Darth Lars
Master Member
For me, the Avatar franchise is tainted. It ushered in the 3D craze in cinemas, and that is something that I can't forget or forgive.
AVATAR 2: THE WAY OF WATER (2022)
- Thread starter peterquill
- Start date
Mottrex
Sr Member
I think that was The House of Wax..
I don't mind 3D cinema, biggest gripe is the loss of brightness and clarity wearing those polarized lenses.
However, I remember everyone making 3D capable TVs around that time too and they were all hot garbage lol
Mottrex
Sr Member
The House of Wax?
Mottrex
Sr Member
Nope... FrozenThe House of Wax?
Here's the thing..
I watched it with the kids and my wife, at the end of the movie I asked her if she enjoy it and she said the 3D wasn't very good...
I checked her glasses which use batteries to work and...
She hadn't turned them on so was watching a blurry image for the whole movie!
Lmfao poor thing, that’s the crux of those active glasses 3D tvsNope... Frozen
Here's the thing..
I watched it with the kids and my wife, at the end of the movie I asked her if she enjoy it and she said the 3D wasn't very good...
I checked her glasses which use batteries to work and...
She hadn't turned them on so was watching a blurry image for the whole movie!
Mottrex
Sr Member
Yeah but on the plus side it has a very good upscale setting they call motion plus which is great but slightly unnerving... Making any content look like it was shot yesterday, it does take the polish of classic movies..
I usually turned it off as the frame rate could look unnatural.
Gimpdiggity
Master Member
It’s been a long time…but isn’t that what happened at the end of the first one? Didn’t they transfer Jake into the Na’Vi body like…completely?
Mottrex
Sr Member
Not sure.. but Sigourney must have been as her body died ?
It's been a while since I watched it.
I just watched it for the first time and that's what happened. Jake's body was transferred the same way they tried to do with Sigourney's. I thought it was okay, but not the best movie I ever saw. I just wanted to be able to say I saw it.
Mottrex
Sr Member
I g
I have a Super Hi Def 4K projector with nvidia shield 4K upscaling device so yeah I might have to wait a few months but a movie has to be pretty special to get me to a Theatre and then it would have to be on IMAX otherwise its just not worth the effort..
I guess back then it was an Event movie.. Since then the general population has bigger and better Home cinema and TV set ups..
I have a Super Hi Def 4K projector with nvidia shield 4K upscaling device so yeah I might have to wait a few months but a movie has to be pretty special to get me to a Theatre and then it would have to be on IMAX otherwise its just not worth the effort..
In the last 20 years the only movies I've gone to see at the theater are Star Wars and a couple Terminator movies. Now SW isn't even worth going to see.
I'm not saying Avatar was a bad movie, far from it, I just don't think it lived up to the hype I'd been hearing all these years.
I'm not saying Avatar was a bad movie, far from it, I just don't think it lived up to the hype I'd been hearing all these years.
Cephus
Master Member
The last movie I saw in a theater was the first Transformers in 2007, and that was only because we were on a road trip and wanted to stop somewhere with air conditioning. No movie is worth it anymore, especially any movie that has come out in the past 20 years.
IMO part of the problem (for theaters today) is that it's harder to predict the quality of a movie before you spend the money. 30 years ago you could see a quick TV commercial and have decent odds of guessing the quality.
Today there's never any knowing based on the marketing. It's a crap shoot even when you look at clips of the actors & subject matter. And a lot of the critic reviews have been bought, including in places that used to be trustworthy. I think it all fuels a perception that modern movies are worse than they really are.
Today there's never any knowing based on the marketing. It's a crap shoot even when you look at clips of the actors & subject matter. And a lot of the critic reviews have been bought, including in places that used to be trustworthy. I think it all fuels a perception that modern movies are worse than they really are.
Gimpdiggity
Master Member
I think this really sums up the film and it’s popularity. It was so talked about that it actually made you feel like you were going to really miss out if you didn’t end up seeing it in the theater.
Hell, a guy I work with saw it in theaters like 13 times. He went every night for the first week with different groups of friends.
As I’ve said before, I enjoyed it…but it’s not something I’ve watched regularly since I saw it in the theater that first time. It was entertaining, but I think a lot of that was just from the spectacle of it…and once I’d experienced it, it lost a lot of that “awe factor” that it had for me.
cboath
Master Member
I'd gather that like the first one, this was likely shot in imax 3D. All other presentations will be converted. It's what made that 3D so good - it was shot that way. Everything else is usually a conversion from 2D.
cboath
Master Member
Well, yeah, when you make something out to be completely different from what it is, people have stronger negative reactions. Whether it's paid for reviews, or trailers cut to make something out to be completely different from the actual product. Something may not be good, but if it's sold as great and you're misled, then you see it and it's just not good, you think it's terrible because it's far from what you were told it was.
Mottrex
Sr Member
And suffers greatly.. There was a time when almost every big release was 3D..
I must admit I prolly saw quite a few..
HP stood out for me..
peterquill
Well-Known Member
the trailer is here, looks good
Similar threads
