Comments on: Will James Cameron’s ‘Avatar’ Rock Our World?

By: Darkhillpic28

Darkhillpic28 — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 17:52:41 +0000

I’m Glad to see James Cameron back into directing (since Titanic). I hope this movie turns out great.

By: Azreal

Azreal — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 21:07:02 +0000

Man, why am I hearing so much praise about the technology in this film and transformers etc, but does anybody even remember The Matrix? I don’t care how bad you think the story was, there is no debating the fact that the movie was revolutionary in the technology at that time(that’s funny), The Wachowski Bros then go and make an even more amazing looking film with Speed Racer(I really think that Avatar is using the same techs as this movie) a movie that should ONLY be viewed on Blu-Ray from an 1080p plasma or LCD or LED tv, until I see the 1st trailer i’ll keep my hypness to a minimum.

By: Vic Holtreman

Vic Holtreman — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 17:07:05 +0000

@TJ

Yes, it will be in 3D.

Vic

By: TJ

TJ — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 05:47:50 +0000

Hey… Is Avatar in 3D?..Cause if it is.its sad for me becse they dont show movies in 3D here in India!

By: An ‘Avatar’ Update, Including A New Tagline - Screen Rant

An ‘Avatar’ Update, Including A New Tagline - Screen Rant — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 18:49:00 +0000

[...] already talked about an early viewing of Avatar blowing people away, as well as the fact that the 3D technology being employed is said to be revolutionary. At ShoWest [...]

By: Ridley Scott Inspired By James Cameron’s 3D ‘Avatar’ - Screen Rant

Fri, 27 Mar 2009 20:10:11 +0000

[...] Ford in the 2019 dystopian Los Angeles of Blade Runner. Cameron clearly has something rather special up his sleeve with Avatar, and I am ultra-curious to find out just how that one turns [...]

By: Ken J

Ken J — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 18:40:20 +0000

Remember the numbers are not correct, it’s $200 million, NOT $300 million. Yes, $100 million does make a difference, lol. If it performs WELL, as in $500 million or more, it would be profitable. Hopefully it well surpasses that.

And GK, I say neither, I say Terminator 2 epic… ok, fine, I’ll use Aliens, Aliens epic.

By: bigDOG

bigDOG — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 17:40:57 +0000

With that big of a budget, he’s gonna need Titanic numbers for this to be successful. It sounds amazing though.

By: greenknight333

greenknight333 — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 17:39:26 +0000

Titanic epic in terms of box office and critical acclaim?

or epic like Watchemn?

By: dean

dean — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 15:03:50 +0000

Trust me this movie will be EPIC beyond anything weve seen Ever!

By: greenknight333

greenknight333 — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 14:02:19 +0000

That’s cool Heath..the more positive feedback this recieves probably means that this tech is the real deal..

@ Ken

**GROAN** dude but yes you are correct …Judgement Day indeed

By: Heath McKnight

Heath McKnight — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 03:25:54 +0000

I saw a pre-recorded NBA game shot with the Pace/Cameron Fusion 3D system back at NAB 2007 on a Sony 4K digital projector. WOW, I felt like I was courtside. It wasn’t like totally in your face, but it just felt real, like I was sitting on the court watching it.

By: Ken J

Ken J — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 00:35:09 +0000

“I will save my judgement until I have actually seen some footage or a trailer for this movie..”

So… would you say that when trailers come out, it will be “judgment day?” lol

By: greenknight333

greenknight333 — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 00:18:18 +0000

I don’t think Cameron would spend north of 200 million dollars just to produce the film (FOX’s and his own money I’m sure…rumor has it he made well over 300 million from Titanic’s box office alone) if it were going to be a poor product. The guy has confidence in his abilities and that this technology will dazzle..I will save my judgement until I have actually seen some footage or a trailer for this movie..it has me very curious though…

By: Aaron

Aaron — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 19:11:57 +0000

Being a fan of stereographic 3D myself, I’m quite excited to hear James Cameron’s own push for the technology.

Unfortunately for stereo 3D to work, the director has to demonstrate good control over depth and parallax. So here’s hoping James Cameron will lead the way for future movies, showing’em “how its done”.

Or not. Either do it right, or don’t do it at all. I’m getting tired of the gimmicky way studios are employing stereo 3D.

By: Heath McKnight

Heath McKnight — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 23:10:27 +0000

Cameron’s cocky, sure, but he’s also brilliant. He’s been developing tech for years. His diving oxygen tank/mask design for The Abyss was HUGE and I think he and his engineer brother are still making money off the patent.

I’m excited, but I still think we need some great marketing!

heath

By: Ken J

Ken J — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 19:16:47 +0000

I have that issue at work, but not at home, and on both computers is IE, lol. But at home it’s IE 7 and it works perfectly fine. I mentioned that problem before while reading an article at work, I’ve always noticed it but didn’t say anything, but looking at the same page at home, everything is fine.

Anyway, about Avatar, I can’t wait to see SOMETHING about it, and what that guy wrote about feeling like he’s been there since the 3D is so realistic, makes me pretty excited. And theaters SHOULD all go digital, and not just for 3D, it’s simply better. There’s no visual noise from dirty film, no AUDIO noise from the big projector cranking through the film, no timing issues, no more “cigarette burn” scene changing, it’s simply a better way to project movies in my opinion. Have you seen a movie that goes through a lot of showings a day? By the end of the week the actual quality of the film actually degrades, you’ll see a lot of specs and noise and color distortions, etc. It’s kind of annoying. Digital is the way to go.

And about Cameron being cocky, he is cocky, but he actually has the right to be so I don’t mind it too much (because I don’t actually have to work with him, lol). It’s just sad when someone who’s not so good thinks that he/she is, lol.

By: Vic Holtreman

Vic Holtreman — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:10:12 +0000

Guys,

I’m looking at IE7, version 7.0.5730.13 on Windows XP at 1280×1024 and I dont’ have that issue.

Don’t know what to tell you…

Vic

By: Vic Holtreman

Vic Holtreman — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:08:25 +0000

@Marc

IESB found an update at the end of that TIME article stating that the budget is north of $200MM, not $300:

“The original version of this story misstated the cost of the film Avatar as being in excess of $300 million. The correct figure is in excess of $200 million.”

http://www.iesb.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6529&Itemid=99

Vic

By: Ross Miller

Ross Miller — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 16:54:46 +0000

Not for me. I use IE and I don’t have that problem.