Guest Blanket Fort Collapse Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 I think the sales kind of prove this point. are you taking into account inflation on revenue? that a lot of people are paying 16.50 for 1 ticket in 3D? compared to movies of the past that have made as much money without inflation with much much much cheaper ticket prices? Well I was referring to the 2.6% drop from opening weekend, most movies drop 20%... being that this wasn't really advertised that well and most people thought it looked its not surprised that word of mouth ("woh it was kinda trippy smoke the rest of your hash and see it" not "wow what a moving piece of cinema" word of mouth") would increase sales slowly. you understand my point?? with inflation, larger populations, more theaters, at least more than double the ticket prices in some cases with some movies in the past that the sales aren't anything like... the original star wars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karmakramer Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 I think the sales kind of prove this point. are you taking into account inflation on revenue? that a lot of people are paying 16.50 for 1 ticket in 3D? compared to movies of the past that have made as much money without inflation with much much much cheaper ticket prices? Well I was referring to the 2.6% drop from opening weekend, most movies drop 20%... being that this wasn't really advertised that well and most people thought it looked its not surprised that word of mouth ("woh it was kinda trippy smoke the rest of your hash and see it" not "wow what a moving piece of cinema" word of mouth") would increase sales slowly. you understand my point?? with inflation, larger populations, more theaters, at least more than double the ticket prices in some cases with some movies in the past that the sales aren't anything like... the original star wars it is tracking to completely out perform the dark knight and lord of the rings return of the king... so I don't understand your point, cause I said nothing about star wars in the last post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
springymajig Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 This thread is weird. I'm glad Avatar exists only because this thread would not exist without it. It's entertaining to read. I was reminded of two things that I thought were embarrassingly bad: 1) Sigourney Weaver avatar 2) Unobtanium. I thought that was a joke the first time he said it. Me and my friend that I saw it with (he loved it mind you) were making up other names for it... rareium, hardtogetium, notalotoftheserocksaboutium.... it's a game you can play for hours... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karmakramer Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 This thread is weird. I'm glad Avatar exists only because this thread would not exist without it. It's entertaining to read. I was reminded of two things that I thought were embarrassingly bad: 1) Sigourney Weaver avatar 2) Unobtanium. I thought that was a joke the first time he said it. Me and my friend that I saw it with (he loved it mind you) were making up other names for it... rareium, hardtogetium, notalotoftheserocksaboutium.... it's a game you can play for hours... its a stupid name, that Cameron used cause its very straight forward and has been used before in sci-fi : "The term has been used in science fiction for materials that have incredibly strong properties." /wiki Cameron has a weird way of writing with very broad strokes. He is quite literally a mainstream film-maker, who's goal is to make entertaining films for all audiences. I would love to see him direct / concept something but have someone else write the screenplay. He's basically a George Lucas that can actually direct really really well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karmakramer Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 - and lol at this From the Activist Survival Guide: Quote: Uniltaron: Na'vi ceremony in which a prospective warrior ingests psychoactive agents. Subsequent hallucinations are believed to be revelatory by Na'vi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest abreaktor Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 a kids movie, nice to watch tho. perfect example for my thesis that at some point all major movies will discard even the last hints of a story for cgi. if you think that movie is mindblowing - then the reason for this might be your "mind" and not the movie. that is all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaarg Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 karmakramer: I never had any after effects about the reality experience of Avatar. I didn't dream it, I wasn't high and in days to follow I didn't really remember it differently than 2d movies. Are you sure it's not just the hype? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karmakramer Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 karmakramer: I never had any after effects about the reality experience of Avatar. I didn't dream it, I wasn't high and in days to follow I didn't really remember it differently than 2d movies. Are you sure it's not just the hype? "Dr. Mario Mendez, a behavioural neurologist at the University of California, said it is entirely possible Cameron’s 3D technology could tap brain systems that are undisturbed by conventional 2D movies. An inner global-positioning system that orients a person to the surrounding world, was one example he gave. “Three-D demonstrably creates a space that triggers this GPS; it’s really very stimulating”. Cameron himself told Time Magazine that 3D viewing “is so close to a real experience that it actually triggers memory creation in a way that 2D viewing doesn’t.” Cameron also believes that stereoscopic (3D) viewing uses more neurons, which would further heighten the impact of 3D." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan C Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 I love this thread, won't see the movie but this is a disgustingly addictive read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karmakramer Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 Fuck a duck, Avatar made 20 mil on Monday that's a 17% increase from last week, 7th best Monday ever, and in 20 days it will do what ROTK did in 4 months! Highest grossing movie ever made... I think so! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plstik Posted December 29, 2009 Share Posted December 29, 2009 Fuck a duck, Avatar made 20 mil on Monday that's a 17% increase from last week, 7th best Monday ever, and in 20 days it will do what ROTK did in 4 months! Highest grossing movie ever made... I think so! dont forget people pay almost twice as much to see it in 3D ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karmakramer Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 I've seen the movie 5 times I'm well aware haha.That doesn't really mean much though at least to the studios. Money is money... People are gladly paying more for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 real 3d > Imax 3d . The large screen size is a bonus with Imax but it's a tradeoff because you get a lot more ghosting and typical analog film artifacts. with the digital projection it was super crisp and not once did i get any ghosting or distracting 3d effects. I remember when i saw spiderman 3 in the imax theatre the sound was so loud it seemed like a rock concert, the last 2 times i saw Avatar (even on imax) the sound seemed a lot quieter than it could have been. I want to incur hearing damage at an avatar showing personally what do you think karmakramer ? i'm assuming by now youve seen both Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kokoon Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 i've been to xpand where they have active shutter glasses and it was very cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcock Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 So now that a good amount has seen it... do you guys find yourself leaving the theater on a sort of "high"... then the following day, vaguely remembering the details of the world, but not completely... and then finding yourself yearning to return to it? My thoughts on this is : the 3D creates memory creation, so like with any awesome place you might visit or period of your life... you can never replicate it completely in your mind. But you know its real. In the case of Avatar your mind actually thinks its real, so as days pass, sub-consciously Pandora becomes a reality. I think the sales kind of prove this point. People are seeing this movie multiple times... what on earth is up with you, it looked amazing, thats where my positive attitude ends. plot, acting, dialogue, characters, all utterly unconvincing and terrible. the 3d and the forest and the floating mountains were top~notch though, i have terrible vertigo and i was actually experiencing serious sweaty palms and queasiness watching the main guy walk over logs and jump onto ropes and shit. also the glow in the dark forest bits were also amazing. themost interesting thing about this film is waiting to see an actual great movie made with the same 3d and effects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 i've been to xpand where they have active shutter glasses and it was very cool. woah holy shit, i didn't know theaters were using shutter glasses. Did they give your eyes any kind of fatigue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zazen Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 real 3d > Imax 3d . The large screen size is a bonus with Imax but it's a tradeoff because you get a lot more ghosting and typical analog film artifacts. with the digital projection it was super crisp and not once did i get any ghosting or distracting 3d effects. Thats interesting ... but some IMax theatres have digital projection dont they? so presumably you wont get the analog artifacts then ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 i haven't been to an imax screen yet that projects the film digitally. i'm sure they exist though my comparison only applies to a traditional film Imax projection VS digital. Digital imax would probably be the best Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karmakramer Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 DIgital IMAX > RealD > IMAX > Dolby 3D > Xpand Saw it on IMAX 3D a few days ago, it was nice how big it was... but RealD was made the CG more impressive/colorful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karmakramer Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GORDO Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 are xpand glasses disposable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 haha probably not. i've been slowly collecting every pair of 3d glasses from every movie i've seen recently with the hopes of eventually doing my own 3d projection at a show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GORDO Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 i think i saw it with xpand the first time then. ok thank you google, yes i saw it in xpand the first time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Dylan Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 Digital imax? lol those are only on fucking Fake imax screens. Please make sure to check the fake imax website at http://www.lfexaminer.com/ before going to see Avatar. http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/05/11/why-you-probably-shouldnt-waste-5-more-for-digital-imax/ Analog imax on a 75' screen >>>>>> Digital imax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awepittance Posted December 30, 2009 Share Posted December 30, 2009 that's what i was thinking too, because doesn't IMAX basically own their own camera and film stock format? it would almost be bad for business to start doing digital showings because they seem to want people to sometimes still film actual movies using their technology. At least for Dark Knight and Transformers 2 i know that there was some association with the actual IMAX company to shoot scenes in 70mm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.