Avatar: The Way of Water | 16 DEC 2022 | Don't worry guys, critics like it

[Plain Old Tele]

120fps with laser projection gives you a bright smooth image that feels 3D without actually being 3D.

It's a moot point because Cameron's not shooting 120, but it's also worth pointing out that HFR has made significant progress since AUJ (and it may also be worth pointing out that the HFR demo that wowed people was Cameron's, not Jackson's.)

[Elessar]

120fps with laser projection gives you a bright smooth image that feels 3D without actually being 3D.

 

Sorry but that sounds like marketing speak. 2D remains 2D, no matter what you do, it's never going to come close to actual 3D, because there's no depth information for your brain. As for brighter, i'm pretty sure that's more due to the laser projection.

 

Jackson tweaked the color grading to make it look more filmic, whatever that means. That didn't sway people that find the smoother movement unnatural (ironic, since it's rather more natural) - that's the main problem for them. And that won't change, whether PJ or Cameron is behind the camera, it's inherent in HFR.

Edited December 28, 2014 by Elessar

[iceroll]

Every year it gets pushed back, its box office potential diminishes IMO. By 2017, the buzz from the original Avatar will be nearly dead and it probably won't look much better than other blockbusters.

[Neo]

Step 1: figure out when the movie will actually be ready

Step 1: Just having fun, predicting when the movie can come out.

[Neo]

Every year it gets pushed back, its box office potential diminishes IMO. By 2017, the buzz from the original Avatar will be nearly dead and it probably won't look much better than other blockbusters.

Terminator 2. Nuff said.

[Neo]

120fps with laser projection gives you a bright smooth image that feels 3D without actually being 3D.

It's a moot point because Cameron's not shooting 120, but it's also worth pointing out that HFR has made significant progress since AUJ (and it may also be worth pointing out that the HFR demo that wowed people was Cameron's, not Jackson's.)

The HFR in BOTFA wasn't great.

[Deep Wang]

120fps with laser projection gives you a bright smooth image that feels 3D without actually being 3D.

It's a moot point because Cameron's not shooting 120, but it's also worth pointing out that HFR has made significant progress since AUJ (and it may also be worth pointing out that the HFR demo that wowed people was Cameron's, not Jackson's.)

I'm gonna drink whatever Kool-Aid Cameron gives me and I'm sure he's gonna show everyone how it's done.

[SchumacherFTW]

The HFR in BOTFA wasn't great.

I didn't even notice it after the Warner Bros logo.

[The Panda]

Terminator 2. Nuff said.

Avatar is no Terminator (plus the first Terminator was very small).

If Avatar 2 can't make 2016 or 2017 it'll be in trouble for the pure fact the last was so far away.

[Plain Old Tele]

Sorry but that sounds like marketing speak. 2D remains 2D, no matter what you do, it's never going to come close to actual 3D, because there's no depth information for your brain. As for brighter, i'm pretty sure that's more due to the laser projection.

Jackson tweaked the color grading to make it look more filmic, whatever that means. That didn't sway people that find the smoother movement unnatural (ironic, since it's rather more natural) - that's the main problem for them. And that won't change, whether PJ or Cameron is behind the camera, it's inherent in HFR.

I think Trumbull knows what he's talking about in terms of image.

[stuart360]

Cameron and Fox will know how to get the buzz growing when the marketing starts. Plus Cameron makes amazing sequels and he knows all eyes will be on this film come release so expect to be blown through the cinema screen.

 

People always say there is no buzz for the sequel but what exactly are people supposed to talk about?. AVATAR is one film, there is no lore, there isn't decades of comics, books, videogames etc behind it, its one film.

Don't expect much buzz until we get close to launch when the marketing really starts.

[Elessar]

I've heard similar phrases in regards to IMAX, that "the picture is so vivid that it appears 3D". At the end of the day, it's a flat image.

[Elessar]

Cameron and Fox will know how to get the buzz growing when the marketing starts. Plus Cameron makes amazing sequels and he knows all eyes will be on this film come release so expect to be blown through the cinema screen.

 

People always say there is no buzz for the sequel but what exactly are people supposed to talk about?. AVATAR is one film, there is no lore, there isn't decades of comics, books, videogames etc behind it, its one film.

Don't expect much buzz until we get close to launch when the marketing really starts.

 

Agreed.

 

Now i don't expect it to come close to the first one money wise but that's okay. It'll still make a boatload of cash.

 

Avatar sequels never will be "in trouble". They are going to be huge.

Edited December 28, 2014 by Elessar

[stuart360]

I've heard similar phrases in regards to IMAX, that "the picture is so vivid that it appears 3D". At the end of the day, it's a flat image.

To be fair, when i got my 1080p TV a few years ago, i was showing AVATAR to my parents just to show the clarity of detail and both of them asked if it was 3D and that it looked 3D to them (it was the part where Jake is walking through the forest and Neytiri is in the tree aiming her bow at him).

I had a good look myself and i agreed that the image did have a very 3D look to it, the image quality and clarity really gave that illusion.

[Deep Wang]

To be fair, when i got my 1080p TV a few years ago, i was showing AVATAR to my parents just to show the clarity of detail and both of them asked if it was 3D and that it looked 3D to them (it was the part where Jake is walking through the forest and Neytiri is in the tree aiming her bow at him).

I had a good look myself and i agreed that the image did have a very 3D look to it, the image quality and clarity really gave that illusion.

Wall•E was one of the first blurays I ever had and I remember there was something like that for me in the early scenes. It's hard to express what you mean, you just have to see it.

[Plain Old Tele]

The effect described is very similar to 15/70 IMAX.... you lose yourself in the image.

[stuart360]

Wall•E was one of the first blurays I ever had and I remember there was something like that for me in the early scenes. It's hard to express what you mean, you just have to see it.

 

I saw Wall-E for the first time this Christmas as it was on TV and i loved the film, it was lovely.

 

Its a shame as i don't watch these cgi cartoon films like Pixar, i ts just something i have grown out of since i grew up and i know i'm missing out on some right gems.

[stuart360]

The effect described is very similar to 15/70 IMAX.... you lose yourself in the image.

 

I think the perfect image quality and clarity combined with a totally artifact free clean image can make some films look almost like a window, like you are looking through an open window to an actual world.

[Elessar]

The effect described is very similar to 15/70 IMAX.... you lose yourself in the image.

 

But it's nothing like actual 3D, where it's actually like a window to another world, something that has depth, that goes into the screen and sometimes stuff that you feel like it's so near you can touch. If you can't see the huge difference, i dunno what to say. Check your theater setup?

[Plain Old Tele]

But it's nothing like actual 3D, where it's actually like a window to another world, something that has depth, that goes into the screen and sometimes stuff that you feel like it's so near you can touch. If you can't see the huge difference, i dunno what to say. Check your theater setup?

I think you're choosing to interpret my comments about Trumbull's comments in a weirdly literal way. I didn't say it *is* 3D, I said the effect is similar. (Not to mention, 3D isn't 3D either, it's manipulating 2D images to create the illusion of depth.)