The Avatar Blu-ray Release Thread

[Marcus Wright]

Originally Posted by Gandalf Stormcrow

Which would make the barebones release a collector's item in its own right.

Haha, so true.

[LordoftheRings]

...Maybe I should buy few more copies?

[Spymaster]

Originally Posted by Gandalf Stormcrow

Which would make the barebones release a collector's item in its own right.

Yeah, a limited edition of a hundred million copies. Cool!

[odvan]

Originally Posted by ChuckT43

Some parts look so directed at 3d and too fake ...

Saw 3 times in Imax 3D and almost 2/3 in BD.

Which parts exactly you found fake and directed only for 3D?

[ChuckT43]

Originally Posted by odvan

Saw 3 times in Imax 3D and almost 2/3 in BD.

Which parts exactly you found fake and directed only for 3D?

I only sat through the entire film once as I borrowed it and did not buy it. However I was re-visiting a part last night where I thought the audio was really good. The part where the main male character is in his avatar alone in the forest and the dog like things surround him. Some clips where you see fern like bushes look as though they were pasted on. Also the dog things themselves seem to look pasted on at times. My point is that this film was shot for 3d and sometimes it shows. Also these things aren't real and sometimes that shows. I'm sure when viewed in 3d these parts will look great. I did enjoy the video quality in 2d though.

[Sir Platypus]

Having seen it twice in 3D, I have to say that just from seeing the ads, there is a scene in which the spinny-bugs (no clue if they have a name, but James Cameron can call them spinny-bugs in cannon if he gives me five bucks) fly "towards the camera" and go across the screen from one side to the other. This scene looked amazing in 3D and makes the world feel a bit "real", but when the depth is taken away the bugs seem a bit useless, and a bit distracting. It doesn't make the film worse by any margin, but it's just a minor example I noticed.

[Marcus Wright]

Originally Posted by ChuckT43

I only sat through the entire film once as I borrowed it and did not buy it. However I was re-visiting a part last night where I thought the audio was really good. The part where the main male character is in his avatar alone in the forest and the dog like things surround him. Some clips where you see fern like bushes look as though they were pasted on. Also the dog things themselves seem to look pasted on at times. My point is that this film was shot for 3d and sometimes it shows. Also these things aren't real and sometimes that shows. I'm sure when viewed in 3d these parts will look great. I did enjoy the video quality in 2d though.

Dont agree. I think that if you see that it was obviously shot for 3d, than its good. If you didnt see that, this film wouldnt feel as the most 3 dimensial blu ray ever on 2d hdtvs.

[sejanus]

I'm reasonably sure I heard cameron say the movie was shot for 2D and they did the 3d work in post for the cinemas.

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by sejanus

I'm reasonably sure I heard cameron say the movie was shot for 2D and they did the 3d work in post for the cinemas.

Well you are wrong, it was even shot with 3D cameras and it is intended for people to watch it in 3D.

[sejanus]

I must have the quote mixed up, He was saying something about the 2d side . I'll try and dig it up.

[DaViD Boulet]

Originally Posted by sejanus

I'm reasonably sure I heard cameron say the movie was shot for 2D and they did the 3d work in post for the cinemas.

This is completely false. AVATAR was shot with 3D cameras for true stereo vision... you don't do that "in post".

What Cameron has said is that he filmed it to succeed first and foremost as a 2D film... meaning that it wasn't a showcase for 3D gimmickry and that the 2D presentation could and should be able to be watched and enjoyed on its own. However, the 3D element was planned from the beginning, and every scene was viewed by he and the cinematographer in 3D to make sure that it worked properly in both 2D and 3D, and of course 3D is Cameron's preferred means for the film to be viewed for his fullest intended experience.

[sejanus]

Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet

What Cameron has said is that he filmed it to succeed first and foremost as a 2D film...

I think that must be the bit I got mixed up with.

[DaViD Boulet]

Originally Posted by sejanus

I think that must be the bit I got mixed up with.

the tricky part is that if you only hear that one comment, it makes it sound like Cameron didn't really care about 3D or that 3D was an after-thought... neither which is the case as the 3D version represents Cameron's fullest vision. What he meant by having the film succeed first and foremost in 2D was that he didn't want the film to depend on 3D, but for 3D to add to it as an already-effective film.

[garyrc]

I saw it in 3D, and wished I'd seen it in 2D.

Not that I don't like 3D. 3D was effective in Hitchcock's Dial M for Murder at the York in S.F. It was effective in all of Lenny Lipton's experimental 3D films at the San Francisco Art Institute. It was effective in Disneyland in questionable films like Captain EO (Michael Jackson) and some cartoons (yes, filmed in 3D) they showed there in 1957. It was effective in the Air and Space center in McMinville. But it was annoying and headache provoking in Avatar (a film I liked) at the theater I went to .... because they handed out the world's worst 3D glasses, which produced a consistent glare on highly polished dark plastic frames whenever there was a light object on the screen.

When alternating eye, mechanized home 3D glasses come out (for a couple of hundred dollars each!) they had better be glare free!

[odvan]

Originally Posted by garyrc

I saw it in 3D, and wished I'd seen it in 2D.

Not that I don't like 3D. 3D was effective in Hitchcock's Dial M for Murder at the York in S.F. It was effective in all of Lenny Lipton's experimental 3D films at the San Francisco Art Institute. It was effective in Disneyland in questionable films like Captain EO (Michael Jackson) and some cartoons (yes, filmed in 3D) they showed there in 1957. It was effective in the Air and Space center in McMinville. But it was annoying and headache provoking in Avatar (a film I liked) at the theater I went to .... because they handed out the world's worst 3D glasses, which produced a consistent glare on highly polished dark plastic frames whenever there was a light object on the screen.

When alternating eye, mechanized home 3D glasses come out (for a couple of hundred dollars each!) they had better be glare free!

Maybe you choose the wrong cinema or you sat on the first raw. In August check the movie in proper Imax in the center or back rows - it's fantastic experience.

[aiman04]

Blu-ray Sales, May 17-23: Avatar Resists on BD

[ClaytonMG]

Originally Posted by Marcus Wright

Dont agree. I think that if you see that it was obviously shot for 3d, than its good. If you didnt see that, this film wouldnt feel as the most 3 dimensial blu ray ever on 2d hdtvs.

I disagree. When something is obviously only in the film to wow the audience with 3D, it becomes distracting for me (even if I am viewing it in 3D, but more so when I see it in 2D).

In Avatar, there were only a few moments where I went "well this was only in here to show people the 3D effects" but it wasn't nearly what other movies are doing (like Shrek Goes Fourth: Forever After: The Final Chapter: In 3D, or the upcoming Despicable Me or more so Megamind).

[ClaytonMG]

Originally Posted by sejanus

I think that must be the bit I got mixed up with.

Maybe you read where he said that the 2D version is brighter and more vibrant? He said it's a trade-off, with 3D you have a duller picture but the extra dimension. With 2D, you don't get the 3D but you do get a better picture.

[liljoey90]

Originally Posted by Marcus Wright

Haha, so true.

I held off on buying this movie just because i saw that they are coming out with the Ultimate Edition in November... If this is really going out of print, i wonder if it's worth buying so i can watch it than just buy the Ultimate when it comes out? I hate buying the same movie twice, but at least the one floating around now you won't see all over the place in a few months.. i dont know what i should do.

[MaCruz]

This thread is not a sticky anymore? I guess it's "dying" down, but it will heat up again once the Special Edition comes out.