Avatar post-release discussion - Page 2

Very cool. I have felt very ambivalent about the way scope films have been handled when projected on IMAX. On one hand, I want my field of vision to be totally engulfed! On the other, I want to see the film the way it was originally composed.

Sigh.

Believe it stands for Digital Noise Reduction. Since basically you're taking movies shot on 35mm and blowing it up for projection on a screen meant for IMAX-sized footage, film grain would become too distracting. At least, that's the idea. I've never actually seen 35mm film projected onto an IMAX screen without having been processed in some way.

Actually, it's IMAX DMR, and it stands for "digital re-mastering" (yes, I know the acronym doesn't match). They're taking a standard 35mm print and digitally blowing it up to the larger IMAX frame.

http://www.cineplex.com/Theatres/Mov...X/IMAXDMR.aspx

It actually stands for Digital MEDIA Remastering (DMR). In Avatar's case, however, they wouldn't be blowing up a 35mm print, they'd be going right from the digital HD master.

Same here, I was not expecting this review, not from this site. I was expecting a tepid "it was okay, but nothing special" response.

Can't wait to see Devin's take.

Ok guys! Thanks for clearing that up for me...really appreciate it!

Glenn Kenny's four-star review:

http://www.theauteurs.com/notebook/posts/1326

Excerpts that I liked:

He also only half-jokingly calls the picture a "call for worldwide jihad." Well worth a read.

This seems to be the most political film of the year, according to Jeffrey Wells....

"The political import of Avatar -- and there's no waving this aspect away because it's right in your face start to finish, and especially in the third act -- is ardently left. It is pro-indigenous native, anti-corporate, anti-imperialist, anti-U.S. Iraq War effort, anti-U.S.-in-Afghanistan (and anti-troop-surge-in-that-country, or strongly against the thinking of President Barack Obama and Gen. Stanley McChrystal), anti-rightie, anti-Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld, etc."

I remain skeptical. Living up to that review is going to be harder than living up to Cameron's statements. I ignore director's telling me how great their films are but this review makes me really expect something special.

I'm unaware of Nick's initial thoughts on the look though. My big hang up is that I loath the look... did the film making get you past this particular hang up or did you always like the look so it was never an issue? Just curious... I'll creep your old posts I guess.

Commentary on work like this always depresses me. I remember when the majority view of the country was actually in line with this kind of thinking, when the Gecko "greed is good" was supposed to be shocking and not something MBA assholes quote to each other like hipsters quote Lebowski. The idea that one charismatic old man could convince entire generations of Americans that it is normal and good to be an insane, uncaring assholes and that we've degenerated to the point that we actually debate whether or not torture is a bad thing just utterly depresses.

Gosh, I terribly miss Nick's reviews. Dude, you need to get back on the bandwagon. At least one review a week...how about it?

Shouldn't some of this be in the pre-release thread?

Yeah no kidding. As much as I like the reviews of bad/cult movies, this one was really charming and heart felt.

Hmmmm, Devin's leaving the site, then? First thing that comes to mind.

Nunz clone?

Well that's a good thing for us but I hope it's a good thing for you too...

We have to nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure (of killing all of those troublesome natives that are stopping us from getting those resources that we need to maintain the US way of life ... I mean save the Earth).

It's always funny when films you could argue are anti-corporate are made by some of the most corporate capitalist entities on the planet.

Of course, I think the best example of this was somehow Fox made Fight Club.

I'm still wondering how that one got past the radar.

Well that news just made my weekend.

(that said Nick, I certainly hope the 'something' is a good thing for you and not negative obviously)

Also Nick - do you know anyone who has seen Avatar yet in 2D perchance or is it all 3D screenings at this stage?

So Nick how do you feel about the Oscar nomination predictions that were thrown around last week? A valid perspective?

Absolutely wonderful review, Nick. Thank you.

Thanks also go to Matt M for those Glenn Kenny excerpts. An interesting comparison and one I wouldn't have drawn with Cameron's work, but an apt one nontheless.

And yet, most of those elements were in the scriptment that pre-dated the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. No doubt, Cameron has amped up elements of the script to reflect his POV in the actual making and cutting of the film (which occurred after those wars began), but I can't help but seeing this as the reviewer reading personal inputs into a film they liked.

This film obviously has a green message, and is obviously anti-corporate (did Wells ever see Aliens?), and probably even "violence isn't always the answer (though sometimes it is awesome)", but I doubt it was cut in response to President Obama's speech this week. I think Wells might be reaching on that.

Beyond predictions, is there anything in the movie besides tech that you feel would deserve a nomination? The way you talked up Stephen Lang feels like the role has potential for attention. But then again, it was really more like how fun and awesome he was in the movie as opposed to how 'awards-worthy' he is (whatever that means to anyone).

These are all good questions, but I want to know the answer to the unasked question. And mabe Justin can answer this one better:

Watching the movie, did you ever find yourself picturing a different cast and wondering what might have Biehn?

nick, appreciate your review, which has now more than tickled my interest in catching this at imax. Up until this review i have kinda been in the same boat as devin and what he has expressed in his last article regarding this flick. Maybe the short previews just don't do justice for a film like this and one really has to experience this shit on an imax screen. I guess I'll see about that. I'm actually a bit pumped to catch this now.

This is even better new than the review!

Uh oh...

Nick, did you break the embargo with your review?

Seems like the embargo's been lifted. If not, then pretty much every publication and website around has broken it.

There's no review on slashfilm or AICN.

Whhops, sorry there is one on slashfilm. Ignore me! Didnt see it over there!

Remember the first time you saw Gollum in the Two Towers? Prepare to feel like that again. The Na'Vi are the next step in CG characters, the quality of animation and the detail boggle the mind.

sorry if this has already been spoken of in this thread, but has anyone watched this in both the IMAX 3D and just the digital version at your regular theater? Which one's better to see?

I watched the regular theatre digital 3D version. It looked good. Imax will probably look even better. However, Cameron uses 3D to enhance the cinematography and not as a gimmick. I think the movie will work in all formats.

Not that I've seen the movie yet in any format, but there will most likely be a trade-off when it comes to IMAX. The bigger the image size, the more 'upscaled' the image will look. It was actually kinda distracting when TDK went back and forth between IMAX shots and 35mm shots. Not enough to ruin the experience or anything. But I notice it.

thanks mastro. I never liked wearing those paper 3D glasses and any 3D movies that have come out in the past for that matter b/c they all give me massive headaches. The closest IMAX theater around my area is about 50 mi away, and I'm actually thinking about going there to see this. I really do hope the 3D isn't a gimmick and ruin the movie for me.

You mean the resolution seemed to get worse with the up-scaled image?

Yes, exactly. I didn't realize I worded that poorly.

Watching 35mm footage blown up to IMAX size feels like watching an upscaled DVD on a big HDTV.

Thanks, Nooj. But would that not be the case for Avatar since it was shot digitally? Will it look just as sharp in IMAX as it will projected digitally on smaller screens?

Well, I'm talking about the real IMAX screens projected with IMAX film. The one I go to boasts a screen that's about 6 stories high. The digital IMAX screens will look fine, I'm sure. As would any other movie.

You need to write more reviews Nick, the internet needs more of this film-literate type business. Honestly, Devin is about the best around, but with you stepping up in a more serious mode like this, thoughtfully and passionately, the other sites only exist to show how second best looks. I mean, never give up the funny or the other thousand and a half projects you have going on, just do more of this. Because who needs sleep anyway?

It has been lifted.

My review http://chud.com/articles/articles/21...AKE/Page1.html

A fantastically fair and level-headed 'middling' review. Thanks for the balance.

You made some well thought out points and that was a very level headed review.


I just hope you are wrong.

It doesn't seem like there's a right or wrong here - both positive and negative reviews acknoqledge the somewhat uninspired narrative and creative choices while highlighting the amazing effects. It all boils down to which of those aspects takes precedent for each individual viewer.

It's late here so this will be quick. I thought it was ok. I enjoyed the action bits and the other bits were entertaining enough.

Strangely I kept thinking of Final Fantasy games. They often have these crazy worlds with stuff that looks cool and is completely illogical. They have the hippy gaia crap. They have people with tails. They have giant trees. They are entirely shallow and clumsy in their story telling. But I sorta enjoy Final Fantasy games and I sorta enjoyed this.

Maybe a 7.5/10

3D is still a gimmick IMO.