Thank you James Cameron...

[Vince Twelve]

Oh yeah, music.  It didn't stand out to me as good or bad.  I hardly remember there being music at all, actually (which I suppose could be good or bad, again).

[Darth Mandarb]

Oh yeah, music.  It didn't stand out to me as good or bad.  I hardly remember there being music at all, actually (which I suppose could be good or bad, again).

I actually consider it a good thing when I don't remember the music but, rather, remember emotional involvement with the movie!  To me, that is what music (in a movie) should do!

Another effect that just blew me away and was super subtle: looking through windows.  There were lots of shots through windows looking out onto Pandora, or through canopies of helicopters or big mechas and the glass would have finger (or whatever) smudges on it.  And they just made it feel like the glass was right there in front of you.  It felt like you could move your head slightly to see the details slightly obscured by these smudges.  Pretty cool.

YES!!  This was, by far, my favorite part of the 3D experience!  It created so much depth that I actually got the feeling of being IN the scene.  Nothing has ever come so close before to such sensory stimulation as that.  The scene SPOILER where Jake (riding the dragon thing) threw the one helicopter into the other and it was the cock-pit view of the one about to be struck and you could see the thing coming I actually flinched back in my seat anticipating the impact!  It was amazing!  My heartbeat was actually accelerated!  Most excellent indeed!

On the 3D, though, I was getting a bit of a headache throughout the whole movie.  I didn't have a problem with Coraline, so I suspect it was because I watched this in IMAX.  Here's my big problem with 3D movies:
...
But when you watch a movie in 3D, your eyes think they can focus on the different things at different depths (and you can!  Changing the focal distance of your eyes brings certain parts of the stereoscopic image into line.)  however, even if you do that, the part of the image that you're focusing on may not be in focus because the director may be focused on something else.  So if you try to focus on, say, a background piece of jungle (which is hard not to do, since you want to soak up all the details of this world) you wind up just focusing a blurred image, which makes your eyes think that they're still not focused even though they are.

I too had this problem (not in IMAX either).  I was getting a bit of eye strain.

My brother and I discussed this on the way home and had very similar ideas as to what you expressed here.  You almost have to stop watching the movie in the way you used to (where your eyes could wander and take it all in)  You just need to watch the focal point the director wants you to watch.  While this is somewhat limiting I do not mind it so much in trade-off for the overall immersion experience.  I found, about 1/2 way through the movie, that if I just relaxed my eyes and let them follow the focal point my eye strain went away.  But my curiosity always gets the best of me and I needed to keep looking around (in a movie other than this with the AMAZING level of detail it'd probably be far less an issue, but I needed to check out Pandora).  That and I was constantly trying to see if the female Na'vi actually had nipples

I would wager, as this is really the first movie with this technology, that eventually it'll be tweaked to allow for those of us who like to let our eyes roam to take in the entire screen rather than just the focal point.

Personally, I cannot wait to see how this evolves!

[MillsJROSS]

The scenery and immersion in this movie was extremely well done. The plot was ok, it was just a backdrop to the scenery. The characters were cookie cutter, but there were very good moments where Cameron was able to get an emotional response out of me. Regardless, the three hours went by quickly.

I went with the iMAX 3d experience, and didn't have any probems with my vision or eye aches. I'll still have to wait to and see how well it translates on my 32 inch television.

The action scenes were intense and wonderful to watch. The plot, as mentioned, was ok, but it was told well, and it wasn't told in a Hollywood one-liner saturated way that most of these big budget films are prone to overuse. I'd highly recommend going to see this in 3d.

Spoiler

My one real complaint, is that it started out as a science fiction movie and turned into a fantasy movie. The forest backdrop didn't make it fantasy, however, floating mountains? His ability to be absorbed and actually become one of the aliens?

That's not to say fantasy is bad, but I started with the belief that this could be a real world somewhere in the future and ended with the belief that it was pure fiction/fantasy.

[close]

[Nikolas]

Mill: I usually complain about such things and found 2012 to be so outrageous that 'Aramgedon' seemed a documentary compared to that! 2012 was filled with moronic scenes!

Avatar didn't bother me one bit, and I wasn't even thinking "oh... these mountains float", or why, or how... It was the first time for me that I wasn't asking questions really...

BTW, 3-d didn't work THAT well with me. I didn't try to dodge anything, didn't feel so amazing. I would be curious to see it in 2-d just for the shake of comparison...

[Bamby]

Totally amaizing movie! Liked it a LOT! super graphics and 3d effects!

[Nacho]

I just bought the videogame... Where can I get 3-d glasses???

[Chicky]

I just bought the videogame... Where can I get 3-d glasses???

You need an LED TV iirc and there are lots of different types of 3D glasses (red-blue,red-green,colorless tinted etc)

[Darth Mandarb]

I came very close to walking out of the theater with 2012.  Right at the beginning, "The nutrinos are heating the earth's core!".  The neutrinos?  Seriously?  That's the best you could come up with? It was just downhill from there but the visuals were pleasing, so I soldiered through it.

I hate to say it, 'cause he's made some movies I love (Stargate, The Patriot) but I think Emmerich has lost his touch.

SPOILERS AHEAD

Mills - interesting perspective... I remember just thinking how cool the floating rocks looked and how they sort of just "fit" on Pandora (they mentioned lower gravity and strange minerals so I just accepted it as part of that).  I did get the mythical/fantasy feeling at the end when the "goddess" transferred Jake into the avatar and let his human body die but it didn't bother me at all as the movie, up to that point, had been sort of hammering home that Pandora (and by extension the na'vi) was not like Earth and humans and that the entire planet was "connected".  It started off with a very technological tone (act I) showing the colonization of Pandora and the greedy humans and their toys, then shifted seamlessly into a [gloriously non-offensive] treehugger mode (act II) as Jake fell in love with Pandora and The People and then ended on a spiritual/fate tone (act III) after many explosions of course!

I don't know, for me it just worked on all levels

Nacho - I can't wait to play video games with this style of 3D.  I think some game companies are going to get sued when some idiots try to duck under something coming at them and get concussions from bangin' their heads on their keyboards

I sense an AGS plug in for this 3D stuff    Get working all you module builders out there!!

[Nikolas]

I came very close to walking out of the theater with 2012.  Right at the beginning, "The nutrinos are heating the earth's core!".  The neutrinos?  Seriously?  That's the best you could come up with? It was just downhill from there but the visuals were pleasing, so I soldiered through it.

I didn't mind the initial premise (the world is coming to an end because some kind of neutrinos BS are... blah blah.

SPOILERS but who cares about such a bad movie?

But I did mind the repeated 'escape' from scratch just secs before the rest of the world go boom. The buildings cut in half, but yes, lights were still on. The underwater scenes that seemd to last forever. The gigantic huge machine, build years in advance, yes cannot work because a MF decided to stop one gear... The tidal wave of 1 km high, overpassing Everest. The monks praying outside in mount Everest (or close by anyways) and drinking tea! The sad loss of the Russian gal, which was just 'forgotten' from the movie producers (nobody seemd to give a shit that she died). Poor plastic surgeon dies and secs later the wife is back with the writer!

[Nacho]

@Chicky: Thanks... I have the TV, now I just need the glasses

@Darth: I walked out the cinema with last DeNiro's... Which is the English name? "Something happens in Hollywood" or something like that... Terrible...

[MrColossal]

Jess and I just saw it tonight. It's interesting to read other people's feelings of the movie but I'm starting to feel like the only person who was completely bored of the movie.

I don't write this to try and shit on anyone's parade because I hate when people enter a conversation "I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU LIKED THAT!! IT WAS HORRIBLE!" and I don't mean to sound like that. People are writing their feelings on the movie and these are mine.

It wasn't a bad movie. VanHelsing was a bad movie, the final 2 Matrix movies were bad in my opinion. This was just middle of the road. It was Ferngully only they were big instead of small! I kid I kid   If this movie changes Hollywood I guess people will just stop writing harder. I kid I kid... If this movie changes Hollywood I hope I get to watch a 3d pretend nature documentary set on a distant planet with a robot Attenborough telling about it. That I am serious about!

I see you... Put on some pants!

[Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens]

I hope I get to watch a 3d pretend nature documentary set on a distant planet with a robot Attenborough telling about it

For some reason I imagine The Attenbot 2000 looking strikingly like Tik-Tok from Return to Oz:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycaWhlHbhrg

complete with the dashing moustache.

[Theme]

Just watched the movie
I liked the movie but didn't think it was "The movie"
But it's a good movie

I didnt watch in 3D, but I guess for me the 3D stuff don't surprise me.
The CG characters animation and some expression were really great

Spoiler

I think that should be more blood there and they should have killed everyone in the american base in the end, it was a war. It would add more realistic feel to the movie.

[close]

o/

[Nacho]

Don't worry, Eric... :I I Felt bored by it at certain moments, but I enjoyed it, overally...

[Bulbapuck]

If you've seen the movie, I'm sure you'll enjoy this:
http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/videolinks/thatguywiththeglasses/bum-reviews/15043-ep036

I haven't seen it yet so I don't have an opinion.

[Misj']

Saw it today (3D IMAX)...was slightly sceptical beforehand (I tend to be that with over-hyped movies), and felt empty afterwards (and not in a good way).

I'm glad so many of you people liked it, because I have to completely disagree. At some point during the final battle all I could think was: I wish it's over. And to be honest, I think that's about the biggest insult you can give a director.

The 3D felt very 3D to me (I was not immersed into the world at any time); it always felt like I was watching a computer game rather than a movie. The world had a lot of plants, but at the same time felt very empty (unless if you count flies, because flies (particularly those giving light) were everywhere).

The story was predictable (including who was to die and who was to survive), and - in my opinion - badly paced (as I said, during the grand final battle I was bored (there was really no thrill for me (no, it's not Michael Mann, but it's not interesting either)) and I wished it would all be over already). Of course it's difficult to pace a story well if you predict everything way way before it happens...and I knew just about nothing about the story going in.

As for the 3D (glasses) vs 2D...3D was a waste, I think (I of course base this only on the 3D experience, since I really don't want to watch this movie again). There was little to no use of the extra dimension except several shots where the director put stuff (like hands) uselessly in front of the view. Of course I realise that I base my comment solely on the 3D (IMAX) version, so maybe the 3D was used that well that I just didn't realize it...except when Cameron missed the mark...that's certainly possible (although I would find it unlikely).

In short, I don't think this movie has revolutionized movies, and I certainly hope this won't be the future. I know it does well, and I know Cameron wants to make a trilogy, but I really have no desire to visit this world again. Simply because I did not find it captivating.



Ps. I just saw it, so my sentiments regarding the disappointment with this movie may be bigger than they deserve (it's certainly not the worst movie I ever saw...the worst I've seen this year, but it's also the only one yet, so there aren't any contenders). But I'm exactly on the other end of the spectrum than Darth's initial post: it's just that not-good. Casting was good (except for Duke Nukem who looked and acted exactly as Duke Nukem), on the technical aspect there was a lot done right in this movie, and several environmental shots (that did not include animals or blue people) were nice. But it just wasn't good enough. There was no magic.

Pps. And now I'll end my rant. I know many people liked/loved this movie, and I hope I didn't spoil anyone's memory of it. While I may not want to visit this world again, I know many of you do.

[Stupot]

I saw Avatar a couple of days ago and really loved it.  I felt the story was slightly generic sci-fi/fantasy fare, the premise of which was nothing special  But it was dealt with very well and I always felt immersed and involved.  The visuals were amazing, as I think the rest of the world has already worked out, so they don't need me to tell them.

I did have one tiny gripe.  The 3D was by far some of the best 3D I've ever seen, but rarely did anything actually seem to come right out in front of me.  In the adverts and trailers at the beginning, there was an advert for Sky, and the Sky logo came right out of the screen and was so close to my nose I felt I could have reached out and touched it.  Same thing with the Cadbury's advert.  But in the actual feature they rarely took advantage of this.  Certainly there was a long of 'depth', but there didn't seem to be a lot of what I'm going to call 'fronth'.  There was a bit, but I felt they should have exploitd that more.

Like I say, it's a tiny gripe...

Awesome film though, and I'm happy to be able to say that I've seen it.

[InCreator]

Saw it.
Not good, not bad. I'd say "watchable".

Story was on the lame side - done hundreds of times (Dances with wolves, anyone?), some effects and props were really boring imo (like chopper/plane things and flying animals) but some were really good (tree shattering scene) and glowing forest/mushroom things at night.

3D-effect was... someplace (especially start) great, most of the time almost unnoticeable and few places downright annoying, like when ashes from tree rained down... It felt very much like it was placed there just to remind you that it's 3D and it irritated my eyes and senses instead of coming as awesome.
But I admit that at few moments, I raised my 3D glasses and though that it could be hi-quality 2D instead.

But what I do find genius about this movie is how it tries to push everyone's buttons, from green movement to anti-war to anti-colonization  to anti-genocide to anti-war-for-oil-stuff to heavy appeal from MMORPG players -- avatar cat-people race was almost exactly Khajiit from TES4:Oblivion, bow fight sequence reminded very much night elf scene from World of Warcraft intro, flying islands were straight outta Netstorm, etc. I none of the occurrences were intentional - it makes this movie very unoriginal.

I don't regret seeing this, but don't care much to see it again.
I would had definitely enjoy this more if it wasn't so dumbed down, military/mercs really felt/acted like one and natives too. All the simplicity felt a bit too childish and tale-like.

Bottom line - overhyped. It's no better or worse than most of the movies previous year.

[Darth Mandarb]

I did have one tiny gripe.  The 3D was by far some of the best 3D I've ever seen, but rarely did anything actually seem to come right out in front of me.  In the adverts and trailers at the beginning, there was an advert for Sky, and the Sky logo came right out of the screen and was so close to my nose I felt I could have reached out and touched it.  Same thing with the Cadbury's advert.  But in the actual feature they rarely took advantage of this.  Certainly there was a long of 'depth', but there didn't seem to be a lot of what I'm going to call 'fronth'.  There was a bit, but I felt they should have exploitd that more.

I am actually glad the movie didn't do this!  I find the, "wow it's coming right at me!" to be over-done in past versions of 3D.  Sure it's neat, but I think it's more of a gimmick.  I don't think Cameron's intention was to make you recoil in your seat from objects flying in your face, but more to just immerse you in the experience.  To give it depth.  And he very much accomplished that.

[TheJBurger]

I saw it in IMAX/3D.

If I tried to judge Avatar as a "film," taking into account entertainment, originality, plot and all that other nonsense, I probably wouldn't like it that much.

It was only when I was out of the theater several hours later did I realize I wasn't in Pandora anymore. For nearly 3 hours I was in that world, fully immersed, and part of its habitat. For that, I would say the film succeeded, not because of its plot, or characters, or anything else strictly related to film. Because to me, Avatar is not really a movie--it's an experience.