James Cameron's Avatar - General

I would really like to see a sequel, if Cameron absorbed the critique and wrote the good sequel we know he could, it would be amazing.

[QUOTE=SantanaDVX;19344903]I know it's one of those "suspension of disbelief" moments, but I want to know how they traveled light years into space to this planet.[/QUOte] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_fiction[/url]

[QUOTE=SantanaDVX;19344903]I know it's one of those "suspension of disbelief" moments, but I want to know how they traveled light years into space to this planet.[/QUOTE] With a space-ship +cryosleep :downs:

We didn't have any ad's. When it hit 10:30, the movie started playing.

I'd have to say that it's one of the best films of 2009. 3D Just made it so real, like you were actually there... Although nearly everthing is CGI.

I loved the movie so much, I'm going to get the game no matter how many times Ubisoft/Movie Games have hurt me. But the Pirates of the Caribbean game was actually better than the movie.

[QUOTE=broo20;19347050]But the Pirates of the Caribbean game was actually better than the movie.[/QUOTE] Wasn't that made by Bethesda :monocle:?

[QUOTE=Warren Holzem;19332821]Agreed completely. Virtually all of them were just remixes of Earth animals. Pretty gay.[/QUOTE] Earth animals can connect to each other and the entire planet via an external neural interface? The 'add extra legs to everything' was a bit silly though. I hate psychic stuff in sci-fi usually (where's the science basis in that) but Avatar actually had a elegant way of incoperating realistic psychic powers. [editline]01:15PM[/editline] [QUOTE=jcallan;19328087]Question to those who liked it a lot : Did you think it was better than LOTR?[/QUOTE] I think there's a big difference between the two films, with LOTR if you've not read the books it is very difficult to get immersed in the story, and while it does have an amazing background and plot it's mostly because there's a gigantic book to go with it, which most people who love the film will have read. Avatar is impressive in my mind because it manages to immerse you in this entirely new universe purely in film form. OT: Has anyone read The Hobbit? I love that book, can't wait for the film.

I'm pretty sure most people who saw LOTR haven't read the book and never will because it would be boring as hell for them.

I saw this film high as fuck, so naturally I thought it was fucking awesome. Although, some of the shitty dialog had me and my friend in stiches. Such as the part [sp]when the woman saves the marine dude from those weird dog things, and when he asked why she saved him she's all like "You have a good heart". LOL[/sp] Another bit that had us laughing is when [sp]she first talks it's like a few grunts of broken English, and then moments later she is fluent in the language.[/sp]

God damnit, 3D sold out today aswell. Gonna watch it in 2D.

Never mind, wasn't nearly as awkward as I thought. It was awesome though. 3D worked great, although I did spot some bits that looked slightly out of place, it was still fantastic.

[QUOTE=SantanaDVX;19344903]I know it's one of those "suspension of disbelief" moments, but I want to know how they traveled light years into space to this planet.[/QUOTE] Yeah I was thinking the same. They said the journey took 5 years from Earth to Pandora. Pandora is located in Alpha Centuri if you look on the avatar wikipedia. Alpha Centuri is 4,37 light years away, which would mean they were travelling at nearly the speed of light, since it only took them 5 years and not 50,000 years like it would do with conventional speeds. Out from the ships massive size I would be guessing the engines were running on either fusion power or Anti-matter, since those would be the only possible ways of getting toward that speed. Although with the plot device of Unobtanium which is a super-conducter of energy that might be the source of fuel as well. You would have to make a suspension of disbelief when it comes to the speed of the ship, since the forces of that speed would very likely rip the ship apart unless it was made of an indestructable compound.

[QUOTE=Beafman;19350880]Yeah I was thinking the same. They said the journey took 5 years from Earth to Pandora. Pandora is located in Alpha Centuri if you look on the avatar wikipedia. Alpha Centuri is 4,37 light years away, which would mean they were travelling at nearly the speed of light, since it only took them 5 years and not 50,000 years like it would do with conventional speeds. Out from the ships massive size I would be guessing the engines were running on either fusion power or Anti-matter, since those would be the only possible ways of getting toward that speed. Although with the plot device of Unobtanium which is a super-conducter of energy that might be the source of fuel as well. You would have to make a suspension of disbelief when it comes to the speed of the ship, since the forces of that speed would very likely rip the ship apart unless it was made of an indestructable compound.[/QUOTE] The ISV Venture Star (the ship they use) is based directly off of Project Valkyrie, which is described as the following: [quote]The Valkyrie is a theoretical spacecraft designed by Charles Pellegrino and Jim Powell (a physicist at Brookhaven National Laboratory). The Valkyrie is theoretically able to accelerate to 92% the speed of light and decelerate afterward, carrying a small human crew to another star system[/quote] The only criticism to the design is that it would require Antimatter as a fuel source (which is helped by Unobtainium anyway.)

[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;19350987]The ISV Venture Star (the ship they use) is based directly off of Project Valkyrie, which is described as the following: The only criticism to the design is that it would require Antimatter as a fuel source (which is helped by Unobtainium anyway.)[/QUOTE] The Unobtainium is actually used to help contain the matter/antimatter reactions, and it does so more efficiently than the first ship they made for interstellar travel. According to the Wiki, THAT ship was 4 times the size it needed to be JUST to accommodate the cooling systems.

[QUOTE=Zero-Point;19351238]The Unobtainium is actually used to help contain the matter/antimatter reactions, and it does so more efficiently than the first ship they made for interstellar travel. According to the Wiki, THAT ship was 4 times the size it needed to be JUST to accommodate the cooling systems.[/QUOTE] At least the starships are based in hard science, with the sole exception of the Unobtainium.

[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;19351268]At least the starships are based in hard science, with the sole exception of the Unobtainium.[/QUOTE] The name in itself is a massive joke. I burst out laughing and made the entire audience give me funny looks when I heard the name.

10 pages of not liking the plot, i for one thought the plot was decent, even if it isnt original.

[QUOTE=Deathbyfire;19351383]The name in itself is a massive joke. I burst out laughing and made the entire audience give me funny looks when I heard the name.[/QUOTE] I really wished they had the part where the Corporate Douche says that Unobtainium isn't its real name (they called it that for the same reason any Engineer would call something Unobtainium) but, over time, the name stuck.

[QUOTE=jcallan;19332282]What ads did you guys get at the start? We had Toy Story 3 :3:, Tim Burton's Tim Burton the Movie, which looks like another shit Tim Burton fest and something else which I can't remember.[/QUOTE] The Robin Hood movie. Russel Crowe, by the maker of Gladiator and he doesn't look a thing like Robin Hood. So basically just a sequel to Gladiator.

I dont see how this 3d techonolgy is anything new. I went to this "4d cinema" that had a movie like thing "polar adventure" in the beginning of 09 summer, the seats had some hydraluics atatched and it felt like you were flying trough the movie, also cold air fans for extra effects. My point is it was exactly the same as avatars "new technology", the glasses were same too.

[QUOTE=Roll_Program;19335935]So is there a new HDMI standard for 3D, for the extra frames? And is there a 3D TV standard yet? Also blu-ray 3D standards?[/QUOTE] I'm hoping all the technology relies on the blu-ray disc and special new glasses. I better not have to buy a new TV and HDMI cable just to experience Avatar the way it was meant to be.

[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;19351459]I really wished they had the part where the Corporate Douche says that Unobtainium isn't its real name (they called it that for the same reason any Engineer would call something Unobtainium) but, over time, the name stuck.[/QUOTE] Hanging a lantern on it would have been great, too. Like a character pointing out the absurdity of the name.

[QUOTE=xzeox;19352789]I'm hoping all the technology relies on the blu-ray disc and special new glasses. I better not have to buy a new TV and HDMI cable just to experience Avatar the way it was meant to be.[/QUOTE] You're out of luck To display 3D you will need a 120hz screen. There's no other way

The movie was around like 3 hours or so right, man i was sore after it. It needed a intermission. Quite a good movie; it had a good hook in it and kept me interested, i give it a 9 though for some over the top scenes.

[QUOTE=Mr.Antisocial;19354243]The movie was around like 3 hours or so right, man i was sore after it. It needed a intermission. Quite a good movie; it had a good hook in it and kept me interested, i give it a 9 though for some over the top scenes.[/QUOTE] The best possible intermission point would've been when Jake Sully says, "And like any dream, eventually you have to wake up." You know, [sp]when Quartich was capturing him after bombing the Hometree.[/sp]

[QUOTE=TheForeigner;19352725]I dont see how this 3d techonolgy is anything new. I went to this "4d cinema" that had a movie like thing "polar adventure" in the beginning of 09 summer, the seats had some hydraluics atatched and it felt like you were flying trough the movie, also cold air fans for extra effects. My point is it was exactly the same as avatars "new technology", the glasses were same too.[/QUOTE] the difference being, that was a gimmick to make you go WOW IT'S IN THREE DIMENSIONS (was probably cheesy as hell) and avatar is still a normal movie you would watch on a couch (even though 3d is betterrrr) [editline]08:00PM[/editline] the technology of polarized glasses isn't new, i went to one of those like 5 years ago. the point is that avatar integrated it into the movie, as opposed to being a last minute addon

[QUOTE=FreDre;19354141]You're out of luck To display 3D you will need a 120hz screen. There's no other way[/QUOTE] actually the movie is in 25fps 3D, so 60 hz is just fine.

[QUOTE=Mr.Goodbar;19339298]Visuals were great. The movie itself, not great, in fact, it sucked as a movie, uninspired characters, full of cliches, predictable story, corny dialogue etc. 4/10[/QUOTE] Sounds like pretty much every professional review of the film I've read. The only people who seem to really like it and think it's a 10/10 are teenagers and idiots, hicks, or chavs. [editline]08:34PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Cheesemonkey;19354884]the point is that avatar integrated it into the movie, as opposed to being a last minute addon[/QUOTE] So did UP. Why is it being considered "new technology" when other films have done it already? [editline]08:37PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Canuhearme?;19351268]At least the starships are based in hard science, with the sole exception of the Unobtainium.[/QUOTE] Theoretical science ≠ hard science, bro. Not sure how you could even make that mistake.

[QUOTE=-MoA- Shaun;19355034]actually the movie is in 25fps 3D, so 60 hz is just fine.[/QUOTE] I could be wrong but my understanding is this: Right now, you need a minimum 60hz for your video stream off blu ray. All HDtvs can do 60hz, more expensive tvs can do higher, but 60hz is the minimum- for 2d. For 3d you need two separate video streams, left eye and right eye(hence the need for glasses). EACH stream needs at minimum 60hz, just like with 2d. But since now you have two streams of video, you need a minimum 120hz to handle it. Someone might say "But movies are 24p, my tv does 24p, what's this 60hz minimum nonsense?" Yeah, well those tvs that do 24p actually do it in multiples of 24. They show it in 72 or 96 frames per second, or more. Either that or they use the 3:2 pulldown technique. NO ONE is watching home video at 24 frames per second, it's all 60 or higher. Even in movie theaters film is played back at 48fps(24 with each frame repeated). There are some HDtvs that do 24p doubled, playing them back at 48p, but that's basically flickering so much no one watches it that way. A 60hz 3d tv means 30hz for each eye- that would be a flickering mess of crap to try to watch.