"I just saw Avatar" Thread

[Ace]

I just saw Avatar.

Ohhhhhmmyyygodddd.

That is all..

[Rick Presas]

i cant wait to see it.

[Ace]

Few things in life that have brought me to tears by their sheer artistic marvel and beauty.. Avatar is one of them. How can any film live up to this epic tale?

[Ethan Cooper]

Few things in life that have brought me to tears by their sheer artistic marvel and beauty.. Avatar is one of them. How can any film live up to this epic tale?

You're kidding me? It's really that good?

[Ace]

You're kidding me? It's really that good?

Fuck yes.

Its not just beautiful, It is an important story of our times.

[Jonas Rejman]

Will see it in 6 hours in ODEON in London. I honestly think, it is overhyped.

But then, Ace never talks BS...

[Jon B.]

I have to wait until next week,, then I'll post. Thanks Ace, gives me something to look forward to even more now,

[Eren Ozkural]

Will see it in 6 hours in ODEON in London. I honestly think, it is overhyped.

But then, Ace never talks BS...

Can't go to the Odeon today but was invited dammit. Seeing it at cineworld tomorrow.

[Hrvoje Simic]

4 hours left...

[Jonathan Stevenson]

I'm going to wait a few weeks. I can't stand a fully-packed IMAX theater. But I refuse to see it anywhere BUT IMAX. So I'm going to wait a few weeks and catch it on a random Tuesday morning.

[Danish P.V.]

Fuck yes.

Its not just beautiful, It is an important story of our times.

Hmmm...sounds ironic to me...

[Steven Caesare]

Ace, didja' see it in 3D? IMAX?

-sc

[Paolo Tinari]

Damn, the 3d version comes dubbed in impossible to understand Czech lingo, here.

[Craig Parkes]

Visually - It's completely freaking amazing. Saw it in Dolby Digital and looked stunning.

Story wise it's grand and bombastic and very James Cameron - not the best film I've seen all year in terms of story or anything, but story and tone doesn't let it down.

But technically, which is Stereoscopic effect, plus visual wonder and also the sound (not so much score but the sound design especially in how the surround is mapped, which is enhanced with the stereoscopic effect.) it pretty much blows anything else I have ever seen out of the water.

In fact I need to see it again to really analyze both the story execution and the effects, because my sense were literally overwhelmed at times, and I walked out of the theater feeling literally light headed.

[Mark Collins]

Dammit. I have to wait till Friday night to see it. I almost missed getting a chance to see it in IMAX 3D because of scheduling conflicts. When i went to get ther tickets there were 12 seats left.

However, From what I'm hearing it will not let me down at all.

[Nikolai Pigarev]

O i hada a nice one! at about the 160minute when some action finally happens the projector brakes and everyone is asked to leave :))) AWESOME!!!!!

[Michael Tsimperopoulos]

Saw it today in 3D. Plain magic. For two and half hours (which flew by in a heartbeat) I was once again a little kid.

[Tai Wah Lim]

Best 3D i have seen - Lim

[Anthony Gratl]

Few things in life that have brought me to tears by their sheer artistic marvel and beauty.. Avatar is one of them. How can any film live up to this epic tale?

c'mon ace, don't hold back. tell us how you really feel....

[Henk van den Doel]

I've just returned from the cinema. I am still in shock. The way in which this story was told was freakin intense. To me it really is as good as the hype suggests and then a whole lot better. Stunningly beautiful.

Forget all plans you made for tomorrow and go see it. Really.

[Tobias Straka]

Holy fuck... That was awesome...

[Cail Young]

Right there with you Ace; saw it in IMAX down here in Melbourne last night and I'm struggling to put in words my reactions. A stunning film in every way.

[Hrvoje Simic]

Amazing movie.

Creativity unleashed with a technological marvel, making a beautiful visual and a strong emotional experience in an epic story with one of the most important messages to mankind.

This movie truly is a milestone in a history of cinema.


Bravo.

[XiaoSu Han]

It will be interesting to see how well it performs at the box office!

[Jamie Havill]

Jesus that was good.

[Matthew Bennett]

I'm sensing a fun time was had...

[Jamie Havill]

I'm sensing a fun time was had...

Very true. The Pandorum world was just... incredible. I almost wanted to reach out and touch it.

It flowed really well, and had you right until the end, excellent all round. 3D experience was unique...

[Imran Farouk]

Just saw it in odeon and to say the least...

It was unbelievable. First time I've heard an audience applause after a film...

I'm going to see it again, I just need to get my head around it all being fake, there were bits when I thought 'that is surely real' but I know it was all animation and so on. It's changed my view on 3D thats for sure. Just...I hope not all films will take the 3D for the sake of it(Step Up?), Avatar was one that took it with good intentions and made it worth the experience of having glasses on your face the whole time.

The story itself was to the point, no fluff, no extra bs that wasn't needed. Everything came together and made it a worthwhile film...my only thought is...I can see where all that money they spent went but I don't see how it'll make it back on cinema views alone, I guess DVD sales but the experience I'm sure will be lost...hopefully not but I haven't found a 3D film I enjoyed at home and I think going from having seen this epic piece in 3D and then watching it in 2D may well lessen my overall experience.

Ah well...If you see it, I'm sure you'll love it. It's more then just a Sci-Fi film...

[Jonas Rejman]

Yeah, the applause in Odeon was awesome.

So was the film. I am speechless. It is very intense.

[Gavin Greenwalt]

27.5 more hours...

[Ace]

The box office on this film will surpass 3-4 Billion that's for sure. 5 Billion considering many people will want to see it multiple times with friends, family etc. Titanic made a worldwide box office of 2.5 billion. Hard to see how this will be beneath that. Except it probably wont be shown in many countries due to "political themes"...So I'm not sure. Titanic was in cinema's for what, a whole year?

[Craig W. Bickerstaff]

I Saw the 3D version last night, awesome stuff.

[Ace]

Ace, didja' see it in 3D? IMAX?

-sc

3D. Is there any other way? Not Imax but V-Max, which is a competing version of the mini-Imax here in Australia. Dolby 3D.

If you're going to see this film, pick a theater which has comfortable seats and isn't too cramped. You're in there for a while.

[Craig W. Bickerstaff]

3D. Is there any other way? Not Imax but V-Max, which is a competing version of the mini-Imax here in Australia. Dolby 3D.

If you're going to see this film, pick a theater which has comfortable seats and isn't too cramped. You're in there for a while.

Was your 3D in scope? Cause I heard that the 2D version would be scope and the 3D would be 16:9 but then I went and saw the 3D version and it was in scope.

[Tobias Straka]

I'm still recovering... Wow! Can't wait to go see it another time.

The movie reminded me of 2 good movies I would strongly suggest for you to see and that I think Cameron took some inspiration from: "Howl's Moving Castle" beacause of the flying mountains and "Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind" for the story about hidden / lost worlds and the destructive nature of mankind. Both animes, both great movies, especially Nausicaä. I often felt Avatar was a live-action Anime because of how all that beauty and marvel was presented. And then the sudden and intense action sequences.

Anyway, what a great movie...

[Hrvoje Simic]

This will rock the box office. I'm not the type to go back to cinema for the same movie and I'm seeing Avatar on Sunday again.


Here it's shown in Dolby 3D, which is inferior 3D to RealD (50-60% of the RealD experience IMO), plus there is distracting light bounce inside the glasses, but Avatar experience is great nevertheless.

[Ace]

This will rock the box office. I'm not the type to go back to cinema for the same movie and I'm seeing Avatar on Sunday again.


Here it's shown in Dolby 3D, which is inferior 3D to RealD (50-60% of the RealD experience IMO), plus there is distracting light bounce inside the glasses, but Avatar experience is great nevertheless.

I am definately going back to see it many more times. This quote from an article sums it up nicely:

"The scenes were so startling and absorbing that the following morning, I had the peculiar sensation of wanting to return there, as if Pandora were real.”

[Hrvoje Simic]

I am definately going back to see it many more times. This quote from an article sums it up nicely:

"The scenes were so startling and absorbing that the following morning, I had the peculiar sensation of wanting to return there, as if Pandora were real.”


Yeah, good quote. I think my next time won't be the last. There is so much to experience there, and after this 2D home version definitely won't cut it.

Whether one perceives this as an emotional experience, great entertainment, exceptional 21st. century artwork exhibit or all together, it calls for another ride...

[Ace]

Yeah, good quote. I think my next time won't be the last. There is so much to experience there, and after this 2D home version definitely won't cut it.

Im going to see a 35mm film print of Akira this friday on the big screen... Akira is one of my alltime favourite films of my youth. I fear that after watching Avatar, everything is going to look and feel boring in comparison. Its a bit like trying Meth or something!

And I think for the first time, I really get the idea of what 60fps projection would add to the viewing experience. If the art is good, it will aid the immersion.

[Hrvoje Simic]

And I think for the first time, I really get the idea of what 60fps projection would add to the viewing experience. If the art is good, it will aid the immersion.

I think high fps should be a rule for 3D.

This is just too slow and kills 3D. Period.

The studios might have had justified reasons not to listen to Cameron this time, but this motion strobing in immersive world has to go - ASAP. The scene in the first part of the movie with beast attacking Jake hiding under a tree clearly proves that.

[Cail Young]

Was your 3D in scope? Cause I heard that the 2D version would be scope and the 3D would be 16:9 but then I went and saw the 3D version and it was in scope.

Your source is good; however fixed matte 3d screens will crop to scope if necessary.

[Darren Orange]

Going tonight midnight IMAX 3D, the only way! This film needs to do extremely well, its kind of important.

[Tom Lowe]

Few things in life that have brought me to tears by their sheer artistic marvel and beauty.. Avatar is one of them. How can any film live up to this epic tale?

YES!!!!!! Okay, I'm going to stop reading this thread right here until I get back from the midnight screening. I don't want to take any chances on spoilers...

:cheers2::cheers2::cheers2:

[Shawn Nelson]

If it's not like getting your eyeballs fucked then i'm going to haunt this thread :-)

[jimhare]

Don't know what theater setup you were in, but I saw it yesterday and it exhibited NO motion strobing or visual anomalies of any kind.

It was bar none the best 3D I have ever seen. Not once was I pulled out of the totally immersed environment for any reason, it locked in and stayed locked for 150 minutes straight.

That was possibly the best movie I've ever seen. Entire family agreed.


I think high fps should be a rule for 3D.

This is just too slow and kills 3D. Period.

The studios might have had justified reasons not to listen to Cameron this time, but this motion strobing in immersive world has to go - ASAP. The scene in the first part of the movie with beast attacking Jake hiding under a tree clearly proves that.

[Petri Teittinen]

Saw it yesterday in 3-D. I did like it, but wasn't blown away. I'd give 3.5, maybe 4 stars out of 5, mostly for technical achievements.

Storyline was very traditional (i.e. done to death), hero's arc didn't grab me, most characters were of either very good or very bad variety with nothing in between, and the few way-too-obvious allegories to current affairs ("fight terror with terror") really yanked me out of the movie by their ham-handedness.

Gorgeous visuals, absolutely - perhaps too much so, as characters felt somewhat overshadowed by all the fantastic surroundings. The romance left me totally cold but the movie contained perhaps half a dozen shots so astonishingly beautiful my eyes watered. I can't imagine ever seeing this in 2-D; it feels like a waste of time.

Titanic's box-office record is safe, I believe. It was women who dragged their family and friends to see the love story in Titanic again and again. I don't think that will happen with Avatar; the love story between two blue aliens isn't strong enough.

Oh yeah. Sigourney Weaver as an alien really freaked me out :)

[Ace]

Don't know what theater setup you were in, but I saw it yesterday and it exhibited NO motion strobing or visual anomalies of any kind.

Hey Jim, where did you see it? Was it Dolby3D or RealD? Saw it at Bondi GU myself..

[Roberto B]

Im going to see a 35mm film print of Akira this friday on the big screen... Akira is one of..

akira?
Mr Kurosawa?

[Omar Saad]

Hey Jim, where did you see it? Was it Dolby3D or RealD? Saw it at Bondi GU myself..

What is the best 3D setup to view it on? I think between the theaters I have in my area I might be able to choose between RealD and Dolby 3D.

Unfortunately the closest IMAX is about 3hrs away. :mad2:


Omar

[Joseph Ward]

What is the best 3D setup to view it on? I think between the theaters I have in my area I might be able to choose between RealD and Dolby 3D.

Unfortunately the closest IMAX is about 3hrs away. :mad2:


Omar

REAL D.:smilewinkgrin:

[Omar Saad]

REAL D.:smilewinkgrin:

Good to know, thanks!

[Ace]

akira?
Mr Kurosawa?

No, as in Akira the anime film.

[Ace]

What is the best 3D setup to view it on? I think between the theaters I have in my area I might be able to choose between RealD and Dolby 3D.

Unfortunately the closest IMAX is about 3hrs away. :mad2:


Omar

I didnt see it on Imax. But it was one of the larger screen cinema's. Either or is fine. But I think RealD is the best.

[Bruce Allen]

RE: Real-D vs Dolby... saw Toy Story 3D in Dolby at the Grove and gradients had a TON of banding - like you were viewing in old-school 16 bit color mode ("thousands of colors" not "millions").

Real-D doesn't have banding but does have more of a ghosting effect. You can do post "ghost-busting" processes to minimze this. I'm assuming Avatar has done this.

The best 3-D I've ever seen has been inside Fotokem, using a Real-D system, when I was art directing / animating the Hannah Montana titles.

You know what else was cool? Vince Pace (the genius behind the Avatar cameras) would come by and give me tips!

So I'm going to probably try to see Avatar in Real-D. Unless they have gotten around the banding with the Dolby system (dithering? maybe it was just really bad with the smooth gradients of Toy Story?).

Anyway, can't wait to see it! No spoilers in this thread please!

EDIT: Oh man, looks like they used a dual-projector system for the opening - FOUR(!) Barco / Dolby 3D projectors. That'd be the way to really do it - fixes all your light loss problems. Anyone know a place in LA doing that?

http://www.webnewswire.com/node/490429
"To meet Camerons exacting standards for Avatars premiere, Dolby and Barco worked to provide a customized solution, comprising two Dolby 3D large-screen systems, featuring four Barco DP-3000 ultra bright digital cinema projectors. Using dual stacked Barco projectors for the left eye and an additional dual stack for the right eye, each set features Dolbys 3D color filter technology."

...and now Arclight is using XpandD. Active shutter glasses?! Sweet! Probably will go for that then.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

[ericyoung]

Just came back from Imax Waterloo in London - stunning. Begs to be seen again. Cameron has delivered again, and nowhere near as schmaltzy as I had feared.

I'm so glad I phoned my friend about seeing it as he had a spare ticket and apparently it's sold out until 2010 including midnight and 3am showings!!

Took awhile, but eventually my eyes got comfortable with the 3D so I was able to forget it. In some ways the quiet scenes were the most impressive as there was time to see all the way from foreground to the distance.

One of the few 3D films that absolutely have to be seen in 3D.

[jimhare]

Hey Ace,

Saw it in RealD at Westfield Chatswood. Absolutely pristine. Couldn't fault it from start to finish. Can't remember a better cinema experience ever.


Hey Jim, where did you see it? Was it Dolby3D or RealD? Saw it at Bondi GU myself..

[Mark Collins]

Just came back from Imax Waterloo in London - stunning. Begs to be seen again. Cameron has delivered again, and nowhere near as schmaltzy as I had feared.

I'm so glad I phoned my friend about seeing it as he had a spare ticket and apparently it's sold out until 2010 including midnight and 3am showings!!

Took awhile, but eventually my eyes got comfortable with the 3D so I was able to forget it. In some ways the quiet scenes were the most impressive as there was time to see all the way from foreground to the distance.

One of the few 3D films that absolutely have to be seen in 3D.


it's sold out until 2010, really?

I know I got my tickets early, but the shows weren't sold out here, close, but not completely.

[Roberto B]

No, as in Akira the anime film.ahh.. okay :svengo:

[Marco Montenegro]

Ok, I just bought my tickets for an 8:30 show tomorrow night in REALD. I have been reading the reactions on here to my wife and totally sold her on it. I am looking forward to an amazing experience. I hope my day flies by tomorrow.

[ericyoung]

it's sold out until 2010, really?

I know I got my tickets early, but the shows weren't sold out here, close, but not completely.

I'm only talking about the Imax I went to in London, although would expect the other large cinemas showing the 3D version to be booked up too.

[Jannard]

Peter Jackson stopped by RED a week or so ago and took the time to inspire the RED troops. One of the things he said was "make sure you all go see Avatar. It is one of those milestone movies that changes everything". I haven't seen it yet, but if Peter and Ace say to go see it... :-)

Jim

[Ace]

Peter Jackson stopped by RED a week or so ago and took the time to inspire the RED troops. One of the things he said was "make sure you all go see Avatar. It is one of those milestone movies that changes everything". I haven't seen it yet, but if Peter and Ace say to go see it... :-)

Jim

Please thank Peter for making this artistic marvel possible!

And yeah, stop all work and take the entire team to see it... RED and Avatar go hand in hand as we will see in the coming years :)

[Joseph Ward]

Please thank Peter for making this artistic marvel possible

I thought it was James Cameron? :biggrin5:

[Jerrod Cordell]

If it's not like getting your eyeballs fucked then i'm going to haunt this thread :-)

I really don't want my eyeballs fucked though...

I'm kinda disappointed I didn't go see it at midnight, but I'm broke so alas.

I'm sure I'll see it soon. It looks insane, and by the sound of everyone here it sounds pretty insane. I can't wait.

[Ace]

I thought it was James Cameron? :biggrin5:

I was referring to WETA and Peters contribution to Character animation :)

[Joseph Hutson]

I'm kinda disappointed I didn't go see it at midnight, but I'm broke so alas.

I see your 3D IMAX tickets are $18.50? Wow. Here, they are $12.75...

[Gustavo Penna]

You gotta be kidding me.
400 million dollars( reportedly) and they come up with this crap?

[Curtis Stanton]

There are a lot of "Avatar" options in the L.A. area. Any comments on XpanD 3D technology? The Hollywood Archlight Cinerama Dome has installed XpanD in time for "Avatar." I enjoy watching movies there; the audience seems more respectful and the screen is immersive even in 2D. Would XpanD compromise the 3D experience of a movie made for RealD?

And just out of curiosity, why would the movie premier at Grauman's and not play there, but play at the Archlight instead? Anything to do with the 3D technology?

[Iannis Holwech]

Avatar isn't made for RealD, that's just sponsor related marketing hype.

All 3D movies can be coded for any of the 3D systems.
XpanD's active polarized shutter-glasses system is by many seen as the best 3D solution with no modulation of the light-path before the light reaches the glasses.
Both RealD and Dolby3D modulate the light-path +uses polarized (passive) glasses.
The XpanD system most resembles the system we will have in our homes for 3DBD and gaming in the future.

But everybody has the opportunity to see Avatar several times and decide which system works best (or if there are much difference).

It would be interesting to hear from people, who has seen the movie several times on different 3D systems, their impression of the difference. Remember that lumens on the screen have a great impact on how the 3D quality/system is perceived.
To illustrate;
The pre show opening of Avatar in London for press and Industry used 4 Barco 3000 projectors to give the best impression.
The regular shows for paying patrons only use one.

[Petri Teittinen]

Finnkino (owner of Finland's largest chain of theaters) did extensive tests before deciding on XpanD for all their 3D theaters. I had a chat with their technical director who said the decision was almost solely based on the quality of 3D image; they wanted the best one and it turned out to be XpanD. He admitted that XpanD costs a lot more than competing systems when it comes to glasses, but it doesn't need a special silver screen like RealD, which in turn saves quite a bit of money per installation.

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Story was boiler plate, certainly above average, well performed and extremely well excecuted but..

OMFG! HOLY SHIT! Unfreaking believable. I had to pull myself out of the film several times just to remind myself what I was watching and how amazing it is that it just worked.

The only reason I ever felt let down by the story was because it was good but the movie is such an indescribable achievement it would be almost impossible to live up to.

I saw it in a full IMAX3D and the 3D was better than any I've ever seen before. That being said there is certainly room for improvement. 1080p just isn't enough resolution. The depth was so incredible and immersive but I could never quite find the focus point because the image was slightly soft, I felt like the resolution or ghosting or something was holding me back from it being real. After about an hour I was completely immersed without any thought to the 3D, it was just taken as a given. But there was an adjustment period as you relax into it. But the 3D isn't a gimmick, well, ok it is a gimmick, but so is music and so are sound effects. It's a gimmick that brings something substantial to the experience.

When Sam Worthington's Avatar holds up his hands and looks at them through his POV I experienced a slight out of body experience myself. I felt like I was actually viewing my hands and I could feel my brain trying to understand how it could be seeing my hands but not be moving my hands. Who knows maybe a little sleep deprivation helped grease the gears as well.

[Tom Lowe]

The film feels to be of a magnitude maybe similar to The Wizard of Oz and Star Wars. A big, big film that will go down in history as some kind of important landmark. The possibilities with all of this are endless. The technology here is stunning... stunning. And it's in the service of something beautiful. Imagine if someone turned Terrence Malick loose in the middle of a huge James Cameron film, with the whole thing being digitally drawn with crystal clarity in three dimensions by the brain of Hayao Miyazaki...

[Eren Ozkural]

The film feels to be of a magnitude maybe similar to The Wizard of Oz and Star Wars. A big, big film that will go down in history as some kind of important landmark. The possibilities with all of this are endless. The technology here is stunning... stunning. And it's in the service of something beautiful. Imagine if someone turned Terrence Malick loose in the middle of a huge James Cameron film, with the whole thing being digitally drawn with crystal clarity in three dimensions by the brain of Hayao Miyazaki...

You summed this up perfectly Tom. There's a few friends at Weta I had to congratulate as soon as I got home after watching it. I had to say to my best friend/regular DP sitting next to me "It's 1977 and we're the schlubs that didn't work on Star Wars"...I don't care how flat some of the lines were. It was like the best fever dream I ever had...

[Christian Edwards]

Flawless! Felt like something i dreamt or something which is stuck in my memory from a vivid imagination.Definitely a surreal experience .Stunning visual form & texture . Outstanding VFX with a harmonious blend of underlying real elements .Captivated from start to end .A rare creative inspiration .What i felt it may have lacked or could have done without in the script was counter balanced with sheer visual purity & clarity.

[Eren Ozkural]

Felt like something i dreamt or something which is stuck in my memory from a vivid imagination.Definitely a surreal experience .Stunning visual form & texture . Outstanding VFX with a harmonious blend of underlying real elements .Captivated from start to end .A rare creative inspiration

Didn't it just? I'm almost embarrassed to admit that I dreamt about Pandora last night...the thought of watching the film in 2D makes me shudder. I don't want to experience that. The thought of watching anything else at the moment just doesn't agree with me...

[Christian Edwards]

Didn't it just? I'm almost embarrassed to admit that I dreamt about Pandora last night...the thought of watching the film in 2D makes me shudder. I don't want to experience that. The thought of watching anything else at the moment just doesn't agree with me...
Yup, wont be long and I can stop reading books:)

[Roger Crouse]

I am considering taking my 8 year old son to see it. But, I'm wondering if it would be too much to deal with at his age. He just got his first "real" camcorder and has been shooting everything non-stop for several days. I'd like to share this experience with him if there isn't too much bad stuff for kids. I think he has a passion and interest in story telling and technology. What do those of you who have already seen it think? Is 8 too young for this one?

[Ace]

The thought of watching anything else at the moment just doesn't agree with me...

Yeah, I saw another movie tonight. It just isnt the same anymore. The entertainment bar has been raised a notch. Scratch that, 20 notches.

[Christian Edwards]

I love to play a computer game of that magnitude

[Ace]

I love to play a computer game of that magnitude

I thought the last level of Unchartered 2 on PS3 was eerily similar...

[Iannis Holwech]

53 seconds youtube; James Cameron Talks Higher Framerates at Avatar LA Premiere
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgrdKmgniGI)

[Eren Ozkural]

I am considering taking my 8 year old son to see it. But, I'm wondering if it would be too much to deal with at his age. He just got his first "real" camcorder and has been shooting everything non-stop for several days. I'd like to share this experience with him if there isn't too much bad stuff for kids. I think he has a passion and interest in story telling and technology. What do those of you who have already seen it think? Is 8 too young for this one?

Dear good Lord, get him to a 3D screening post haste! It's going to rock his world!

Okay, now putting the sensible adult hat on: Some scenes get intense and people say "shit" about 4 times. However, if you're concerned that alien wild life chases or bad guys putting our heroes in danger will be too visceral and traumatising for your 8 year old I wouldn't worry that much. If you'd let your kids watch Empire Strikes Back or Revenge of the Sith then they shouldn't have a problem with the beasties and the bad men doing bad things...

Saying that I watched the Terminator when I was 5 and Aliens when I was 10 and I turned out fine...if you count being obsessed with "state of the badass art" space marines and unkillable alien monsters and thus becoming a filmmaker fine...

[Darren Orange]

I saw the movie, it felt like a really expensive update of the 1992 cartoon movie FernGully: The Last Rainforest(http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0104254/). The CG was great, 3D was good, however i thought the 3D was not as creatively used in this movie. Plot was predictable to a strong degree. The major issue was the timeliness of the films statements on politics, it's dated a little bit in that regards. It's political statements really distracted from the movie. Also, If another movie ever gets made where "Sam Worthington" Is told he has a strong heart I think the world may just end, I almost started laughing after they said that so point blank, check Terminator if you don't know what I'm talking about. Anyway fun movie, good movie, but not great. Star Trek still by far the best movie of the year.

Also, the danger element, with so much CG, people never feel in peril at least thats the feeling it causes me.

[Mark Collins]

I saw the movie, it felt like a really expensive update of the 1992 cartoon movie FernGully: The Last Rainforest(http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0104254/). The CG was great, 3D was good, however i thought the 3D was not as creatively used in this movie. Plot was predictable to a strong degree. The major issue was the timeliness of the films statements on politics, it's dated a little bit in that regards. It's political statements really distracted from the movie. Also, If another movie ever gets made where "Sam Worthington" Is told he has a strong heart I think the world may just end, I almost started laughing after they said that so point blank, check Terminator if you don't know what I'm talking about. Anyway fun movie, good movie, but not great. Star Trek still by far the best movie of the year.

Also, the danger element, with so much CG, people never feel in peril at least thats the feeling it causes me.

It's almost guaranteed that Sam Worthington will be told he ahs a strong heart in Clash of the Titans.

[Hrvoje Simic]

I am considering taking my 8 year old son to see it. But, I'm wondering if it would be too much to deal with at his age. He just got his first "real" camcorder and has been shooting everything non-stop for several days. I'd like to share this experience with him if there isn't too much bad stuff for kids. I think he has a passion and interest in story telling and technology. What do those of you who have already seen it think? Is 8 too young for this one?

No bad stuff for 8 year olds, very healthy message in the movie.

If your son possesses the passion for storytelling and technology this movie may very well be "that special moment" for him.

[Gavin Greenwalt]

The film feels to be of a magnitude maybe similar to The Wizard of Oz and Star Wars. A big, big film that will go down in history as some kind of important landmark. The possibilities with all of this are endless. The technology here is stunning... stunning. And it's in the service of something beautiful. Imagine if someone turned Terrence Malick loose in the middle of a huge James Cameron film, with the whole thing being digitally drawn with crystal clarity in three dimensions by the brain of Hayao Miyazaki...

I agree with everything except for the fact that it's going to be of a magnitude of The Wizard of Oz or Star Wars. The big difference I think between this movie and Star Wars or Wizard or Terminator is that I might watch this movie three or four times in theater and then probably won't really want to watch it again. It's so much an experience that I don't know that I will really care beyond technical curiosity after a few watching and particularly in 2D on a small screen. And while the pandoran environment was wild and beautiful it's not necessarily a world I really am on the edge of my seat to see again in another film.

It's undoubtedly a landmark but I think its re-watchability will hinder its historical tail.

[András Puiz]

This was a fairy tale, if you didn't get that ten minutes into and were expecting a complicated plot, then well, I think that's your bad... To my great surprise and astonishment, they had supernatural or mystic things in there that were semi-explained by science... and yet it didn't turn out to be some horribly stupid crap as it almost inevitably does (I'm looking your way, midi-chlorians).

Story is simple and predictable, but it just works. Some bits in the plot are somewhat hard to swallow, but there's nothing seriously wrong with anything.

As an experience, though, this is really something else. 3D is not used as a gimmick; the film is not a 3D technology showcase. 3D provides immersion: into Pandora, into the visuals, into the story. If you question the use of 3D, you may just as well question the use of color and sound? If Metropolis didn't need either of these, why use them? Well, because they add value. They tell the story better. They get you more involved.

And if there ever was a film which needed a lot of immersion, then it's this one about waking up in a sleek blue alien body on a magic alien planet... 3D is quite necessary there. And it works. It more than works. This is something really extraordinary.

[Eren Ozkural]

This was a fairy tale, if you didn't get that ten minutes into and were expecting a complicated plot, then well, I think that's your bad... To my great surprise and astonishment, they had supernatural or mystic things in there that were semi-explained by science... and yet it didn't turn out to be some horribly stupid crap as it almost inevitably does (I'm looking your way, midi-chlorians).

Story is simple and predictable, but it just works. Some bits in the plot are somewhat hard to swallow, but there's nothing seriously wrong with anything.

As an experience, though, this is really something else. 3D is not used as a gimmick; the film is not a 3D technology showcase. 3D provides immersion: into Pandora, into the visuals, into the story. If you question the use of 3D, you may just as well question the use of color and sound? If Metropolis didn't need either of these, why use them? Well, because they add value. They tell the story better. They get you more involved.

And if there ever was a film which needed a lot of immersion, then it's this one about waking up in a sleek blue alien body on a magic alien planet... 3D is quite necessary there. And it works. It more than works. This is something really extraordinary.

I've heard quite a few people say that they were suerprised at how subtle the stereography was in the movie and I agree with them.

Making it my business to watch every 3D movie I can the first shot threw me off. Even my first thought was "Is that it?" I enjoyed how the shots kept showing more and the stereo effect seemed to increase until after Jake is taken out of stasis. I felt like I was having an acid flashback to a parabolic flight shoot I was on. Gripping stuff. Not gimmicky in the slightest.

[mikeburton]

One of the best theatre experiences I've ever had! I was quite skeptical going in about believing the mix of CG characters and live action characters. Like when Neo becomes CG Neo in Matrix 2 in the fight scene with 100 agent Smith's. At a certain point you just don't believe it and disregard it. This was not like that for me. I thought the articulate facial expressions were done quite well and allowed me to bridge that gap. For that alone is a huge undertaking and accomplishment IMO.
The only thing I was really dissapointed with was that I couldn't see it again, (being 3am). I agree, wasn't my favorite story ever told but it visually grabbed me in a way that I didn't want to end. Congrats to James Cameron and team for making an absolutely amazing film!

[Gavin Greenwalt]

The only thing I was really dissapointed with was that I couldn't see it again, (being 3am).

Hehe. The 3AM line at our IMAX was only about 40 people long. It briefly crossed my mind. :)

[Zach Nelson]

I'm just not sold on Avatar - what is this "revolutionary technology" everyone keeps spouting about? It's live action and motion-capture CGI together? It's 3D? So what? I don't get it.

[Craig Parkes]

I'm just not sold on Avatar - what is this "revolutionary technology" everyone keeps spouting about? It's live action and motion-capture CGI together? It's 3D? So what? I don't get it.

It's the combination and execution of several things.

Best stereoscopic work to date for a theatrical feature, combined with best facial motion capture work to date on a feature, combined with the most impressive 3D environment to date on a feature (bar none - the world of Pandora is the true star) combined with a director who figured out how to merge it all pretty seamlessly so it never feels like actors where acting against tennis balls or that the director couldn't imagine the CG on the day and a disparate group of people had to fill in the blanks.

It 'feels' like Cameron and crew went to Pandora and shot this movie - it's got this immersive quality that nothing before has.

The movie isn't a triumph of storytelling and script writing- but neither was the Matrix. But like the Matrix 10 years ago, it pushes the envelope of film making technology so far beyond what we have previously seen, and does so seamlessly, that you can't help but sit back and stare, jaw slack.

(The Matrix is a very good companion piece to this movie for a lot of ways, they are 10 years apart, they both will probably define what people will attempt to do in action movies for the first 5 years of the next decade, and they both are kind of unexpected to the mainstream audience)

Like the Matrix - in terms of a viewing experience - no one can tell you what Avatar is - you have to see it for yourself.

If you can't 'see' the 3D (stereoscopic blindness, or alternatively it just doesn't work for your brain, doesn't immerse you in Pandora) then you won't get the love. But I felt like I got to visit another world, and I can't wait to go back.

[Zach Nelson]

Thanks, it sounds cool - I'll see it :)

I think some people are just suffering from the over-hyped marketing machine. They keep saying "ground-breaking technology" and I think to myself, the motion capture they're using isn't that new, ie. Sid the Science Kid.

[Mark Collins]

I'm leaving to go see it in IMAX 3D right now. So excited!!!!

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Thanks, it sounds cool - I'll see it :)

I think some people are just suffering from the over-hyped marketing machine. They keep saying "ground-breaking technology" and I think to myself, the motion capture they're using isn't that new, ie. Sid the Science Kid.

No and Benjamin Button arguably did it better. Any shot from Avatar has probably been done as well before. But not in stereo and not an ENTIRE FILM.

That's what's just mind blowing is that most of the movie is an 'animated' film.

Previously you might have a movie with one or two CG characters ala Gollum. You might have a peripheral race of alien creatures. But Avatar goes ape shit crazy and makes an entire photo-real animated film. And it works! That's what's so incredible. It works so well it seems normal.

The significance of that can't be understated. It's been clear for a decade that in the future we would be able to shoot an entire film on the computer. We've seen a few dabblings in that regard with Beowulf etc. But Avatar is the first where everything comes together and is virtually seamless. It's proof of the often stated postulate "anything is possible with CG now".

Just think. If they wanted to they could theoretically re-release avatar in 5 years in 8k 3D at 60fps. It's all data now. Some of the matte paintings would need to be redone and I'm sure there is a lot of paint and roto that would also need to be redone but by and large they could return to Pandora and re-render huge portions of the film.

[Brook Willard]

This was a pretty stunning movie.

[David Collard]

To me it was like a cross between Terrance Malick's "New World" and a collage of all of James Cameron's movies.

It was lovely. Will be just as viewable on a non-3D screen.

[Tom Lowe]

Malick and Cameron explored some of the same ideas. Malick did it with very, very simple cinema technology that more or less could have been shot 50 years ago. Cameron went 180 degrees in the other direction obviously! But in some ways they arrived at the same place.

The influence of Miyazaki cannot be overlooked either--especially Nausicaa.

[jimhare]

Two simple points sum it up for me:

1. I never felt like I was watching an animated, 3D or effects film. I was blissfully immersed.

2. It was the first time I didn't want a 150 minute movie to end. I'm usually glancing at my watch for the last third. Would have happily sat there another two hours!

[Eren Ozkural]

The Malick/Cameron/Miyazaki combination is very accurate. Watched it for a second time tonight with my parents who're visiting and my brother. They thanked me for it. It was their first 3D movie :)

I'm truly envious of my friends who worked on it. Makes me want to step up my VFX work and go join one of the big post houses here in London...and shoot in stereo. I always thought that stereo would trickle down to the indie/low budget/young shooter quite a bit of time after it became mainstream in hollywood.

I have a feeling that it's going to be sooner rather than later. I just hope that RED put the pedal to the metal regarding their 3D rig. Can't wait to buy 2 2/3" brains and shoot stereo. Finishing a music video I shot on the RED right now. Once I got back from Avatar the second time I started rigging the AE comps with virtual stereo cameras and rendering the results as anaglyphic images just for kicks.

I hope Adobe get their asses in gear and offer end to end stereo workflow and integrate it the way they do it so well throughout the Creative Suite range. I feel that it's too much to ask for CS5 as the big change seems to be 64 bit nativity but a man can dream...

I used to walk out of movies that I found visually arresting with a new found appreciation for lighting and composition in the world around me and how I could manipulate it. This is the first movie that I walked out of one and felt how pronounced and nuanced my depth perception was.

[David W. Jones]

Just saw it. And you know what, my buddy and I were the only people in the theatre to stay through the credits.

[Jose Alvarez]

I was trying to formulate the proper words to describe my experience watching this movie; but after restarting 3 time I'll leave it at this: FANTASTIC!

[michael zaletel]

Just two words from me... Facial Animation!

-michael zaletel

[Jeremy Neish]

I was stunned, and my wife was literally speechless. As in I couldn't get her to say any words at all for the first 10 minutes of our drive home, then she basically said it was a borderline spiritual experience.

[Eren Ozkural]

I was stunned, and my wife was literally speechless. As in I couldn't get her to say any words at all for the first 10 minutes of our drive home, then she basically said it was a borderline spiritual experience.

Funny, that was pretty much my experience with The Fountain. This on the other hand, I can't shut up about...

Think people will start learning Na'vi?

[Jeff Bruno]

First movie in a long time where I want to go back and see it again immediately.

Some of the hokey mother nature stuff gets a little heavy handed and the writing is still typical Cameron, but my god literally everything else is just spectacular. It would have been a life-changing experience if someone else wrote the dialogue though.

[Mark Collins]

I just watched this in IMAX 3D...OMFG!!!!

It was so good. Even though the story has been done a lot, it was absolutely amazing. The visual effects are crazy good, and the 3D is not gimmicky. It's so subtle that you almost don't even know it's there, but at the same time, without it I think it would take away so much from the film.

[Jeremy_Sawatzky]

YOU GUYS HAVE NO IDEA HOW GOOD THIS FILM IS- that is unless uve seen it lol. purly astonishing- mezmerizing i will probably see it 3 times in theaters. normal 3d - imax 3d and normal theater. FRICKIN BEST Ive ever seen. GO SEE IT AND AGAIN!

[Howard Shaw]

Haven't seen it, but Malick and Cameron in the same breath? Oh dear, I don't think so.

[Christopher Grant Harvey]

The film blew my cock off!

Get over the hype an watch it!

[David W. Jones]

While I was watching it, I got the feeling that James might of had a thing for Heavy Metal. With Taarak, Taarna and the Taarakians.

[Barry Gregg]

The visuals are stunning.

[christopher witzke]

I saw it last night as well... very impressive and I was emersed the entire time. I did get a little distracted looking for nipples though.

[JanneJansson]

Amazing film, loved it!!! Good job Mr Cameron. ;)

[Carlbattreall]

It was a beautiful thing to watch, but without the 3d, the film would have been mediocre.
Lord of the Rings was more of a revolutionary film, great visual effects AND a great story with engaging characters.

[Michael Schrengohst]

The film blew my cock off!

Get over the hype an watch it!

Ah, err...I would like to keep my cock....

[Jamie Havill]

The film blew my cock off!

Get over the hype an watch it!

L

O

L

Best post on these forums ever.

[Christopher Grant Harvey]

Ah, err...I would like to keep my cock....

I found it when I saw the film for the second time! :biggrin:

The film is just awesome.

[Marco Montenegro]

I saw it last night as well... very impressive and I was emersed the entire time. I did get a little distracted looking for nipples though.

Ditto! I did catch myself looking for that as well, is that bad?
However, I really just want to go see it again. I found myself just looking around every inch of the screen and the images. Next time, I want to see it on IMAX. Hopefully I will get to see it again next week.:thumbup1:

[Tom Lowe]

I did get a little distracted looking for nipples though.

Neytiri = :001_tt1:

I saw this on IMAX 3D last night. Far superior to even a huge, standard 3D screen. Sure, you lose a little bit cropped off the sides, but it doesn't matter. It's worth it to get that huge screen filled. The film absolutely holds up on the giant screen. I was looking for pixelization... zero. Avatar is exquisite in IMAX 3D.

People who are saying that this film is not a game-changer don't understand what they have seen. The game is changed.

Just for my own career I was thinking I would jump from my first picture right into an IMAX film if I can. Now there is no doubt in my mind -- that IMAX film will be in 3D.

I bet my last dollar that phonelines around the globe are on fire with conversations between directors, DPs and producers about how to convert their current pre-production projects into 3D -- maybe even some in-production films.

Also, consider the impact of 3D on piracy. Does anyone really want to watch a non-3D, VHS-quality "cam" copy off bit torrent of AVATAR?? No way.

[Liam Hall]

I'm seeing in Monday, but couldn't resist listening to Kermode:

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/fivelive/kermode/kermode_20091218-1657a.mp3

[Joel Kaye]

I just saw the 2D version and I thought it was awesome. I'll check it out in IMAX 3D next time to compare. It's just a damn good story very well done. I think it lends itself to 3D. But would Titanic really be better in 3D? I dunno.

[Steven Caesare]

Visually spectacular. Real and CG elements seamless... by FAR the best mesh I've seen.

The character eyes and facial expression also amazing. Skin had a bit much "sheen" for me.

The environment, was perhaps the hit of the movie. Incredible detail, endless layers, and fabulaously realistic physics. I was _NEVER_ taken out of the suspension of disbelief when water was flowing, waves were hitting the rocks, the downward thrust form the ships whipped thru the foilage, etc. Awesome.

The musclature on the animals was likewise incredible. The breast muscles of the flying creatures would heave as they expended effort to flap their wings. The "chest nostrils" of the "horses" looked and behaved as you know they should.

While the story was a bit too much "Dances with Aliens" for me, it was nonetheless a visual tour de force that had sufficient story to hold it together.

-sc

[christopher witzke]

haha... I've been saying all day it was a "Dances with Wolves" meets "Alien Mine".... haha

Your dead on about the nostrils.... as an owner of three horses I was completely amazed at the realism.

[Tim Lüdin]

I watched it last night. What a great movie.
It is realy a game-changer.
Make sure you sit in the first half of the theater so the 3D effect will be much greater.
The only thing that bothered me was that the movie looked like one stop to dark throug the 3D glasses. When I took of the glasses from time to time, the movie looked better exposed. Maybe the operator messed up, I dont know.

How ever, this movie rocks big time.
Now think Star Wars in 3D the way Cameron does it. That would be awsome.

As we all said it many times on this forum, it ist maybe the best time ever for us cinematographers. Everything is possible now. Just look what Cameron did.
Damn.

Sempre Fi
Tim

[Eren Ozkural]

Neytiri = :001_tt1:

I saw this on IMAX 3D last night. Far superior to even a huge, standard 3D screen. Sure, you lose a little bit cropped off the sides, but it doesn't matter. It's worth it to get that huge screen filled. The film absolutely holds up on the giant screen. I was looking for pixelization... zero. Avatar is exquisite in IMAX 3D.

People who are saying that this film is not a game-changer don't understand what they have seen. The game is changed.

Just for my own career I was thinking I would jump from my first picture right into an IMAX film if I can. Now there is no doubt in my mind -- that IMAX film will be in 3D.

I bet my last dollar that phonelines around the globe are on fire with conversations between directors, DPs and producers about how to convert their current pre-production projects into 3D -- maybe even some in-production films.

Also, consider the impact of 3D on piracy. Does anyone really want to watch a non-3D, VHS-quality "cam" copy off bit torrent of AVATAR?? No way.

Yeah, 2nd time around...where are the nipples?

Ditto on the game changer. Just made me think about the overheads I would have to budget for to have a stereo production on my next film. I really hope that RED goes full steam ahead with their 3D rig rather than leaving it on the backburner and that Adobe implements an end to end stereo workflow throughout CS5.

Off to go through some AE projects and rig them up with stereo cameras now...

[Patrick Tresch]

...
It is realy a game-changer.
... it ist maybe the best time ever for us cinematographers. Everything is possible now.

Game changer is more the budget pumped in and the hundreds of people/artits working in the dark...

I don't know if this kind of movie is really the best time ever for us cinematographers?

If you like to work this way, it is up to you... and the money you find.

See you.

Patrick

[Steven Caesare]

...
The only thing that bothered me was that the movie looked like one stop to dark throug the 3D glasses. When I took of the glasses from time to time, the movie looked better exposed. Maybe the operator messed up, I dont know.

...

Sempre Fi
Tim

Most 3D glasses block light via polarization, so they do tend to look darker. Some theaters will double-stack projectors ot make up for this, but not all.

[Brian Ferguson]

I went to the Irvine Spectrum IMAX 3d for the 9 am show today, that was unbelievable! I went by myself, and so I sat next to 2 strangers. Both guys were in their late 20's and both wanted to talk about the movie as soon as it was over. We all agreed we felt like we had just had a work-out. I originally thought the theater was too hot but mid-way through I realized the experiance was so immersive that my adrenaline was up. I actually got vertigo when they would look over some of those cliffs.

I predict people that see this movie in IMAX 3D will get sort of addicted to the experience and want to go back over and over. The guy next to me said "I don't want it to be over!" If you see it in IMAX I suggest you sit about a 1/3 of the rows down from the top of the theatre, that is supposed to be the sweet spot of the screen.

I have never liked 3D movies previously and didn't understand all of the hype about it in the last couple of years, but there is no way you could see that effect in a movie without that huge screen. The 3D work was amazing, I got used to the glasses after about 10 minutes. I still wish they would make glasses with better optical quality, I sure those wavey lenses are not good for your eyes.

I also couldn't stop thinking about James Cameron and what a brain that guy must have to have all of that inside of it. This will be the movie that is a new yardstick for the future. Just as an alternate reality and E-ticket ride it was worth every dollar, and with the sur-charge to buy online it was $18.50.

The only line of dialouge that bugged me was the Colonel says something to the effect of - the indigenous humanoids have bones reinforced with a naturally occurring form of carbon fiber. Yeah and maybe they have kevlar toenails. That just was a weird comment.

[Tim Hole]

Im going to see a 35mm film print of Akira this friday on the big screen... Akira is one of my alltime favourite films of my youth. I fear that after watching Avatar, everything is going to look and feel boring in comparison. Its a bit like trying Meth or something!

And I think for the first time, I really get the idea of what 60fps projection would add to the viewing experience. If the art is good, it will aid the immersion.
No film can make Akira pale in comparison. Seeing it on the big screen is something that I would absolutely love to experience. Akira is in both visually and philosophically spectacular, a masterpiece in so many ways.

I saw Tarkovsky's STALKER not so long ago on the big screen. That was a dream come true.

[David Mullen ASC]

I saw the movie this morning in digital 3D.

Overall, it was very impressive, probably the best sci-fi fantasy/adventure film since, well "Star Trek" (my personal bias on display here) or "Lord of the Rings: Return of the King". There are many "oh my god" sort of moments during the movie where you get goosebumps from seeing such amazing imagery.

Also easily the best-done 3D movie I've ever seen. Cameron really has taken the technology up a major step.

I also liked that the wild imagination on display was tempered by a notion of making the technology and the biology plausible, as long as you didn't ask too many questions. It was nice to have an alien planet where the air wasn't breathable and the gravity was different, though not much different than Earth. That and the fact that the aliens didn't speak (much) English.

The colors and the lighting effects were beautiful.

Now the downsides:

#1 The story, despite the level of imagination involved, was fairly predictable. Not always a problem with genre movies, especially when the set pieces are so impressive as they are here, but I rarely was surprised by any plot development.

#2 As impressive as the 3D CGI landscapes were, they rarely reached a level of photographic realism as would a movie shot in real environments, giving big stretches of the movie the feeling like I was watching the most expensive video game ever made. The 3D helped take the edge off of the animated look by creating believable depth cues, so I suspect that in 2D, this movie is going to feel even more CGI-ish.

#3 I think this IS the most expensive movie ever made, which is going to make copying its technical level and approach hard.

#4 Shooting the movie in HD and doing the efx at 2K just didn't seem like there was enough resolution. Although I have this problem with 3D movies in general, they always seem a bit blurry. But it's amazing that Cameron had such control over the 3D process that I didn't get eyestrain after nearly 3 hours.

I would be hard-pressed to call the movie "revolutionary", though 3D filmmaking has been taken to a higher level -- I mean, overall the impression is like more of the same wall-to-wall CGI-driven effects movies ala "Revenge of the Sith", just improved upon, done much better (in fact, the final battle kept reminding me of "Return of the Jedi" but with better effects and directing). "Evolutionary" may be a more accurate word.

--

By the way, I saw the trailer for "Piranha 3D", which was shot in 2D and converted to 3D in post... and looks it. It felt like someone took chunks of the frame in post and decided whether to make the foreground, midground, or background, it looked like some old Viewmaster slide.

[Roberto B]

"The story, despite the level of imagination involved, was fairly predictable. Not always a problem with genre movies, especially when the set pieces are so impressive as they are here, but I rarely was surprised by any plot development."

quote of the thread.. we the screenwriters should change our job if it was any different ehehehehe

[Nick D]

Avatar… 0 Star

Consider my 4 objections first before you write your review...

I give it 0 stars because I felt conflicted while and after watching the movie. Yes, Jim Cameron is the Cecil B Demille of our time, but I can't recommend anyone go see this movie, hence the 0 rating because...

1. I morally object to Jim Cameron's $500 million Wicca celebration and I don't want my young daughters to see this movie and confusing this foul soup of moral nonsense to be truth, ever...

2. I don't believe 3D is intended for viewing past a 1.5 hour period unless it can be done without the goggles. It was painful after that point, and many scenes didn't work at the beginning of the movie in 3D, unless that was my eyesight going out of phase with Cameron's subliminal mind control experiment...

3. PLOT SPOILER: This movie is nothing more than Aliens, Terminator and Titanic (even down to the soupy soundtrack) rolled up in a 3D Apocalypto meet Tree Hugger wrapper, with 3D effects and "Hate America First" themes running throughout. Oh, and by the way, the Navi tribe are only not screwed because they look like tall blue humans, not because all life is precious. If they looked like aligators or insects, people would have less feeling for the alien lifeform... and here's the TWIST- the ALIENS are the HUMAN / American military contractors this time!!

4. After sitting thru 2 Wiccan forest rituals and prayers to a Pagan Mother Planet life-force, I wanted to walk onto the IMAX 3D screen and say: Navi, have you heard of the Navajo or JC and salvation? Because I know the director of this flick has, and he thoroughly rejects JC and the apostles.

So, in conclusion, to Hell with You Jim Cameron and your $500 million Digital DEMONS…

Nick

[Tom Lowe]

LMFAO. I hope that is a parody, Nick D.

[Nick D]

Yes, that was my...

Cameron's Avatar: $500 million

Pair of Imax 3D Tickets for two: $24.50

Taking off my 3D Goggles, Leaving the theater and going into the real 3D world and going home with my wife to see my two daughters ... PRICELESS

moment.

God bless 2D!!!

Nick

[Stuart Hooper]

Saw it this afternoon. I enjoyed it, but am curious to see it in 2D as well. The 3D here is better and more subtle than any other 3D movie I've seen but the glasses and slight eye-strain are still slightly distracting.

The story was extremely predictable, and I'll even say politically skewed, but not terrible for all of that.

I agree with David Mullen that especially the wide shots felt like an awesome video game. The really, really, impressive, 'real' feeling CGI for me was the shallow DOF shots of the Navi faces, which seemed incredibly sharp. For all of the 'realism' in the jungle, etc, it just seemed too fantastic to really seem 'real' if that makes any sense. Even though it was perfect...it felt animated.

Overall, very cool movie, but I wonder what else might have been accomplished with nearly a decade and four hundred million dollars, given half a chance...

[Craig Parkes]

I hear a lot of people keep repeating the idea that Cameron spent nearly a decade working on this film - He spent nowhere near that. Most of that decade and a bit since Titanic he was doing deep sea adventures and developing tech in a generic way. Avatar is probably a 5 year deal all up, in terms of actual tech development through to screenings.

The money aspect I don't care about, because the money IS on screen. And the fact that he got from where we were 5 years ago, to what has been achieved now, when others were content spending half as much on crap like Transformers 2... Well in my estimation it's pretty obvious what got better value for each dollar - clearly Avatar.

[Ace]

LOL @ Nick D.

I thought the Christians wouldve taken the most out of it... Wierd. Infact I saw a lot of prayer if anything...

Also, Alien lifeforms can still be Humanoids, you know that right? Do you honestly think Earth was the only world created by God?

[Ace]

Its quite funny, Letterman made a joke the other day along the lines of:

"They spent 400 million dollars on this amazing technology, and with this technology, theyre able to actually get the actors to appear on the screen!!"

[Joel Kaye]

LOL @ Nick D.

I thought the Christians wouldve taken the most out of it... Wierd.

I hope this thread doesn't head off in a weird direction, but I thought Cameron did a pretty nice job of working a positive message into the movie without hitting everyone over the head too hard.

The basic plot may have been predictable but there are constant bits of visual poetry, action, comedy and other surprises that aren't predictable. A lot of little things keep happening to keep the viewer interested. To me that's good action writing. Ultimately this is an action romance... or as other have said "Dances With Aliens".

[Ace]

Ultimately this is an action romance... or as other have said "Dances With Aliens".

Well thats exactly what it is. As James Cameron puts it "A good old swashbuckling romance"

[David Mullen ASC]

Though "Avatar" is a great movie, it bugs me a bit that ALL big-budget science fiction has to be an action-adventure movie to sell tickets worldwide. We rarely get big-budget cerebral experiences like "2001" or "Solaris" much anymore. If "Blade Runner" were remade today, there would be a high-speed Spinner chase scene, flying through the city (like the one in "Attack of the Clones") in the middle of the movie, and the climax would involve Roy Batty and Deckard hunting each other down inside a giant Nexus 6 factory as it explodes around them. Even the "Star Trek" movies have had to embrace a "Star Wars" type action style.

[Tom Lowe]

Yes, but David, you know darn well that what you are asking for is nearly impossible.

If you want to make a "big-budget" sci-fi picture ($150 mil budget), that movie is going to have to be seen by huge, huge numbers of people to make a profit. Frankly, there are just not enough intelligent cinema-goers around to support intelligent sci-fi without chases, explosions and gimmicks. I mean, have you turned on TV lately and seen what people are watching?

What percentage of people have ever read "War & Peace" cover to cover? Maybe 15%? And half of them probably only read it because they were forced to in college. What percentage of people can name a single piano concerto by Beethoven? Maybe 10%? Less?

This is why a beautiful, spiritual, exquisite sci-fi film like Darren Aronofsky's "The Fountain" (with no explosions or space-ship chases) earns only $10 million while garbage like "Transformers 2" rakes in $400 million.

I give a lot of credit to Cameron here for "sneaking in" all the spirituality, anti-imperialist and nature-worship stuff, into a film that will be seen globally by hundreds of millions of people. I mean, parts of "Avatar" really do play out like "Baraka in Space."

http://i47.tinypic.com/4jwbxu.png

[Ace]

Avatar had science fiction devices, but I wouldnt nessecarily classify it as a science fiction film, and I dont think it seeks to be that. Avatar wouldve worked just as well as a spiritual movie, where, for example, the alien planet was the 'afterlife'. In general I dislike the term "science fiction", because a theme or setting isnt necessarily what should be driving the story.. Yes Avatar has relatively simplistic archetypes, but considering the mass commercial viability this film must be capable of to break even, I applaud James Cameron's balanced sense of commercial artistry. Quite easy to be complex and artsy. Quite easy to be completely commercial. Quite hard to do both.

And in a sense, the complexity in this film arrives when you start to deconstruct it (if you are so inclined that is..)

[Shawn Nelson]

The box office on this film will surpass 3-4 Billion that's for sure. 5 Billion considering many people will want to see it multiple times with friends, family etc. Titanic made a worldwide box office of 2.5 billion. Hard to see how this will be beneath that. Except it probably wont be shown in many countries due to "political themes"...So I'm not sure. Titanic was in cinema's for what, a whole year?

You think it will significantly surpass Titanic? I dont think it will even match it.

I saw it today at a packed matinee, the movie ended and the room did not applaud.

It's definitely a "must see" movie for the sheer stunning level of design work on screen, it's very overwhelming. But after it's all said and done, the story leaves so much to be desired that I'd be greatly shocked if it drove the repeat business necessary to go over 1 billion domestic gross.

I think this is James Cameron's "The Phantom Menace". That movie overwhelmed me with awe years ago. The underwater gungan village, the pod race, etc., were all stunning examples of what a ton of computer farms can render, this is the next step. David Mullen well summed it up by calling it a good evolutionary step. It's the next thing in visuals. Story? It's just Pocahontas crossed with Dances With Wolves and Fern Gully, except the natives and all the other animals have a USB port out of the back of their head.

But the sheer volume of work in world creation is stunning. It's mind blowing how much design and render time went into this. I eagerly watch to see how it does and how the copycats do.

[Zakaree Sandberg]

amazing film!!! I use to hate hate hate 3D... but this one didnt hurt my eyes!

[Brad Webb]

Just saw Avatar for the 2nd time. This time I saw it in 2D. You can really see just how incredibly good the CG is when viewed in 2D. Wow, just wow.

However, I don't feel like it's a game changer. It pushes technology, it does things that have never been done, but it's not a game changer. Movie are not changed forever.

[Christopher Grant Harvey]

Though "Avatar" is a great movie, it bugs me a bit that ALL big-budget science fiction has to be an action-adventure movie to sell tickets worldwide. We rarely get big-budget cerebral experiences like "2001" or "Solaris" much anymore. If "Blade Runner" were remade today, there would be a high-speed Spinner chase scene, flying through the city (like the one in "Attack of the Clones") in the middle of the movie, and the climax would involve Roy Batty and Deckard hunting each other down inside a giant Nexus 6 factory as it explodes around them. Even the "Star Trek" movies have had to embrace a "Star Wars" type action style.


I completely agree with you on this point.

Blade Runner and 2001 are my favorite SF films, and I often yearn to see something new like them. There are promises but nothing comes to fruition. Moon wasn't bad it just lacked something special.

Hollywood has found an avenue in which they can be guaranteed to make money and I think they will exploit it as long as possible.

The high cost of Avatar means it needs to appeal to the whole world so it can recoup it's money. :wink: Plus I get the feeling that if they spent $320 million on a hard SF film without any modern spectacle it would fail at the box office. Moon cost $5 million and that is more in line with with expectations. It has made $7,191,615 so far.

Out of interest I was looking at the Box Office Mojo statistics for Ridley Scott (I worship this man) and his average box office earning is $59,974,538. Not bad. James Cameron has an average of $146,743,414. My point is that if you give Sir Ridley a hard SF film he has to keep the budget around $15-30 million. Even a legend in the SF realm such as Sir Ridley does not generate a huge haul at the box office. I only mention these numbers knowing investors are keen for a return. They would not be happy when you say they won't make their money back but we will be creating the best modern hard SF film.

http://totalscifionline.com/features/3809-the-100-greatest-sci-fi-movies

Most of those films are not really SF. They are set in the future, in space, have aliens, have cool science-looking props, and generally feel like SF but they are not.

I mean look at all the crappy SF remakes recently. WTF? The Day The Earth Stood Still is a good example. The remake was horrid, the original was great. The Earth ACTUALLY STOOD STILL in the 1951 version... Hollywood is remaking these SF films and stripping them of the SF element and replacing it with science-action.

[Christopher Grant Harvey]

I predict a box office performance of anywhere between $450-$900 million for Avatar. It will reach $1 billion given enough time. I also don't feel it will make it's money all in one weekend. It is not a franchise or sequel/prequel so it is tough.

I think it will have the "legs" to last out December in January and perform well.

[Sanjin Jukic]

http://digitalfilms.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/blg_tetro_5.jpg?w=480&h=380
Walter Murch discusses future technology...Stereoscopic 3D movies...

"Stereoscopic 3D is all the rage now, but you may not know that Walter Murch also worked on one of the iconic 3D short films,
Captain Eo, starring Michael Jackson. Francis Ford Coppola directed Eo for the Disney theme parks in 1986. It’s too early to tell
whether the latest 3D trend will be sustained, but Murch offered his take. “3D certainly has excellent box office numbers right now,
but there is still a fundamental perceptual problem with it: Through millions of years of evolution, our brains have been wired so that
when we look at an object, the point where our eyes converge and where they focus is one and the same. But with 3D film we have to
converge our eyes at the point of the illusion (say five feet in front of us) and simultaneously focus at the plane of the screen
(perhaps sixty feet away). We can do this, obviously, but doing it continuously for two hours is one of the reasons why we get headaches watching 3D.
If we can somehow solve this problem and if filmmakers use 3D in interesting ways that advance the story – and not just as gimmicks – then
I think 3D has a very promising long-term future.”

LINK>>> (http://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/2009/08/01/reliving-the-zoetrope-tradition-walter-murch-and-tetro/)

[Christopher Grant Harvey]

I like 3D but I would think that more than a dozen films per year in 3D would be over-kill.

[Peter Chang]

Though "Avatar" is a great movie, it bugs me a bit that ALL big-budget science fiction has to be an action-adventure movie to sell tickets worldwide. We rarely get big-budget cerebral experiences like "2001" or "Solaris" much anymore. If "Blade Runner" were remade today...

It took 25 years for 2001 to break even, 25 years for Blade Runner to break even. They failed utterly at the box office. Stanley Kubrick blew his Dr. Strangelove and Spartacus capital to make 2001, Ridley Scott mined his Alien cache.

James Cameron spent some of his Titanic capital getting Soderbergh's $50m Solaris made (which bombed with a piddling $15m), and then spent the rest on Avatar. Good thing Avatar stands a better-than-good shot at making money.

The original $70m version of "The Fountain" with Brad Pitt was much bigger in scale, involving extended battle scenes. Aronofsky cut the budget in half, made an incredible and indelible film, and it got cast down into box office hell. Sad.

We can only hope that more visionary directors with box office clout will blow their wads on big budget cerebral sci-fi, and studio execs with sci-fi plated balls will greenlight them. Ridley Scott, make "Forever War" already (in IMAX 3D pretty please)! Get rolling on Rendezvous with Rama, David Fincher! In the meantime, content yourself with low budget brainy sci-fi (try on Jones' Moon or Rivera's Sleep Dealer or Natali's upcoming Splice or Herzog's Wild Blue Yonder). ;) Or turn on the TV (Dollhouse, anyone? The Virtuality pilot! Both canceled... )

[Steven Caesare]

#4 Shooting the movie in HD and doing the efx at 2K just didn't seem like there was enough resolution. Although I have this problem with 3D movies in general, they always seem a bit blurry. But it's amazing that Cameron had such control over the 3D process that I didn't get eyestrain after nearly 3 hours.


I agree on hte bluriness.

Given the fact that the polarization scheme for blocking light in 3D glasses isnt 100% (when looking at titles on a black background, you can see "ghosting" from both offset images, etc..) I wonder if increased resolution will really be that much more noticable though.




By the way, I saw the trailer for "Piranha 3D", which was shot in 2D and converted to 3D in post... and looks it. It felt like someone took chunks of the frame in post and decided whether to make the foreground, midground, or background, it looked like some old Viewmaster slide.

Ditto. Not to mention it looked horribly lame. Although in the first 15 seconds, my wife and I both thought "Jaws remake??"

The 3D trailer for the Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland remake looked great though.

-sc

[David Wyatt]

What a phenomenally crafted film :shocked:

Totally immersive experience in 3D IMAX...can't wait to see it again!

[Ben Coleman]

I think some people are just suffering from the over-hyped marketing machine.


YES!!! I am so sick of the commercials inside of commercials. I'm sick of TV shows plugging the movie inside the show. It has been marketed to death and has pretty much turned me off.

I think the marketing went way overboard and personally I feel that I am being told that if I DON'T see it than I must be a bad person.

[Ben Coleman]

Is anyone else just a little bit disturbed that we are now replacing reality with CG?

Hmm, maybe soon we will be plugging in to a port on the back of our necks and experiencing it all firsthand.

Didn't I see that done already somewhere?:emote_22_yikes:

[Truls Skare]

I saw Tarkovsky's STALKER not so long ago on the big screen. That was a dream come true.

Sorry for a bit offtopic, but how was the quailty of the print you saw? I keep dreaming of a blu-ray release, but I guess that will never happen.

[P Andersson]

"Baraka in Space."

http://i47.tinypic.com/4jwbxu.png

That is what I saw as well and loved it.

I hope in the sequel he brings the blue people to earth to help rebuild our polluted world.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

OK... Saw it last night.... In IMAX 3D. Overhyped? Yes. Religious experience? Not for me, anyway. Visually impressive? Definitely! All things considered, it's a truly remarkable film from a technical and cinematographic (er, 3D CGI) perspective. I will definitely be seeing it again this week. I'll probably hit the Dolby3D one closer to me - I want to take my dad to see it.

Actually I've avoided this thread thinking there may be some potential spoilers, but I guess not now that I've read through. Anyhooo.... AVATAR was very impressive. I really think the comparison to The Matrix a ways back in this thread is spot on. There wasn't much in the film that was truly revolutionary or that had not been done before on some level. But like the Matrix, what makes the film special is that it merged so many cutting-edge concepts and VFX techniques, nearly all seamlessly too, into a film that typically would not be so mainstream. From a VFX / CG artist point of view, I'm totally geeking out over many aspects of the film. From the point of view of a Sci-Fi nut, I just wasn't totally enthralled with the story. As Ace said above, it really isn't even a Sci-Fi film. It's a fantasy film, almost spiritual in nature and would work as a spiritual film. I agree with Ace about typical Sci-Fi using a single device or theme should not drive a film or story. That is precisely what is WRONG with Hollywood Sci-Fi these days. But getting back to AVATAR, the revolutionary visual experience was undermined by the over-used and overly-predictable story. But why should I complain about that, I knew that going into this. It's all about mass commercial appeal and has many of the typical "safety nets" we see with typical Hollywood story structures.

I can't call this film a "game changer". And, damn, I hate that phrase. But the bar has definitely been raised, and raised quite high, for many aciton / adventure / fantasy type films from this point forward.

The 3D added a lot to the film. As others have said, it wasn't a gimmick. Although non-gimmicky 3D has become common with most new 3D films over the last year or so and I'm glad to see this trend. Filmmakers have stopped with the in-your-face 3D tricks and have let the effect expand the visual sense of the film in a very subtle, but very noticeable way. AVATAR does not depend on the 3D to make this a good movie and it will hold up just fine without it.

[Tom Lowe]

It seems like the question is now coming down to, "Is it a game changer?"

I would argue, Yes, it is, but this can't be stated as a fact, only as a prediction. You have to look at how the film industry is reacting. What is Spielberg doing? He's been down in New Zealand with Peter Jackson making a digital 3D film called "Tintin." Another film series to watch is "The Hobbit." Del Toro has stated that the success or failure of AVATAR might determine whether "The Hobbit" goes 3D.

One of the most telling stories about the "game-changing" nature of AVATAR was a reported comment made by a director overheard leaving the AVATAR premiere: "What do we do now?" To me, comments like that are indicative of a ground-shift. Or look at Michael Mann, who now says he's going to jump into 3D. Mann on AVATAR: "There's before this movie and after this movie."

Let me ask this question: if you were a high-powered director or DP right now and you had a huge-budget upcoming sci-fi or fantasy project in the pipeline, are you going to ignore 3D? Are you going to ignore "performance capture"?

I guess, ultimately, that the long-term box office numbers for AVATAR will tell the final tale. As several people here have pointed out, watching this film almost feels like you "visited" this far-away planet, Pandora... it's nearly a physical experience. The thing to watch for is huge repeat business at IMAX 3D screens, as people try to relive that experience, and also as word of mouth spreads. The fact that my MOM is going to drive 50 miles to an IMAX 3D theater because all her friends are talking about "Avatar" is one indication! :thumbsup:

[Michael Schrengohst]

How long before we see "Avatar" the ride at Disneyworld? "Pilot a gunship through the floating islands of Pandora".
I remember a ride in Las Vegas....I think it was in the Luxor.
A Capt. Nemo kinda of ride. It was motion with 3D combined. The feeling was very interesting.

"What do we do now?"

That question has been asked for hundreds of years.
And it will be one that anyone working in almost
any profession should always be asking.

I remember when BetaSP came on the scene and
my partner - looking at our extensive investment in 3/4" gear asked:
"What do we do now?"

I remember producers wondering what to do when their
investment in BetaSP equipment dropped in value when DV gear hit the street:
"What do we do now?"

I remember what producers said when the first wave of affordable HD cameras hit the shelves:
"What do we do now?"

I remember what DP's said when they saw RED footage for the first time:
"What do we do now?"

[Matt W.]

It seems like the question is now coming down to, "Is it a game changer?"

I would argue, Yes, it is, but this can't be stated as a fact, only as a prediction. You have to look at how the film industry is reacting. What is Spielberg doing? He's been down in New Zealand with Peter Jackson making a digital 3D film called "Tintin." Another film series to watch is "The Hobbit." Del Toro has stated that the success or failure of AVATAR might determine whether "The Hobbit" goes 3D.

One of the most telling stories about the "game-changing" nature of AVATAR was a reported comment made by a director overheard leaving the AVATAR premiere: "What do we do now?" To me, comments like that are indicative of a ground-shift. Or look at Michael Mann, who now says he's going to jump into 3D. Mann on AVATAR: "There's before this movie and after this movie."

Let me ask this question: if you were a high-powered director or DP right now and you had a huge-budget upcoming sci-fi or fantasy project in the pipeline, are you going to ignore 3D? Are you going to ignore "performance capture"?

I guess, ultimately, that the long-term box office numbers for AVATAR will tell the final tale. As several people here have pointed out, watching this film almost feels like you "visited" this far-away planet, Pandora... it's nearly a physical experience. The thing to watch for is huge repeat business at IMAX 3D screens, as people try to relive that experience, and also as word of mouth spreads. The fact that my MOM is going to drive 50 miles to an IMAX 3D theater because all her friends are talking about "Avatar" is one indication! :thumbsup:

I have mixed feelings about the movie, but overall it was stunning. I was surprised that the narrative is so slow-moving and episodic and that it takes place on one planet; this is in stark contrast to the "Star Wars" school of thought, which shuttles you quickly between locations with a more broad, figurative approach to each (i.e. each planet foremost represents an emotional state or specific narrative archetype). Instead, Avatar offers a kind of comprehensive anthropology of a specific (imaginary) place out of which the story is born. To this extent, the film recalls Malick or Herzog in a weird way (particularly Aguirre or The New World), and specifically because Cameron "built" a world and then explored it from a physical and spiritual dimension with then a diegetic story of exploration taking precedence over monomything, etc. The contrast between a muted aesthetic in the space station (and in the burned forest) versus bright colors in the rainforest evokes Wizard of Oz and the other films inspired by it, particularly Lynch's work. The "fairytale"/parable aspects of the story are there, too, and this type of storytelling is familiar to Malick's work and Del Toro's (to a lesser extent Lynch's or even von Trier's--in a cynical, academic way), wherein we have this contrast between two worlds (one of wonder/one of civilization) and then those two worlds meet in some sort of horrible violence. Of course, Cameron's movie is different to the extent that it ends in an action showpiece and has a straight "happy" ending, one substantially different from Days of Heaven, New World, or Pan's Labyrinth, films in which the beauty of the fairytale world is intrinsically linked with its transience. Cameron's shot choice is serviceable if on-the-nose, but I really do appreciate his willingness to hold on a shot and to edit less disjunctively than in most modern blockbusters; Cameron is a master action director even if his coverage is otherwise cursory, but he's not a visual savant like Spielberg or even Bay.

I have some background in 3d animation and I honestly feel this is a "game changer" but the problem is Avatar may be the only movie playing that game. The CGI here is far beyond anything before it, but most movies don't take place on alien planets or star humanoid non-humans and I think motion capture isn't up (in terms of economics or verisimilitude) to the task of rendering humans realistically in familiar locations. That said, Terminator 2 and Titanic were to some extent "game changers" in very broad ways (so Cameron's technology has caught on in the past), more so that even Jurassic Park or the hugely overrated LoTR films--so hopefully the movie will do well and the technology will become less expensive. The stereoscopic effects were superb, too, but I felt they worked much better on IMAX (unmatted) than on widescreen, because the cropping substantially eliminates depth while and the smaller screen is less immersive. I'd love to see more bigger 3d screens for movies like this.

[Tom Lowe]

The contrast between a muted aesthetic in the space station (and in the burned forest) versus bright colors in the rainforest evokes Wizard of Oz and the other films inspired by it, particularly Lynch's work.

Great post, Matt W. Of course, what is really being explored here is what Malick's character John Smith gave voice to as living a "false" life versus a "real" life. This is perhaps the ultimate philosophical question of our time (which is why Malick dealt with it), brought to our attention in the last century by Heidegger, but which has roots dating back to Lao Tzu and Zen Buddhism.

Both Malick and Cameron have their characters literally voice this question. When Jake wakes up in the human compound after an experience in the woods with the Navi, he says something about "The real world" being outside, in the Pandoran jungle. In "The New World," Smith considers (and foolishly rejects) the idea to "...give up the name Smith.... exchange this false life for a true on."

The stark, lifeless, high-tech compound Jake returns to after each Avatar journey is very similar to the dead, lifeless, ugly, "high-tech" fort Smith returns to in "The New World" after his adventures with the indigenous people.

http://i49.tinypic.com/2eqgod2.png
http://i46.tinypic.com/28ji0bb.jpg

I think people are concentrating on what they see as a "standard" plot, and this is true. But what they are missing (at least consciously), IMO, is something much deeper and more important running under the surface of "Avatar."

[Peter Mosiman]

I thought it was amazing. Got out of the movie theater at 3am at the midnight showing and was completely ready to see it all over again. No question, truly incredible experience.

Great little video I found...
http://www.hulu.com/watch/110975/making-a-scene-avatar

[Matt W.]

Both Malick and Cameron have their characters literally voice this question. When Jake wakes up in the human compound after an experience in the woods with the Navi, he says something about "The real world" being outside, in the Pandoran jungle. In "The New World," Smith considers (and foolishly rejects) the idea to "...give up the name Smith.... exchange this false life for a true on."

That's a very interesting (and almost certainly true) point re: New World, which those frame grabs support. I haven't read any philosophy, unfortunately, so I've got nothing to add; I hope someday to overcome my horrible attention span and start reading, though....

I agree that most complaints regarding Avatar's plot miss the point; but I don't think the plot is faultless. There are real pacing and tonal issues with the first 2/3rds of the film (our introduction to the native's culture is too plot-point linear to feel experientially "real" but too slow-moving to be engaging on pure narrative terms; the inciting incident comes too late, leading to a disjointed narrative flow), but it's really the last act that bugs me. The action scenes are phenomenal on visual terms, but they're not entirely congruous with the rest of the film and particularly the arrival of the animal hordes feels contrived and disingenuous, as does Jake's status as "savior" among an egalitarian/communal society. The film's clean morality and too-convenient happy ending bother me, too; I know Cameron's not one for subtlety or restraint, but even Titanic and Terminator 2 are stronger for their focus on heroic sacrifice and the tragic overtones they impart on technological hubris (rather than a simple "imperialism is bad" message or something along those lines). Whereas films like Pan's Labyrinth and even Wall•E (which I just love) offer some sort of uneasy redemption to a damaged human race, Avatar seems merely to reify escapism into a contemporary white man's version of a "native"/"primitive" paradise--a troubling conceit. That said, the movie is gorgeous, fascinating and daring and of course I'd rather have a flawed movie that's so breathtaking than a more neatly-constructed one that's stymied by its own need to please a jaded audience. Cameron's a brave man and I wish the best for him and his breathtaking film, which I really like, even if I take issue with elements of it.

[scott william]

It was an experience and I was engaged for the 161 minutes.

I couldn’t help but compare the experience to that of watching Apocalypto in the cinema and for me the hunting sequences in Gibson’s films had me more on edge.

I thought Cameron’s vision was fantastic and beautifully executed. However I’m not sure im interested in ‘the chosen one’ concept anymore. I understand films of such budgets need universal appeal but let’s figure out another way.

[Shawn Nelson]

BO is out, $73 mil domestic weekend take, roughly half what New Moon or Dark Knight took in their openings. Now the question is what's its longevity. Does word of mouth and repeat viewings take over or does it do the typical sharp blockbuster decline from here?
http://movies.yahoo.com/news/movies.reuters.com/avatar-earns-73-million-box-office-reuters

[Tom Lowe]

Shawn, remember, it took FIVE WEEKS for Titanic to reach its box office peak.

[Paolo Tinari]

And the blizzard on the E coast

[Shawn Nelson]

Shawn, remember, it took FIVE WEEKS for Titanic to reach its box office peak.

I do recall the insane longevity. It's rare for a movie to go UP in box office for more than a single week.

I abhor this modern beancounter idea that a movie can't build its audience. So i'm certainly not supporting the notion in any way, just pointing out that sadly it almost always holds true.

Titanic did well because it appealed to a broad 4 quadrant market well while also strongly appealing to the young woman quadrant which drove incredible amounts of repeat business. It's this same market that's driving New Moon. Funny that the stereotypical exec wants to appeal to teenage boys, but it seems that if you can appeal to teenage girls that they are a more loyal customer base.

What quadrant to you imagine would go see Avatar 3 or more times?

[Tom Lowe]

I do recall the insane longevity. It's rare for a movie to go UP in box office for more than a single week.

I abhor this modern beancounter idea that a movie can't build its audience. So i'm certainly not supporting the notion in any way, just pointing out that sadly it almost always holds true.

Titanic did well because it appealed to a broad 4 quadrant market well while also strongly appealing to the young woman quadrant which drove incredible amounts of repeat business. It's this same market that's driving New Moon. Funny that the stereotypical exec wants to appeal to teenage boys, but it seems that if you can appeal to teenage girls that they are a more loyal customer base.

What quadrant to you imagine would go see Avatar 3 or more times?

Well remember that younger men drive the insane numbers behind POS films like Transformers, but you're right in saying that female tennie-boppers, under the right circumstances, can lower the boom at the box office.

I've been paying attention to the AVATAR chatter at Twitter. Very, very interesting. Of course, Twitter skews young vs general population, but still, I see a wide spectrum of people going apeshit over AVATAR there. Everything from teenage girls to SOCCCER MOMS. Titanic was amazing in its ability to get older filmgoers to come out of the woodworks. My grandma went to see it -- the only film she has seen at a theater in the last 20 years. I don't think AVATAR will be nearly as successful with very old people, but it could make up for that with massive sales of marked-up 3D and IMAX 3D tickets. I paid $18.50 for my IMAX ticket. Back when I saw TITANIC, the price was like 7 bucks.

I read a statement recently about Cameron saying that he is a genius because he "makes films for women disguised as films for men." Maybe true. It reminded me of the advice Tupac gave to Biggie Smalls when he first got into major-label recording. Tupac said, "Rap for the b#tches, because the n#ggas are gonna buy the CD anyway." :coolgleamA:

Edit... HAHHAHAHA!!!! Jarred.. lol. Try typing SOCCCER MOMS in, spelled correctly.

[Cüneyt Kaya]

BO is out, $73 mil domestic weekend take, roughly half what New Moon or Dark Knight took in their openings. Now the question is what's its longevity. Does word of mouth and repeat viewings take over or does it do the typical sharp blockbuster decline from here?
http://movies.yahoo.com/news/movies.reuters.com/avatar-earns-73-million-box-office-reuters



Hey you did forget the 150 millions USD that the movie made domestic.
thats total of 230 000 0000 USD

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=avatar.htm


but i dont think that avatar will come near titanic, but it already made its money back considering this weekend, dvd and blueray sales, and world wide pay TV and TV rights.

guess it will top 2012

[Shawn Nelson]

Hoochie Mamas? lol

[Shawn Nelson]

Hey you did forget the 150 millions USD that the movie made domestic.
thats total of 230 000 0000 USD

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=avatar.htm


but i dont think that avatar will come near titanic, but it already made its money back considering this weekend, dvd and blueray sales, and world wide pay TV and TV rights.

guess it will top 2012

$73 mil domestic vs the like $140mil domestic of New Moon.

That $159mil is foreign

[Shawn Nelson]

Well remember that younger men drive the insane numbers behind POS films like Transformers, but you're right in saying that female tennie-boppers, under the right circumstances, can lower the boom at the box office.

I've been paying attention to the AVATAR chatter at Twitter. Very, very interesting. Of course, Twitter skews young vs general population, but still, I see a wide spectrum of people going apeshit over AVATAR there. Everything from teenage girls to SOCCCER MOMS. Titanic was amazing in its ability to get older filmgoers to come out of the woodworks. My grandma went to see it -- the only film she has seen at a theater in the last 20 years. I don't think AVATAR will be nearly as successful with very old people, but it could make up for that with massive sales of marked-up 3D and IMAX 3D tickets. I paid $18.50 for my IMAX ticket. Back when I saw TITANIC, the price was like 7 bucks.

I read a statement recently about Cameron saying that he is a genius because he "makes films for women disguised as films for men." Maybe true. It reminded me of the advice Tupac gave to Biggie Smalls when he first got into major-label recording. Tupac said, "Rap for the b#tches, because the n#ggas are gonna buy the CD anyway." :coolgleamA:

Edit... HAHHAHAHA!!!! Jarred.. lol. Try typing SOCCCER MOMS in, spelled correctly.

That's a good point about Titanic, I remember seeing the lines of people and being surprised how many upper middle age and older couples were there. It was a big event film and not just for the young crowd. How many couples in their 60s or 70s felt a need to go watch Transformers 2?

[jimhare]

Now the question is what's its longevity. Does word of mouth and repeat viewings take over or does it do the typical sharp blockbuster decline from here?

I am sure it's going to increase. The shear number of people out there screaming from the rooftops for everyone else to see it can't be ignored.

There is a huge group who understood what this was going to be and anticipated seeing it.

There is a group 20x that size that thought it was just another movie and wouldn't plan to see it.

I suggest that a large number of that big group will now see it, simply because of what their friends are saying.

I know there are several people I know who have now seen it simply because of my reaction. Multiply that by a few million and I think we will see longevity.

[Cüneyt Kaya]

$73 mil domestic vs the like $140mil domestic of New Moon.

That $159mil is foreign

1st- i mixed domestic and foreign...who cares.
2nd- new moon is a sequel...and honestly just sucks.
3rd- avatar is an experience (dont think about the story...could have been more subtle imho)
4rd- wtf are we talking about the millions other people make :)

[Stephen Matthews]

I agree with Mr Mullen and some of the others, It was visually stunning but fell short in many other area's that it should not have.

Aside from personal opinions on the movie my one issue is that I have a medical condition where I am more inclined to get migraines than most people, and after half the movie my head was throbbing. now aside from the blurry edges of the screen and what seemed like out of focus shots the visuals were not noticeably disturbing me. I know that movies shouldn't be geared to a small population but I would be very upset if due to my condition I can not see any 3d movies. I loved JC's concepts he's got great ideas I just hope that the technology to display these movies will drastically improve otherwise I sadly will not be able to take part in them.

As a side note the other movies mentioned The Fountain (one of my favorite movies), 2001, Solaris, even Moon are far better pieces of art than these type of movies and I would love if the were pushed for more, though I know that's not the case seeing as most people are in the business to make money and not do what they love and are passionate about (or like many other have just lost their passion or severly dulled it down)

Mah either way I paid for my whole group and despite my headache and the story I still thoroughly enjoyed the movie and don't regret the decision.

[Steven Caesare]

And the blizzard on the E coast

I think there may be some truth to this. I'm in N. VA, and my buddy here saw it opening night at nidnite and the theater was packed.

We saw it yesterday afternoon after 16" of snow had hit the ground, and we were one of only a handful of cars on the relatively unplowed roads... the theater was maybe half full, if that.

By this morning, 24" of snow had fallen since Friday nite, and from our trip to the mall, it again looks like travel was way down.

I suspect this might have been a $125mil opening if it weren't for the weather.

-sc

[Luke Stewart]

"Dances with Blue People"

[lee caropolo]

I was completely blown away by this movie and could not stop thinking about it all day today. Me and a friend walked to the imax theatre in manhattan at midnight through the blizzard. He was in bad spirits because of the weather and i told him get ready to feel like a 13 year old again! Thank you james cameron for creating yet another awesome movie going experience.

[R.ChilD]

I give a lot of credit to Cameron here for "sneaking in" all the spirituality, anti-imperialist and nature-worship stuff, into a film that will be seen globally by hundreds of millions of people.




It reminded me of the advice Tupac gave to Biggie Smalls when he first got into major-label recording. Tupac said, "Rap for the b#tches, because the n#ggas are gonna buy the CD anyway.


Tom I think you need to lecture lots of film makers cos it seems they dont get it!! You make a lot of valid points that I think a lot of us indies miss. They are most of the time focused with deep meaning stories, isolating the teens who are buying the tickets, when the most important, the human experience is ALL the same. And film on this level is a great way to get your points across and I think James C. did this without overly hammering it!!

On a side note, I disagree with the story being so predictable cos I am yet to see a movie that I couldn't predict, maybe its just me but I think its about how you go about it, with that said I am looking forward to my 3D feature next year!!

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

OK, I just saw this in an 3D IMAX Projection, I'm not a 3D virgin anymore...

(No,... never ever...)

Storywise - a very good film. Masterful writing and direction, which is not a surprise from someone like Cameron. Visually, I have never seen something like this before. Very, very impressive and I can't even imagine how hard it must have been to make something like this... Motion capture, CGI,.. Omg, this is really something new... I was almost attracted to that CGI humanoid chick,.. which is kinda logical as the actress that "played" that character reminds a little bit of someone that I... know... anyway :blush5:, a very good film.

Strangely enough, the only thing that didn't work for me was the 3D itself. Lol. :biggrin5: There were times that I wanted to take off the glasses and just finish the movie in regular 2D. And what's with the pain, man? My eyes were hurting from the start and it kept on throughout the movie. That's not right. OK, I'm an alien from another planet, but my *human* eyes are OK, there shouldn't be a problem.. And don't tell me it only hurts the first time. :biggrin:

So, yeah, now I can't say that I haven't tried 3D cinema but I don't really like it. :biggrinjester:

I can`t see very many uses for 3D that would really work. Not for narrative films, at least. 3D would rock for films like Cloverfield, The Blair Witch Project and the sorts. Cloverfield would really rock in stereo. But Braveheart in 3D? No thanks. Once Upon A Time In The West? It just can't work... La Dolce Vita? Noooooooo.... :bigear:

The best use of this tech would be for gaming. FPS blowing brains in 3D? Oh, yeah! :w00t: 3D porn? A new horizon... :emote_happyhappy: (If only they can invent those devices a little faster :001_tongue:) If someone can adapt a *fast* 3D workflow, it would work great for documentaries, but AFAIK, there's no quick-n-easy-3D yet. Baraka in 3D? Absolutely.

/propaganda mode: on

And, BTW, the torrent sites are loaded with Avatar, so if you want to try a real game-changer for the industry, you can visit:

www.thepira...

Oh, nevermind... :redface:

/propaganda mode: off

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=os0F4-XFf6w

Sya. :bath:

[R.ChilD]

I was completely blown away by this movie and could not stop thinking about it all day today. Me and a friend walked to the imax theatre in manhattan at midnight through the blizzard. He was in bad spirits because of the weather and i told him get ready to feel like a 13 year old again! Thank you james cameron for creating yet another awesome movie going experience.

which IMAX theatre? I tried to go see for the second time and was told it was sold out for the week at both 34th & 42nd street locations

[Bryce O]

And, BTW, the torrent sites are loaded with Avatar, so if you want to try a real game-changer for the industry, you can visit:

www.thepira...

Oh, nevermind... :redface:

:

Only a complete idiot would download a movie like Avatar.

[PatC]

Visually astounding for me and my bud said it reminded him of Fern Gully.

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

Only a complete idiot would download a movie like Avatar.

I haven`t. :rofl:

I just checked if it's online yet, and there's hell of a lot of complete idiots downloading it right now.

I wouldn't spoil my "first time" like that and it really is a movie you'd wanna watch in a theater, not home video. I'll probably see it again in the cinema, but in 2D, yes, thanks. I love my eyes and I love my brain, it's a nice brain, good activity.

3D is for sharks. :smilielol5:

Good night.


P.S. Ahh,.. Neytiri, mother Earth... bring the meaning back into my life. :001_tt1:

[Shawn Nelson]

I give a lot of credit to Cameron here for "sneaking in" all the spirituality, anti-imperialist and nature-worship stuff, into a film that will be seen globally by hundreds of millions of people.


Does your quotes mean you're joking? :-) If by "sneaking in" you mean front and center then yes! It's far and away his most preachiest film.

I thought his idea that the interconnected nature of the forest was something tangible and measurable was a great idea that barely got any screen time.

[Tom Lowe]

By sneaking in, I mean he gave us a basic, archetypal plot that can be enjoyed around the world plus all kinds of explosions and action and romance and eye-candy and everything that is needed to suck hundreds of millions of people into seeing the film -- then he hits them with all this spiritual, philosophical, nature-worship stuff. I doubt many people were expecting that! :thumbsup:

Or course Cameron has a long history of making films that deal with the most important question of our time -- man's relationship with technology. The Terminator films dealt with Singularity theory before Vinge ever wrote his seminal paper on the topic.

[KETCH ROSSi]

I will only say this:

I have known diversity my entire life from all corners of the world (LITERALLY), and I have learned many customs, especially those of which languages I speak, we are all the same no matter were we are from or were we spend our days, in our country or in that of an other, we are all AlLIENS in one way or an other one visiting an other country or place, even so we are in the same Planet, go figure.

We al have our opinions, my opinion of this Movie however is that it was simply FANTASTIC in all and every aspect of Story Telling, so BRAVO to every one involved.

My hears have well learned to completely undermined the voices of negativity and unfounded complains of the never happy.

I have but a short time in this world, and I intend to not spend it listening to winers, complainers or pessimists, this movie give me goos bumps, several times.

I guess soon some of you will know and better understand why, while some of you already know.

AVATAR in my opinion will be the biggest MOVIE in Cinema History!!

Now if only we, Humans were just 1/100% in touch and in respect of our own planet like the AVATAR creatures, well then that would really be something... I'm doing my part, hope you are too.

[KETCH ROSSi]

like your capital letters? :dita::anti-old:

Not quite understand you Roberto, if that is your real name since you are not posting your last name, but if you refering to shoot me, sorry you are too late , there have already been those that did that for real, and I'm still here for a little longer any way.

As far as the fingers, I don't particularly like for people to tell me to F$#@!#! Off, especially on a public forum, face to face is different as I can respond properly.

As an educated and respectful individual with High integrity I don't use those kind of Avatars to express my opinions while offending others,a as I simply try to never offend others, to bad you do.

[Ace]

Not quite understand you Roberto, if that is your real name since you are not posting your last name, but if you refering to shoot me, sorry you are too late , there have already been those that did that for real, and I'm still here for a little longer any way.

As far as the fingers, I don't particularly like for people to tell me to F$#@!#! Off, especially on a public forum, face to face is different as I can respond properly.

As an educated and respectful individual with High integrity I don't use those kind of Avatars to express my opinions while offending others,a as I simply try to never offend others, to bad you do.

Dont worry.. Roberto is sitting in the naughty corner for a day to think about how to address people politely...

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Hehe... And Roberto get's banned, again. Ace you beat me to it. And I thought I had nipped his post before others saw it, didn't realize Ketch was already responding.

Why do with have that smiley that flips people off anyway?

[KETCH ROSSi]

Dont worry.. Roberto is sitting in the naughty corner for a day to think about how to address people politely...

Thanks Ace, this is the first time it has ever happen since my first post ever on a forum two years ago, which was actually on DVXuser, since then I'm now a respected member of over a dozen forums and communities were I go to learn and share knowledge, share opinions, ask and give help, and replies such as the one just posted by Roberto, didn't make me fill good, cause I just don't understand what I could have written to offend some one else opinion to bring him to respond in such a rude, unpolite and very disrespectful way towards me.

The fact that I felt particularly touched by AVATAR, and wanted to share a strong opinion, I don't think deserved such a response, and I thank you again for jumping in Ace, much appreciated.

[KETCH ROSSi]

Hehe... And Roberto get's banned, again. Ace you beat me to it. And I thought I had nipped his post before others saw it, didn't realize Ketch was already responding.

Why do with have that smiley that flips people off anyway?

Yeah I was just responding to Tom's PM wen I got it, but if you wish I can delete it Jeff, even so is a bit too late since I already seen it :~).

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Don't worry about it Ketch. And every forum has a few clowns.

[KETCH ROSSi]

Okay Jeff, I guess I need to learn to be less sensitive.. sure wish that was possible!

[Neil Larson]

Just got out of IMAX 3D. Blew me away. Wow.

[Michael McLaughlin]

don't worry about the sensitivity...

its sorto of tough when you have bounced off eternity.


Gives you a bit of a different perspective on life then some people can,
or ever will appreciate.

[Benni Diez]

I've seen it last week in (Dolby) 3D and will see it again tomorrow, in Real D I think.
The visual magic is just mind blowing!

I think Cameron has two problems though:
He was so eager to accomplish the technological goals he set for himself that at some point he just had to give in in terms of complex story telling. The film just had to make an insane amount of money and the only way you can predict that, as sad as it is, is to 'dumb' it down to a somewhat common denominator. That way the Fox guys could be convinced that it will likely repeat Titanic's business and to go ahead pumping in those millions.

I've read some infos about the original scriptment and what was left out over the course of making the movie. There were some really cool and original ideas and the overall tone must have been much darker plot-wise. I'm pretty sure, had he had his way without studio interference and the insane marketing pressure, this could have been the brilliant film a lot of us are missing right now. But it could never have been done in the first place, not for another ten years.

The other problem is that the guy spent a decade not really getting his hands dirty developing new fictional stories and screenplays. He's kinda stuck in 90s style storytelling which was a lot cheesier and cornier as it is now. The thing is we remember the great 80s and 90s films like Aliens, T2 and other filmmakers' masterpieces as how we saw them THEN. If Predator would have been made and released now in exactly the way it was done in the 80s, it would look downright stupid.

And that's a problem Cameron could have handled by letting in some gifted 21st century writers. But that's him, no one touches your lifetime project when you're the king of the world, right?

As for how he handled the studio problem, I think he pushed them as far as he could. He always does.

All that being said: Avatar is still a masterpiece of filmmaking. Name me one masterpiece that doesn't have its flaws.

The 3D is used superbly like never before. The CG characters are more believable than a lot of flesh and blood characters I've seen over the last few years. The film is just pushing so many boundaries and you can clearly see the love that was put into making it, which has been a rare thing lately.

So still 5 out of 5 with a little dent on one.

[Roberto Lequeux]

Saw it in 2D two days ago and just saw it again in 3D. It was definitely made for 3D, where the cinematography worked much better and felt complete. The 2D felt it was lacking at times, despite how much I was enjoying the ride. I wonder how the cinematography would have been if 3D wasn't in the strategy.

Lovely movie regardless of what you watch it on. I would have enjoyed it in B&W with subtitles.

Thank you to James Cameron for realizing such a wonderful concept.

[Ken Waller]

Watched it in IMAX 3D Thursday night and didn't notice any ghosting. This was from a film print not digital. Print was matted on 4 sides so it didn't use the full IMAX screen at my location. Once the movie started you didn't notice. Image looked clean and in focus. Did they limit the screen size due to the 2K or render time?

[Cail Young]

Did they limit the screen size due to the 2K or render time?

DMR has its limits; I don't recall 300 filling our IMAX screen either.

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

If Predator would have been made and released now in exactly the way it was done in the 80s, it would look downright stupid.

Why?

[Stephen Gentle]

I saw it again in RealD 3D tonight - and it really looked amazing! I loved the little things like the embers swirling around the characters in the 3D space, and I'm really glad that we seem to have got away from the 'things flying at your face for no reason' kind of thing that a lot of other 3D films seem to do.

I was looking for ghosting, but didn't see any at all (I got a little of that in Up, which I also saw in RealD). One thing though that wasn't great was that there was some pretty irritating flicker... The 2D version looked perfectly fine at 24p, but in 3D there seemed to be a lot of flicker when there were really fast moving things in the frame - probably exacerbated by the fact that they were usually separated spatially in the frame (that is, it looked worst when the background was either stationary or slowly moving, but then you have a fast, flickering object move by in front). I really like the aesthetic of 24/25p in 2D, but we really do need higher frame rates for 3D content.

[Rodney Johnson]

DMR has its limits; I don't recall 300 filling our IMAX screen either.

I work at an IMAX theatre and my understanding that not filling the whole screen was a creative choice made by Cameron. They could have filled the screen if they wanted to. I get quite a bit of IMAX info from a projectionist website 1570.com

[C.H.Haskell]

Saw it in 3D IMAX, although it is simply breathtaking...I was disappointed that the bad guys were very one dimensional and had a cookie cutter feel to them. Cameron wanted mass appeal and with a 232 million dollar world wide opening is safe to say this is commercial success but I look back at Abyss or Aliens and wish the AVATAR humans were more real...less Disney. Cameron wanted the NAVI to be real and I can say he was successful at that...the creature design, and the NAVI people were so hyper unique that I am going to go back to the cinema to see what I missed. Bravo Cameron and team. :)

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Why?

Maybe because it looked kinda stupid then? "Kill me, I'm here! I'm here! Kill meeee!!!"

Predator alien jumping over logs and crap looking just like a halfway out of shape stunt guy in a bulky costume with big clown shoes. Because that's what he was wearing.

Truth be told, I always liked Predator. A cool concept and implemented with lots of cheesy goodness and gut-wrenching dialogue. Too bad they made Predator 2. Oh, gawd, what a stinker... Danny Glover was "too old for that shit" too...

[Leo Ticheli]

Avatar. This changes the movies as surely as the talkies killed the silent screen.

I don't remember ever going to the cinema to see a film more than once, but I'll be going back to see Avatar again!

Good shooting and best regards,

Leo

[Peter Franzen]

The film feels to be of a magnitude maybe similar to The Wizard of Oz and Star Wars.
That's the same conclusion that we came up with after seeing this on Saturday night. I think that when we look back at big-budget filmmaking in 20 years we are going to put films into "pre-Avatar" and "post-Avatar" groups; this film convinced me that 3d is here to stay and is no longer just a gimmick.

Put yourself in Michael Bay or Jerry Bruckheimer's shoes for a moment-- how can they not do their next big action flicks in 3d after seeing this?

[Tom Lowe]

That's the same conclusion that we came up with after seeing this on Saturday night. I think that when we look back at big-budget filmmaking in 20 years we are going to put films into "pre-Avatar" and "post-Avatar" groups; this film convinced me that 3d is here to stay and is no longer just a gimmick.

Put yourself in Michael Bay or Jerry Bruckheimer's shoes for a moment-- how can they not do their next big action flicks in 3d after seeing this?

Exactly.

[Joel Kaye]

Though "Avatar" is a great movie, it bugs me a bit that ALL big-budget science fiction has to be an action-adventure movie to sell tickets worldwide. We rarely get big-budget cerebral experiences like "2001" or "Solaris" much anymore.

I really enjoyed "Sunshine". You're right, SciFi lends itself to a cerebral experience... but we all know how cerebral sells to the masses. That bums me out too.

[Joel Kaye]

There are real pacing and tonal issues with the first 2/3rds of the film (our introduction to the native's culture is too plot-point linear to feel experientially "real" but too slow-moving to be engaging on pure narrative terms; the inciting incident comes too late, leading to a disjointed narrative flow)

Or you were just having a bad day when you saw it. ;-) Just kidding of course. Everyone has a different taste. I'm amazed any movie gets more than 50% of the people who see it saying they like it.

I study screenwriting and read scripts more than anything. You can break all the screenwriting rules in the world if you're not boring people. I really didn't have a moment in this movie where I wasn't actively interested.

I think the Box Office will tell the tale - though I rarely think that's a fair judge alone. I remember Titanic critics saying it was a good movie but no one would see it twice. No one's saying that about this movie. It's a monster.

Get ready for a bunch of 3D box office bombs in the upcoming years though. This is a good movie. Ultimately that's what sells tickets. Not cool 3D alone.

[Gavin Greenwalt]

I really enjoyed "Sunshine". You're right, SciFi lends itself to a cerebral experience... but we all know how cerebral sells to the masses. That bums me out too.

Wait sunshine? Sunshine was about as cerebral as a commentary of WWF fighting strategy.

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

Maybe because it looked kinda stupid then? "Kill me, I'm here! I'm here! Kill meeee!!!"

Well yeah. :smile5:

There are these lines, but it's kinda cool, I mean for a film of this genre.


Predator alien jumping over logs and crap looking just like a halfway out of shape stunt guy in a bulky costume with big clown shoes. Because that's what he was wearing.

It freaked me out.

[Nick Gardner]

out of shape stunt guy

Isn't that a major oxymoron? Every stunt person I have ever worked with has been in tip top shape ;-)

Nick

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Isn't that a major oxymoron? Every stunt person I have ever worked with has been in tip top shape ;-)

Most of them yes... But it was a comment made in silliness. It was Kevin Peter Hall who wore the Predator suit in the film and he was also the primary Predator alien in the sequel. Really, go watch Predator. That costume probably weighs at least 85lbs or more, I'd even believe it was over 100lbs. Hall is a big guy, but In all fairness, I bet that suit weighed a lot and was not designed for how it was used in a number of shots.

[Hrvoje Simic]

Saw it again. Yup. Still rocks.
Found some minute issues. Don't care.

This one goes as a landmark into cinema history for sure.


BO is out, $73 mil domestic weekend take, roughly half what New Moon or Dark Knight took in their openings.
New Moon and Dark Knight were sequels to popular titles.


Now the question is what's its longevity. Does word of mouth and repeat viewings take over or does it do the typical sharp blockbuster decline from here?
http://movies.yahoo.com/news/movies.reuters.com/avatar-earns-73-million-box-office-reuters

It will go up. Way up than estrogen-erator movie.





So...anyone still having issues with "cartoon looking", or "blue aliens" ? :ihih:

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Well for me... Having blue aliens no longer means that the movie will suck. In fact, I want to embrace more new films with blue aliens!

In some ways, Avatar did still have that cartoon vibe to it, but the way that all the elements came together, everything just fits and flows. It's so immersive... The "cartoony" feel that does linger only serves to help with the whole fantastical world of Pandora.

One other thing that I keep thinking about is that with the upcoming Blu-Ray 3D format and home theatre 3D systems, just think of what this means for other future entertainment. Within the next decade there's a good chance that we will have video game environments that are as immersive and detailed as Pandora is in this movie.

I think I'm going to see it again tomorrow...

[C.H.Haskell]

Teeth and eyeballs of the NAVI...holly hell. To me it felt like I was watching digital makeup, not CG characters...incredible! The NAVI were more believable then the humans by far...this film will make a billion and more.

[KETCH ROSSi]

don't worry about the sensitivity...

its sorto of tough when you have bounced off eternity.


Gives you a bit of a different perspective on life then some people can,
or ever will appreciate.

Thanks Michael!!


On the AVATAR note, las night I just could not go to sleep for the life of me, so exited, motivated, inspired, simply put my BRAIN could just not relax, so much so was the amount of neuron stimulation I got from watching AVATAR 3D on IMAX.


It is true that 3D, well done 3D, does stimulate ones mind.

[jimhare]

Exactly right. Avatar had to prove itself, especially with all of the pre-hype. I think it has done that and the word or mouth is going to do more than the marketing ever could.

It's going to be around for a while, and deservedly so.


Saw it again. Yup. Still rocks.
Found some minute issues. Don't care.

This one goes as a landmark into cinema history for sure.


New Moon and Dark Knight were sequels to popular titles.


It will go up. Way up than estrogen-erator movie.





So...anyone still having issues with "cartoon looking", or "blue aliens" ? :ihih:

[Hrvoje Simic]

In some ways, Avatar did still have that cartoon vibe to it, but the way that all the elements came together, everything just fits and flows. It's so immersive... The "cartoony" feel that does linger only serves to help with the whole fantastical world of Pandora.

During second screening I paid more attention to other things...and one of the things was photorealism for this movie. Although it was "technically" almost there, to me it appeared as if this look was exactly what was intended. I tried to imagine 100% photorealism in this fantasy tale and I think it would actually suck, in a way Ice Age or Madagascar would suck if animals looked like real animals.

Maybe I'm just biased and more surface transparency in skin tissue for example would not spoil the dreamland experience...but to me it seems that art design was more "fantasy" design then "reality" design, and photorealism would give it a totally different impression altogether (wrong one IMO).

What's fascinating is that fantasy look was still real enough, immersing you into the fantasy, which is an exceptional achievement. Finding the line between fantasy and reality.



One other thing that I keep thinking about is that with the upcoming Blu-Ray 3D format and home theatre 3D systems, just think of what this means for other future entertainment.

I think the immersive revolution at home will require greater FOV screens. Current FOV in home environment is not enough for immersive movie experience, and I think watching 3D on a screen "over there" doesn't cut it. Gaming world currently has the advantage because its FOV is much larger.



Within the next decade there's a good chance that we will have video game environments that are as immersive and detailed as Pandora is in this movie.


Yeah, GPU's can do wonders these days. Too bad Ubisoft - Avatar game developers - managed to come up with a POS. With all they had as a theme, they actually made a game where you go around frantically blasting off critters on Pandora. If you pay closely on a gameplay video you can actually hear the sound of eight figure profit being blown away.

Maybe in the sequel Cameron might expand his creative paws to a gaming world also, with a title which matches the vision from the movie...

[Bruce Ingram]

The artist side of me, well, it's still tripping on the visuals. There are moments, more than I can count on both hands, that are just jaw dropping to me. A good amount of those being so impressive because I'm aware of just what kind of talent it took to pull-off (as many on this board are as well).

The writer side of me is somewhat disappointed, but I also know that a film can't always live up to its script or the concepts behind it. Unfortunately, story sometimes has to take one for the team to get a movie out the door. I'm impressed enough with what they were able to put on screen and that they managed to keep a solid telling of the story even with all the visuals stacking on top of it.

The editor side of me prays for the sanity of the poor souls that had to make the editing decisions on this film. I get a sense that there were plenty of sleepless nights hoping they had made the right choices. I think, with the time restraints and the overall theme of the story, they did. I sure wish I could see the first or second cut, though.

My producer side knows they really, really wish this film could have been longer, but again the realities of budgets and distribution are what they are and even someone as big as Cameron can only do so much to move them. Even Cameron has a boss. I doubt an extended cut on DVD is an option, but I can hope.

The movie fan side of me is totally satisfied. Not perfect but, damn, that was a fun 2.5 hours and I'd like to see some more please.

[Steven Caesare]

Wait sunshine? Sunshine was about as cerebral as a commentary of WWF fighting strategy.

I disagree.

Much of Sunshine was suspense regarding what would heppen in hte envirnment, trying to figure out what had happened abaord the dead ship, and the moral dilemma the characters faced in deciding what to do after they became aware of the ship.

Was it the worlds brianiest film? No. Bu I'd suggest it was a much more "cerebral" experience than Transformers I/II, Star Trek, Cloverfield, etc...

Incidentally, I liked some of those films too... but they had entirely different execution styles.

-sc

[Steven Caesare]

Saw it again. Yup. Still rocks.
Found some minute issues. Don't care.

This one goes as a landmark into cinema history for sure.


New Moon and Dark Knight were sequels to popular titles.


It will go up. Way up than estrogen-erator movie.





So...anyone still having issues with "cartoon looking", or "blue aliens" ? :ihih:

Only a bit. The skim was still a tad to "sheeny" for me, but it's a minor nit to pick on what I think was a spectacular visual experience.

-sc

[Tom Lowe]

Well for me... Having blue aliens no longer means that the movie will suck. In fact, I want to embrace more new films with blue aliens!

In some ways, Avatar did still have that cartoon vibe to it, but the way that all the elements came together, everything just fits and flows. It's so immersive... The "cartoony" feel that does linger only serves to help with the whole fantastical world of Pandora.

One other thing that I keep thinking about is that with the upcoming Blu-Ray 3D format and home theatre 3D systems, just think of what this means for other future entertainment. Within the next decade there's a good chance that we will have video game environments that are as immersive and detailed as Pandora is in this movie.

I think I'm going to see it again tomorrow...

:cheers2: :wink5:

I knew you'd come around, Jeff.

[Roberto Lequeux]

To be perfectly honest, I felt 3D on Avatar was often a little bit too pronounced for my taste.

While I thought 3D was masterfully used throughout the film, I also feel that I would personally use a slightly lower base. Though so many shots were flawless, by far most of them... but there were several moments when there was too much 3D depth, and it felt out of place.

I also feel I would tone down many of the lesser beats just a tiny little bit, so as to have a bit more contrast left for the most important beats of the story to stand out just a tinie tad more in the 3D layer.

There could be a concern with people feeling cheated after paying more to see it in 3D if they don't get "a lot of 3D"... if so it is a shame, but it also makes lots of sense at this point in time. I suppose that might be changing in the coming years.

At the same time I think there could have been a few more shots with extreme depth in the final battle, not many, just a few more. Toning down other moments and leaving the battle as-is would have also achieved the contrast I would look for.

OK, enough Monday Night quaterbacking James Cameron from me. ROFL (!) :rolleyes5:

To end on a positive note (with so many to chose from):
I love how 3D was used for with the General on his first WTF moment! Heck YES! THAT WAS @%#ing AWESOME!!! There is something that a super wide CU lacks, going wider and tighter doesn't help but hurt instead. Apparently pushing foreground 3D has ALL of that magic with none of the side effects!!!!! I watched it for the second time in 3D by myself and I nearly pulled on the arm of a stranger to ask him if he saw that! :shocked: That was the moment when I thought to my self Crap! I really gotta learn this 3D stuff!!!

Again, thank you James Cameron for manifesting such a fantastic concept. 1.9D would have been fine. :)

[Eren Ozkural]

The only two shots that felt...not gimmicky but where stereography was very pronounced was when a bead of sweat floats in front of Jake's face in Zero G and the POV shot where Selfridge is looking directly into the camera.

I didn't feel uncomfortable or anything but they seemed like the two shots that called attention to themselves purely for stereo reasons.

EDIT: Just realised that this will be an invaluable thread for stereo research during pre production on any film. Once you're familiar with Avatar on 3D Blu-ray etc. you can see gauge peoples reactions to certain shots and know what kind of screen they saw it on, what they thought of other shots etc. to help steer you towards going for a desired stereo efect that the audience will find pleasing.

On the other hand, I can't remember ever seeing a push-pull shot in a 3D movie...and I try to catch as many as I can. Am I being forgetful or is there a reason behind this? I'm assuming that since the central/in focus object doesn't really "move" inter ocular problems wouldn't exist. But then again I'm not a stereographer. Maybe I should do a test in AE...

[Roberto Lequeux]

But in that case I thought it was perfectly justified. It serves to set up the rules of the ride.

[David Mullen ASC]

I don't mind the occasional "cool" 3D effect to show off the process as long as it isn't tacky and unmotivated (like having Brendan Fraser spit his toothpaste into the lens from the POV of the sink drain, in "Journey the the Center of the Earth". That was on the level of "Doctor Tongue's 3D House of Pancakes".)

[Shawn Nelson]

David, presuming you've seen Avatar, would you recommend 3D for your next project if the director were to ask your opinion?

[lee caropolo]

which IMAX theatre? I tried to go see for the second time and was told it was sold out for the week at both 34th & 42nd street locations

Hey chil i went to the one at lincoln square. 1:20 am . Supposedly they are the only theatre equipped with the correct projector for imax! As my friend says all the other theatres aren't really imax. Would have been nice to see it at the ziegfeld. Going again on wednesday!:001_tt1:

[Eren Ozkural]

But in that case I thought it was perfectly justified. It serves to set up the rules of the ride.

Oh definitely, as I mentioned earlier. I appreciate how Cameron helped the audience dip their toes into the third dimension...

1st Shot: Very wide shot of a dreamscape/jungle. Almost no stereo effect whatsoever. Maybe none at all.

2nd Shot: ECU Jake's eye. Subtle stereo effect.
3rd Shot: Cu Jake/sweat. The focus pull allows our eyes to adjust to changing convergence mid shot in a space without a lot of visual information.
4th Shot: Jake is pulled out of stasis and we have a wonderful twisting shot showing the stereo effect at it's fullest with lots of depth cues.

It's like the scene where the lab techs are testing the Avatars' hand/eye coordination. This process allows our eyes to kind of calibrate themselves gently, get used to this new viewpoint rather than throwing us out to the stereo jungle

[Roberto Lequeux]

the stereo jungle

And what an amazing tool 3D is for when this finally happens. The first few shots of Jake walking through the jungle with his machine gun was a PERFECT 3D sequence.

[Jesse Korosi]

I just came back from the theater.
That was incredible to say the least.
I have been to a few 3D movies where the glasses icon on the bottom of the screen would pop up to let the viewer know to put on there glasses for a few specific scenes. It will be interesting to see how long it takes before we are looking back at that to laugh.

I cant wait to see the movie again based on the fact that I was surprisingly able to let go and get submerged in the film without the critical eye that I normally watch movies with!

[Jeremy_Sawatzky]

Thanks Michael!!


On the AVATAR note, las night I just could not go to sleep for the life of me, so exited, motivated, inspired, simply put my BRAIN could just not relax, so much so was the amount of neuron stimulation I got from watching AVATAR 3D on IMAX.


It is true that 3D, well done 3D, does stimulate ones mind.

Ketch, i couldnt sleep either, ur the only one so far on this thread that i think enjoyed the movie as much as me, granted u are a successful filmaker and im not...yet :) u were probably POURING over ideas in your head going to sleep, i just wanted to go live on pandora rofl. on another note why is no one commenting on the soundtrack for the movie??? the music was my favourite part BY FAR- not to say the whole movie wasnt ASTONISHING. I absolutly loved the flying scene just because of the music, i just wanted to close my eyes but i couldnt because it looked so incredible. there is this underlying chorus that occurs in most of the major scenes and i absolutly love it. I will probably see this movie 4 times and on top of that i will buy the blueray for sure. and i wont torrent it. they deserve my money. Now im just excited to go see it again. :biggrin:

[David Mullen ASC]

David, presuming you've seen Avatar, would you recommend 3D for your next project if the director were to ask your opinion?

It just depends -- shooting 3D is more work, needs more crew (you have a lot more camera bodies to deal with, and more footage), it may be the wrong format for a small intimate shoot on a short schedule. It would be a little like proposing that a small indie movie shoot in 65mm -- it might be cool, it might look fantastic, but it may not be justified. You don't want to be jerking-off by picking a format just because it's cool, if it's more work and expense as well.

Also, it tends to mean shooting digitally, though in theory one could still shoot on film.

For example, the last two movies I interviewed for both were gritty urban dramas about low-life characters in small rooms, and they were mainly performance pieces, the directors expressed a desire for the camera style to be simple and unobtrusive. So those weren't projects where my first thought would be to propose 3D.

However, I also believe in the notion of avoiding cliche by making atypical choices. In many ways, the best 3D directing I've ever seen, besides Cameron's work on "Avatar", was Hitchcock's directing of "Dial M for Murder", which is a small suspense drama set in a few rooms. Based on a stage play, rather than "open it up" for the big screen, he shot it in 3D, though most people haven't seen it that way. He does his normal trick shots using composition to build suspense, but the effect is increased in 3D. For example, in one scene, Ray Milland has to steal a house key from Grace Kelly's purse and Hitchcock put the purse in the foreground and Grace Kelly in the background, distracted because she's talking to someone else as Milland keeps trying to reach into the purse. In 3D, that purse in the foreground takes on even more dramatic weight and power.

So it would be interesting to do a small suspense drama or thriller in 3D. But for a straight drama, it may be a distraction.

[KETCH ROSSi]

Ketch, i couldnt sleep either, ur the only one so far on this thread that i think enjoyed the movie as much as me, granted u are a successful filmaker and im not...yet :) u were probably POURING over ideas in your head going to sleep, i just wanted to go live on pandora rofl. on another note why is no one commenting on the soundtrack for the movie??? the music was my favourite part BY FAR- not to say the whole movie wasnt ASTONISHING. I absolutly loved the flying scene just because of the music, i just wanted to close my eyes but i couldnt because it looked so incredible. there is this underlying chorus that occurs in most of the major scenes and i absolutly love it. I will probably see this movie 4 times and on top of that i will buy the blueray for sure. and i wont torrent it. they deserve my money. Now im just excited to go see it again. :biggrin:

He he Jeremy, definitely tone of ideas were going true my head, but i'm far from being an affirmed Filmmaker, will be one soon, that I can guarantee, but not yet.

One of the reason was that I was truly blown away by the reality and closeness of Pandora's situation to many of our own, very sad and absolutely true.

I'm in the process of finalizing few projects, of which I can't yet discuss, but when I will more of an understanding of why I couldn't sleep will come to know.

I have been working against a strong current, as making a 3D film, as David mention is not always the right choice, especially for the Independent Filmmaker like myself, no matter if I have a studio or not, I'm not a Major studio, not yet, but nonetheless Avatar has inspired me to continue to push forward to make my first Drama film a 3D film, so will see.

On the sound Tracks note, yes totally agree, I had goose bumps more then once, coming from the action, the message felt at the particular moment for what was happening, and as well in more then one occasion do to the ramping sound tracks entirely transporting me in a world of emotion.

[Gavin Greenwalt]

I think I'm in Avatar withdrawl.

But my fix is sold out and I don't have any free time.

[Hrvoje Simic]

Though "Avatar" is a great movie, it bugs me a bit that ALL big-budget science fiction has to be an action-adventure movie to sell tickets worldwide. We rarely get big-budget cerebral experiences like "2001" or "Solaris" much anymore.

I share the same feeling about sci-fi being concentrated around most common type of action-adventure. However, this movie may not be the typical example IMO.

Is there any chance that "action adventure" packaging in Avatar's case brings potential "prejudicial vale" over what is actual cerebral experience? In my opinon, "2001" and "Solaris" have less different genre elements which helps in concentrating on specific aspect of the movie, while Avatar has multitude. Of course, it is debatable and prone to subjective perception and I'm sure someone could find a deep message in "Huge Robots" movie also, but Cameron does seem like a specific case. Abyss, Terminator, Aliens, even Strange Days - all had "something special", making them stand out, not just the special effects.

Cameron quote on Abyss:

Omni: When did you happen upon the Friedrich Nietzsche quote you use to open the screenplay: "If you stare into the abyss long enough, the abyss starts to stare into you"?

Cameron: That's the movie. You go into the deepest, darkest part of the ocean to confront the monster, and the monster is you. You go down to confront the aliens, and all they do is hold up a mirror and show you how fucked up you are.


This doesn't seem like a shallow thought for a brainless adventure movie.


Cameron quote on Avatar:

I think there’s a lot of the wonderful history of the human race written in blood. You go back to the Roman Empire and further where we have this tendency to take what we want without asking, as Jake says. I see that as a broader metaphor, not as intensely politicised as some people might take it, but broader in that that’s how we treat the modern world. There’s a sense of entitlement. We’re here, we’re big, we’ve got the guns, the brains, there’s a sense of entitlement there fore we’re entitled to do every damn thing on this planet and that’s not how it works. And we’re going to learn that the hard way, unless we wise up and start seeking a life that’s in balance with the natural cycles of life on earth. This is the challenge before us.

The film espouses this kind of love-hate relationship with technology. The film uses technology to tell the story that is a celebration of nature, which is an irony in and of itself. But, I think that it’s not that technology is bad, it’s not that that a technological civilization is bad, it’s that we need to be in control of the technological process. We’re not going to be able to just rip our clothes off and run back into the wilderness. First of all, there’s no wilderness left. Second of all, that’s not going to work for 8 billion people. So, we’re going to have to think our way out of this using technology and science. We we’re also going to need to be human about it, get in touch with our emotions and with our understanding of each other. Part of the theme of the film, I think, is symbolised by the fact that it begins and ends with the characters eyes opening. It’s about a change of perception and about choices that are made once that perception has been changed.

Movie quote:
"All energy is just borrowed"

So, once we go beyond the "action adventure" wrapping, drawing a parallel between human nervous system and a structure of a tree, with an allegory tale suggesting the existence of a planetary conscious life form...does not sound brainless at all, quite the opposite actually, plus it's a totally atypical premise for a Hollywood blockbuster.

Some may perceive this movie as strictly eye candy, some as environmental message, some as ethical question, some as one night amusement, some as movie that makes you think, but it may also be all of that at the same time.

From my perspective - the author of the story who studied physics, natural sciences and majored philosophy, and envisioned and developed cutting edge storytelling technology just uses action and adventure in a different, deeper way, also having fun while storytelling. Inner child and inner scientist creating together. I think Cameron intentionally chose the balance of both instead of stripped extremes in any direction.

[David Rasberry]

I just came back from the theater.
That was incredible to say the least.

I cant wait to see the movie again based on the fact that I was surprisingly able to let go and get submerged in the film without the critical eye that I normally watch movies with!

That was my experience too. Very immersive and engaging. Saw it on a 60ft screen in Real3d. Now I want to make the trip to see in an IMAX theater just to experience the larger field of view. Truly spectacular in any case.

[KETCH ROSSi]

Just wanted to take a sec. to say that I have miss understood Roberto's post as He explained to me that offending me was not absolutely his intention..

Oh and He wished me Marry Christmas :~)

SO thanks Roberto, I much appreciate your gesture, I know at times I'm a bit too sensitive, but I am a respectful person and like to be respected as well.

[DS Williams]

Am I the only one who was extremely attracted to Neytiri???


;)


Her performance carried this film. AMAZING work by Zoe Saldana

[Jeremy_Sawatzky]

Am I the only one who was extremely attracted to Neytiri???

Her performance carried this film. AMAZING work by Zoe Saldana

ROFL - comment of the day

[Eisen Feuer]

I feel that just like cinematography itself, stereo 3D is a developing art, but unlike cinematography, it is still in its infancy as an art. Most of the movie for me was trying way too hard to make things pop.

There was however ONE shot that had me in utter awe: the first shot where they are in the prison cell and the camera is dollying toward the glass. It wasn't pronounced, I'd say it was even subtle, but it was completely immersive. I was there, moving toward the glass. I clutched my heart over it. That's what I think 3D should be, a way of immersing your audience, whereas I felt a lot of Avatar was playing toward the gimmicky pop-up book side of 3D. But, as long as 3D is commercially geared towards being that extra bang for your buck rather than simply a more immersive way of filmmaking, 3D will remain in said infancy.

[Milan Spasic]

I give a lot of credit to Cameron here for "sneaking in" all the spirituality, anti-imperialist and nature-worship stuff, into a film that will be seen globally by hundreds of millions of people. I mean, parts of "Avatar" really do play out like "Baraka in Space."

Funny. That reminds me of the old communist days were some directors were given a special credit (by dissidents) for "sneaking in" spirituality and anti-communist stuff.

Substitute a communist dictator with a corporation and there you have it.

Somebody should make a "sneaky" film about it. Really.

[Christopher Grant Harvey]

Just saw it again and the wonder was still present.

[Christopher VanDyke]

I'm surprised no one has made a comment about unobtainium yet. Perhaps something along the lines of "I bet I know who was responsible for using up all the unobtainium on Earth."

[jaadgy akanni]

I'm surprised no one has made a comment about unobtainium yet. Perhaps something along the lines of "I bet I know who was responsible for using up all the unobtainium on Earth."

Hahaha...I'm so tempted to say...