|
Avatar - The trailer is out...
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Acton |
http://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi2804482585/
I have been looking forward to this ever since I heard Cameron was doing it a year or so ago.
But does anyone else think the trailer, and hence the film, looks a bit ? The trailer was going well though until it went all CGI.
But despite what I think of the trailer, it will be a brilliant film.......because its Cameron :p. |
|
|
| owien |
| well it looks like a combo of hot and from that clip you put up,but i would defo still watch it time will tell i guess. |
|
|
| Bernd_Gradish |
I just came back from the 16 Minute screening of Avatar and cannot wait to see the whole thing!
At the end, when they showed the teaser trailer with that score I had goosebumps all over me and my jaw dropped like on reversed XTC!!!!
I saw the screening at a cinema with RealD 3D projection. I will compare it to Beowulf which I've seen in 3D with xPanD technology.
- real actors got blury when moving faster. CGI only scenes were sharp all the time.
- CGI actors on real background looked perfect - The motion capturing was the best I've seen to date. Not even Beowulf got it more realistic. Even the in many cases taken for comparison Gollum from LotR was beaten.
- The "out of the screen" effect was minimal compared to Beowulf (see Grendels mothers tail). But the depth was much more present than in Beowulf.
- The level of detail on the Na'vi planet was huge and extremely vivid.
- The scenes from the teaser, which involved real people in front of CGI background, looked much more impressive and couldn't be recognised as green screen scenes that much compared to the 2D version.
- The temporary OST featured tracks of The Thin Red Line and Crash. I hope that we will hear similar atmospheric music in the final product. It fit really well. |
|
|
| Acton |
| quote: | Originally posted by Bernd_Gradish
I just came back from the 16 Minute screening of Avatar and cannot wait to see the whole thing! |
You lucky bastard!
I heard earlier that some Brits got to see a small preview of it, how did you manage that? |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| I'm going to wait for the full thing and trust because it's Cameron. Titanic wasn't anything special, but even then it was better than most big budget Hollywood wank. |
|
|
| Bernd_Gradish |
| quote: | Originally posted by Acton
You lucky bastard!
I heard earlier that some Brits got to see a small preview of it, how did you manage that? |
I just went to the cinema? :D
They are showing that footage all over the world today and here in Germany you could get the tickets for free. |
|
|
| Acton |
| quote: | Originally posted by Bernd_Gradish
I just went to the cinema? :D
They are showing that footage all over the world today and here in Germany you could get the tickets for free. |
Random, I thought it was only in selected places. |
|
|
| SuspicionVandit |
I've seen an hour of it on 2D. It's nothing great.
I do plan on seeing it just for 3D mecha. |
|
|
| The17sss |
Description in a British newspaper of how the 3-D situation in this movie is different from the past:
| quote: | However the $237m budget of Avatar signals a leap in technology - indeed, Cameron waited 15 years before starting filming as technology had not advanced enough to portray his vision. Tired of waiting for technology to catch up, he co-developed a new generation of stereoscopic cameras.
Simplified, this is the equivalent of two cameras strapped together, each providing a slightly different perspective on the scene, mimicking the way human eyes view the world in three dimensions.
This changes the ballpark of moving images.
If you've had previous experience of 3D, your impression will probably be one of a flattish image with the occasional object 'flying' at you'.
But these advances are different - the entire screen has depth, taking on the appearance of a window through which the viewer is watching a 'world' on the screen, with a distinct foreground and background, rather than a flat, moving painting
In effect, the cinema screen becomes a theatre stage.
There's still at least one throw-back to the 'early days' of 3D - viewers will need to wear glasses to get the illusion.
However these are not the red and green cardboard cut-outs you used to get free with Sugar Puffs before Comic Relief.
These are polarising glasses, untinted, which do not cause the headaches experienced in the past, or more importantly rely on frequent 'pans' of the camera to make the image appear in 3D.
Each lens has a different filter , which removes different part of the image as it enters each eye. This gives the brain the illusion it is seeing the picture from two different angles, creating the 3D effect. |
prety interesting. someone in the comments section of the article said this:
I attended a special screening in LA of about 20 minutes for theater owners and operators ... I have pretty much seen it all over the years dating back to 2001: a Space Odyssey .... mark my words, this film is a paradigm breakthrough --- the sensation is immersive and breathtaking, not "in your face" -- and from what I saw, the storyline is strong .... in this day and age of bluray, and HD home theaters, Cameron's stated goal is to give folks a reason to go to the movies, and he may well have succeeded. |
|
|
|
|
