesome!) and has eliminated the headaches and eye strain of the former theatrical system. There is a competing system for television using 'shutter' glasses that a couple of companies have adopted but this is unwieldy and pointless since the REAL 3-D works so well without the extra equipt. There is a NEW system a couple of years down the road that will not need glasses at all. This has already successfully tested and is workable though hugely expensive at present. You do get the depth but not the extension beyond the screen into YOUR space. This uses a form of lenticular screen.

My book Museum: Mysteria features the anaglyph red/green (or blue...actually Cyan) and I shot those photos using a normal single lens SLR. 3-D is fun no matter the delivery system.

by the way...back in the day the theatrical prints using Poloroid and two projectors were sometimes combined into ONE print for use in areas that did not have a 2 projector set up...these were in 16mm (and used on TV) and needed the anaglyph. As red and Blue print were combined on a single color film stock. ALL of these prints have gone to crap since the film used was Eastman and the colors have shifted to RED. (Blue is not present thhuis no 3-D).
Higley's Giant Flea Pocket Zibit
Mehtas
View Profile
Inner circle
England, UK
1650 Posts

Profile of Mehtas
Just watched it today.

Wonderful movie and fantastic CGI effects.

I enjoyed it through and through.
Payne
View Profile
Inner circle
Seattle
4572 Posts

Profile of Payne
Quote:
On 2009-12-23 06:06, Pakar Ilusi wrote:
Omg, from the all the replies here and all the over-analyizing of story and plot etc.. I just have to say..

Smile

WTF?! Really, it's just a freaking Movie people!


So movies don't have to have plot, character development and motivation?

I guess every time I perform from now on I'll get to say Really, it's just a freaking magic show people.
"America's Foremost Satirical Magician" -- Jeff McBride.
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27145 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Since when can you use polarized light style 3d on television?
...to all the coins I've dropped here
EsnRedshirt
View Profile
Special user
Newark, CA
895 Posts

Profile of EsnRedshirt
Doug- thank you for a very enlightening post. I just may have to check it out sometime, by going to the movies! (Not always an easy thing with a 9-month old baby crawling around your home. Of course, by the time he's old enough to enjoy the movies, those 3D TV systems will be commonplace, I'm sure. Maybe we'll cheat time by hiring a baby-sitter Smile )
Self-proclaimed Jack-of-all-trades and google expert*.

* = Take any advice from this person with a grain of salt.
Doug Higley
View Profile
V.I.P.
Here and There
7173 Posts

Profile of Doug Higley
Jonathan, since REAL 3-D engineered it. We watched it using the SAME glasses as the theatrical show (at D23 Expo)...the 3-D on the TV was PERFECT. Just beautiful.
Disney will be releasing it on Blu-Ray.

Don't forgety...the theatrical 3-D 'Films' are now DIGITAL to begin with and projected digital on the BIG Sreen. (Except Imax which is digital transferred to film. Unless they did a changeover recently.)
Higley's Giant Flea Pocket Zibit
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27145 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Doug, our televisions don't currently support polarized light separation of images. At least mine don't. So those glasses aren't much use. What TV do you have which works?
...to all the coins I've dropped here
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil’s Island
16247 Posts

Profile of tommy
It will when the Polls take over.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Avatar!!! (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2021 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.19 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL