Avatar Superthread

opinion guy

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

so its not that it wasnt advertised...just not advertised to you? Thats like the hermit complaining nobody visits him.

I dont know about anyone else, but its a bit hard to miss the 20 foot poster hanging outside cineworld on parnell street these days

No no no subtle distinction. Relative to other recent blockbusters such as New Moon, it has not been that heavily advertised, thus rendering moot someone else's point that it had extremely heavy advertising

Galvasean

opinion guy wrote: »

No no no subtle distinction. Relative to other recent blockbusters such as New Moon, it has not been that heavily advertised, thus rendering moot someone else's point that it had extremely heavy advertising

Considering Avatar is sold out pretty much everywhere, broken records and is raking in the dough, I think they got the marketing mix just right. Sure they could have stuck up more billboards, but it wouldn't have increased box ofice gross, just wasted more money.
re: the comparison with Twighlight (New Moon); That franchise sells itself by whipping up an absolute frenzy amongst it's fans by bombarding their senses from every angle. If a comparison was made to war, it would be nuclear.

BlitzKrieg

opinion guy wrote: »

No no no subtle distinction. Relative to other recent blockbusters such as New Moon, it has not been that heavily advertised, thus rendering moot someone else's point that it had extremely heavy advertising

again 20 foot poster outside cineworld...

Just because you didnt see the advertisements doesnt mean they werent there.

seraphimvc

finished my about 8k words review on Avatar and put on my blog last night:p

maybe one day i will write an english version:o

to put it in the simplest form of english i can think of,i quote this dude from Rotten tomatoes:
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/avatar/comments.php?reviewid=1860933
Cameron tried to win the audience over exactly in the spirits that befits the na'vi: it's not through complex reasoning, it's just through PUTTING YOUR SENSES THROUGH WHAT A NA'VI EXPERIENCE, and he's done such a beautiful job. Any old-style complex drama through reasons will really seem out of place here. It's a great movie, if not one with an extraodinarily big brain (it's not supposed to be), certainly one with a pounding heart. Totally deserves the golden globe it was nominated for. Just don't try too hard to judge it by the traditional definition of a good story. For the first time the CG not just enhance the story, they tell much of the story.:)

bascially that is what i fully agree and i bet Avatar is so gonna grab many oscars next year - this movie, called Avatar,is actually our audience's Avatar a trip to pandora which guided by cameron.

actors?stories? as someone said above ,if it is a winning formula,why bother to change it?Cameron is also a business man deep down - a successful director who knows how to sell his product and satisfy us audience.i sorta mentioned in my review that i will give 4/10 max for the story,and if i judge it like a normal movie i will give an overall of 7.5/10 - but if you see the real core idea behind avatar(which is the above quote),as i believe i did :P i give it a 9.5/10,since cameron basically create a new definition for the usage of CG.

think of back to 10years ago,Jurrasic Park's T-Rex made the little girl in the jeep screamed and we scream too when the camera focus on the t-rex's roar.
2009's Cameron attempt to put us in the girl's body and see the t-rex through her eyes. awesome?cameron = genius?i am not sure.mind blowing?not really. but the idea is truly fascinating,isnt it?:) speaking from me as a hardcore movies lover!

3 hours of Avatar is totally enjoyable. think of Micheal Bay,sitting through his totally sh!te 2hours Transformer2 was like a hell!!!seriously tho,bay should really GO BACK to collage!!

feel the Na'vi,feel the pandora - Nyetiri told us!:D

opinion guy

Galvasean wrote: »

Considering Avatar is sold out pretty much everywhere, broken records and is raking in the dough, I think they got the marketing mix just right. Sure they could have stuck up more billboards, but it wouldn't have increased box ofice gross, just wasted more money.
re: the comparison with Twighlight (New Moon); That franchise sells itself by whipping up an absolute frenzy amongst it's fans by bombarding their senses from every angle. If a comparison was made to war, it would be nuclear.

Thanks for backing up my point...even thou you didn't realise it

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

again 20 foot poster outside cineworld...

Just because you didnt see the advertisements doesnt mean they werent there.

Oh a poster at the CINEMA ?!!! wow total blanket adversiting:rolleyes:. New Moon had a 20ft poster around the corner from my HOUSE!!!!, and another at the cinema, and every flat surface in between. I used the same process for registering that advertising as i did for the avatar one. fact is i could not turn on my tv, radio or venutre mor ethan 50ft from my house without hearing about new moon. the same cannot be said of avatar

seraphimvc wrote: »

finished my about 8k words review on Avatar and put on my blog last night:p

maybe one day i will write an english version:o

to put it in the simplest form of english i can think of,i quote this dude from Rotten tomatoes:
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/avatar/comments.php?reviewid=1860933
Cameron tried to win the audience over exactly in the spirits that befits the na'vi: it's not through complex reasoning, it's just through PUTTING YOUR SENSES THROUGH WHAT A NA'VI EXPERIENCE, and he's done such a beautiful job. Any old-style complex drama through reasons will really seem out of place here. It's a great movie, if not one with an extraodinarily big brain (it's not supposed to be), certainly one with a pounding heart. Totally deserves the golden globe it was nominated for. Just don't try too hard to judge it by the traditional definition of a good story. For the first time the CG not just enhance the story, they tell much of the story.:)

bascially that is what i fully agree and i bet Avatar is so gonna grab many oscars next year - this movie, called Avatar,is actually our audience's Avatar a trip to pandora which guided by cameron.

actors?stories? as someone said above ,if it is a winning formula,why bother to change it?Cameron is also a business man deep down - a successful director who knows how to sell his product and satisfy us audience.

3 hours of Avatar is totally enjoyable. think of Micheal Bay,sitting through his totally sh!te 2hours Transformer2 was like a hell!!!seriously tho,bay should really GO BACK to collage!!

feel the Na'vi,feel the pandora - Nyetiri told us!:D

Interesting point - the whole movie is the audience's avatar. never thought of that. intriguing...

agree with you transformers 2 was unbearably painful. But then so was the first one. when anyone tries dragging my to the third i'm putting my foot down and going to the pub instead

BlitzKrieg

http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2009/12/03/avatar-advertising-invades-bones-episode/

http://business-video.tmcnet.com/topics/business-video/articles/70961-lg-mobile-phones-launches-marketing-campaign-avatar.htm

http://www.marketingmagazine.co.uk/news/970929/Coca-Cola-ties-up-James-Camerons-forthcoming-3D-film-Avatar/

http://www.cinematical.com/2009/08/13/avatar-day-details-finally-announced/

let me spell this out so you get it. Just because you as an irish consumer did not see the marketing campaign that pushed this film across the entire world.

DOES NOT MEAN IT DIDNT EXIST.

speedboatchase

Umm the movie is gonna blow past 1bn worldwide in a few weeks, why would anybody complain about the advertising? I think the ads started very slow but really picked up the week before release, and then good word of mouth took it over the top. New Moon is one of the most frontloaded movies of all time, half it's overall gross in the U.S right now was from it's first 3 days. So half the people that seen it seen it in 3 days, the same amount seen it over 6 weeks afterwards :eek: I think NM bombarded people like myself who have no real interest in the franchise so much they decided "nope, definitely not for me" which is why so few people went to see it after the first few days. Avatar dropped 1.4% in its second weekend and had the highest second weekend gross of all time, proof that audiences will do the majority of advertising for you anyway

opinion guy

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2009/12/03/avatar-advertising-invades-bones-episode/

http://business-video.tmcnet.com/topics/business-video/articles/70961-lg-mobile-phones-launches-marketing-campaign-avatar.htm

http://www.marketingmagazine.co.uk/news/970929/Coca-Cola-ties-up-James-Camerons-forthcoming-3D-film-Avatar/

http://www.cinematical.com/2009/08/13/avatar-day-details-finally-announced/

let me spell this out so you get it. Just because you as an irish consumer did not see the marketing campaign that pushed this film across the entire world.

DOES NOT MEAN IT DIDNT EXIST.

And let me spell this out to you.

My original point was: I, AS AN IRISH CONSUMER, DID NOT FEEL THAT THIS FILM WAS AS HEAVILY MARKETED AS NEW MOON, FOR EXAMPLE. Thats my opinion and others have agreed me. You are strawmanning me

mrniceguy2

absolutely brill

mrniceguy2

n try d videogames

mrniceguy2

mrniceguy2 wrote: »

n try d videogames

That the name of some new Nintendo console? The N-Try-D.

bnt

Lots of "making-of" pics are here:

vinylbomb

Deleted User wrote: »

That the name of some new Nintendo console? The N-Try-D.

Nice to see a constructive, on topic post

vinylbomb

opinion guy wrote: »

And let me spell this out to you.

My original point was: I, AS AN IRISH CONSUMER, DID NOT FEEL THAT THIS FILM WAS AS HEAVILY MARKETED AS NEW MOON, FOR EXAMPLE. Thats my opinion and others have agreed me. You are strawmanning me

The advertising spend of Avatar is rumoured to be in the in the 150-200 million range.
- This NT Times article states total cost may run to 500 million (production was 245 million )

EDIT: While you may not have noticed any billboards it would seem the residents in Mumbai have been treated to a 10,000 sq ft billboard.
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/news-by-industry/services/advertising/Marketing-takes-a-brand-new-Avatar/articleshow/5341764.cms

New Moon's production budget was 50 million, so assuming the marketing budget was another 50 million (which would be highly unusual - marketing spend does not match production costs except in cases of massive budgets such as Avatar)
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/09/business/media/09avatar.html?pagewanted=all


Whether or not you feel Avatar was heavily sold is irrelevant, the money was spent somewhere.

I'm not trying to condone New Moon here, I havent seen either of those Twilight movies. I can only imagine my eyes would bleed and my brain would dribble out my ears if I attempted too, so I'm avoiding.

vinylbomb

To get back to the crux of my (and what seems to be many) of the problems that people have with Avatar - people are lauding it as one of the greatest stories of the year and possible all time.

Its far from being in the top ten stories of the year in my opinion, and I expected better (but not something completely original) for a movie of that budget.
(Mind you I would disagree with Hurt Locker too, bit too silly and gung ho. Best picture that I have seen this year was Up - Original, funny and heartwarming - thank God for Pixar)

Another problem is the preachy eco and anti-capitalism messages while many lucrative tie-ins exist that dont give a sh-t about the environment and are solely based on revenue streams
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mitchell-blatt/2009/12/29/anti-capitalist-movie-avatar-partners-mcdonalds-corporate-marketing-

mayordenis

Jaysus didn't know mumbai was in Ireland, madness.

vinylbomb

mayordenis wrote: »

Jaysus didn't know mumbai was in Ireland, madness.

And who said it was? I really dont see where you've managed to take that from what I have said, you may need to have another read of my post.

L31mr0d

vinylbomb wrote: »

Nice to see a constructive, on topic post

oh snap... Darkos been served :rolleyes:

vinylbomb

vinylbomb wrote: »

Nice to see a constructive, on topic post

L31mr0d wrote: »

oh snap... Darkos been served :rolleyes:

The quick wit evident by that post left me speechless.


I'm still trying to find people saying that the story in Avatar is amongst the greatest of the year. In fact most agree that the story is hackneyed but entertaining which is exactly what it set out to do, entertain. You can cry all you want about it being Smurfs with Wolves or whatever thinly veiled comparison you want but at the end of the day it's an ages old tale which eprfectly suited Cameron's needs.

hick

yawn, happy new year, still crap story

BlitzKrieg

I'm not trying to condone New Moon here, I havent seen either of those Twilight movies. I can only imagine my eyes would bleed and my brain would dribble out my ears if I attempted too, so I'm avoiding.

I actually tried a few weeks back. Got sky player on my xbox and decided to give twilight a watch. I was literally hitting my head off the wall about a third of the way through and simply stopped. awful awful cinema.

In its defence though, I lasted longer watching twilight then I did with alone in the dark, which I honestly swear my housemate started having a nosebleed 6 minutes into the film it was so bad...

My original point was: I, AS AN IRISH CONSUMER, DID NOT FEEL THAT THIS FILM WAS AS HEAVILY MARKETED AS NEW MOON, FOR EXAMPLE.

well its opinion vs opinion because I cant understand how you might have missed the 20 foot poster if you passed by parnell street (not in the cinema outside the cinema) or the billboards/bus stops that for the first half of december between smithfield and coolock had mostly avatar adverts (its the route I go by to work). Maybe you live in an area that was considered part of the market for avatar or something, I dont know, I have no idea where you live. You also seemed to have missed avatar day completly, which while you were not a member at the time (I think) you can see it spawned a pretty big thread here (http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055650795&highlight=avatar) so it was something that was not missed by other boardsies. And this wasnt kept to just boards.


On the topic of New Moon, yes it got heavily blitzed in advertising but it came in at a low point of the annual film cycle with little competition around it, unlike avatar which had sherlock holmes breathing down its neck (all those billboards/busstops quickly swapped out avatar for sherlock holmes literally days after its release).

I just think its ridiculous to jump that because you missed the big preview push in august and missed most of the adverts for it in the first half of december to assume that the film wasnt pushed.

Yes its your opinion, but it can still be a ridiculous one.

BlitzKrieg

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

In its defence though, I lasted longer watching twilight then I did with alone in the dark, which I honestly swear my housemate started having a nosebleed 6 minutes into the film it was so bad...

Was that during the never ending scene of scrolling exposition? I love Alone in the Dark as I love the remake of the Wicker Man, has ever there been more comical material ever committed to celluloid?

BlitzKrieg

Deleted User wrote: »

Was that during the never ending scene of scrolling exposition? I love Alone in the Dark as I love the remake of the Wicker Man, has ever there been more comical material ever committed to celluloid?

No we were both training to be editors at the time and its the car chase scene that randomly starts at the airport which is a f*cking mess of a sequence...

though I might need to rewatch it because transformers 2 random teleporting location editing could possible top it for physical pain.

BlitzKrieg

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

No we were both training to be editors at the time and its the car chase scene that randomly starts at the airport which is a f*cking mess of a sequence...

though I might need to rewatch it because transformers 2 random teleporting location editing could possible top it for physical pain.

From an editorial viewpoint the entire film is a mess to be honest. I actually reedited the entire film to try and fix it but unfortunately there doesn't seem to be any way to make the film decent. Part 2 isn't bad though, watched it about a year ago and found it rather enjoyable. Possibly due to it having some connection to the games.

johnny_ultimate

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm still trying to find people saying that the story in Avatar is amongst the greatest of the year. In fact most agree that the story is hackneyed but entertaining which is exactly what it set out to do, entertain. You can cry all you want about it being Smurfs with Wolves or whatever thinly veiled comparison you want but at the end of the day it's an ages old tale which eprfectly suited Cameron's needs.

There are a lot of people saying it is one of their favourite films of all time though, and critics are giving it crazy good review - and fair enough, everything is opinion! I think alot of us are just not willing to overlook a hackneyed plot though. I would argue that most of the strong points of this film are a result of ludicrous amounts of money being thrown at Cameron and his crew (seriously - would Avatar be worth going to see if it had, say, a quarter of the budget? Perhaps then the narrative flaws wouldn't be excused with less extravagant visuals?). I saw a number of December releases (Humpday, Love Exposure, Where the Wild Things Are) that had a fraction of the budget and far more interesting (and entertaining) narratives (and I'd also probably argue that Wild Things is as interesting visually, but I won't dwell on that ). Is it really unfair to criticise a plot that isn't as engaging or original as ones playing a screen over? Yes, it clearly is a mainstream, financially risky blockbuster, so perhaps this argument is somewhat moot, but it is a central reason why I wouldn't consider myself as wildly enthusiastic about the film as others in this thread would.

And ignoring arguments about quality - which is clearly a contentious issue :pac: - I definitely wouldn't agree that there was no hype. Cameron himself heavily boasted that this film was going to be a revolution, or, in his words, a 'game changer' for years prior to release. And the man has a fairly solid track record. This of all films was one that very few people would've have been able to see without some element of hype - in particular regulars on an internet film board! If you did miss the PR and marketing - well done is all I can say!

gandalf

On the advertising front I am not sure how people didn't even notice it. It was everywhere. Christ I remember watching an episode of Bones on Sky a couple of weeks ago and part of the plot was a couple of the main characters mitching off work to alternate queuing for the first showing of Avatar !! So you couldn't even avoid it trying to watch a program on the telly!!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1514861/

opinion guy

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

I actually tried a few weeks back. Got sky player on my xbox and decided to give twilight a watch. I was literally hitting my head off the wall about a third of the way through and simply stopped. awful awful cinema.

Hahaha - yeah I can imagine.

well its opinion vs opinion because I cant understand how you might have missed the 20 foot poster if you passed by parnell street (not in the cinema outside the cinema) or the billboards/bus stops that for the first half of december between smithfield and coolock had mostly avatar adverts (its the route I go by to work).

But you say that like its something on unusual. it s the cinema. They alway have 20ft posters for whatever is big at the time. Onlly time I go by there is when I'm going to the cinema. I saw avatar there - can\t remember if there was aposter but since i was going to see it i woulnd't have noticed most probably.

Maybe you live in an area that was considered part of the market for avatar or something, I dont know, I have no idea where you live.

I don't imagine it varies that much by area.

You also seemed to have missed avatar day completly, which while you were not a member at the time (I think) you can see it spawned a pretty big thread here (http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055650795&highlight=avatar) so it was something that was not missed by other boardsies. And this wasnt kept to just boards.

Yup never heard of it - in fact never heard of avatar at that point either. Which is kind of my point really. Yeah it might have happened, but I never heard of it. Seems like they didn't market the event that heavily (even if it was a marketing event in and of itself). New Moon on the other hand - Christ on a bike I had dem gaunt annorexic gurmpy teenagers staring down at me for weeks on end. Never seen any films posters up for so long.

On the topic of New Moon, yes it got heavily blitzed in advertising but it came in at a low point of the annual film cycle with little competition around it, unlike avatar which had sherlock holmes breathing down its neck (all those billboards/busstops quickly swapped out avatar for sherlock holmes literally days after its release).

There you said it yourself - that stuff changes so often. I didn't think avatar had any more presence than your average film.

I just think its ridiculous to jump that because you missed the big preview push in august and missed most of the adverts for it in the first half of december to assume that the film wasnt pushed.

Yes its your opinion, but it can still be a ridiculous one.

Yes well its equally as ridiculous to assume that becuase you were aware of it that everyone was. And oh by the way its not just me - other people have agreed with me.

vinylbomb

opinion guy wrote: »

Seems like they didn't market the event that heavily (even if it was a marketing event in and of itself). New Moon on the other hand - Christ on a bike I had dem gaunt annorexic gurmpy teenagers staring down at me for weeks on end. Never seen any films posters up for so long.

And oh by the way its not just me - other people have agreed with me.

Please see post #665
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055655055&page=45

For fear of repeating myself - The proposition being made is not that YOU did see the advertising (you may have closed your eyes. looked the other way or simply not left your domicile) but that in economic terms (production and marketing - in this case marketing) the spend for Avatar has been the biggest in history, far more than than the latest Twilight mess.

opinion guy

Oh My God why are you guys continuing to argue this point. I NEVER said anything about advertising budgets. What you just posted right there is the very definition of a straw man argument. I said that to me, it seemed like there was less advertising than for other recent films such as New Moon, hmmm and maybe even Sherlock Holmes is ramping up now. its also possible that there advertising was sucky and ineffective. Point is it didn't reach me and I'm fairly aware of the stuff I see around me/on tv/ on net. Maybe they spent more on Avatar - whatever, maybe they spent more in other countries than here - did u think of that? Whatever. I said it did not seem to me to be as heavily advertised, some people agreed. Thats my opinion. You can't prove it wrong (especially not with straw man arguments). Just accept I, and several others have a different opinion to you. ok ?

hick

maybe you can't see blue

Galvasean

vinylbomb wrote: »

Nice to see a constructive, on topic post

If you have a problem with a post you should report it.
For what it's worth, the odd bit of humour in a heated discussion thread is quite refreshing now and then.

irish_bob

i live in rural ireland so i wouldnt be seeing any billboards for avatar or any other movie for that matter so the only form of advertising available to me when it comes to movies is via the idiot box and personally speaking , before its release , i did not see all that many adds for avatar , i remember a few years ago when king kong was released around christmas , you could expect to see tv adds around three times during every half hour of programming , that said , i have noticed an increase in adds for avatar in the past week

jaykhunter

I've said my piece so I've no want to re-thread old ground, but I thought i'd pass this info along from Boxofficemojo.com :

AVATAR : TOTAL LIFETIME GROSSES

Domestic: $268,886,074 36.1% + Foreign: $476,192,825 63.9% = Worldwide: $745,078,899

vinylbomb

opinion guy wrote: »

Oh My God why are you guys continuing to argue this point. I NEVER said anything about advertising budgets. What you just posted right there is the very definition of a straw man argument.

Ok, fair enough you didn't see the advertising and wasn't aware of the movie prior to release. Thats cool. Point made




All I was pointing out is that there was a significant amount of money spent on marketing, quite a lot more than the Twilight movie (which you made an example of). I haven't attacked your argument (or my fallacious one which I have supposedly substituted in for yours), merely stated (again and again) that Avatar had the most spent on marketing in history.

So its not the definition of a straw man argument IMO, but we'll agree to disagree on that too I think

vinylbomb

opinion guy wrote: »

Oh My God why are you guys continuing to argue this point. I NEVER said anything about advertising budgets. What you just posted right there is the very definition of a straw man argument.

Ok, fair enough you didn't see the advertising and wasn't aware of the movie prior to release. Thats cool. Point made




All I was pointing out is that there was a significant amount of money spent on marketing, quite a lot more than the Twilight movie (which you made an example of). I haven't attacked your argument (or my fallacious argument which I have supposedly substituted in for yours), merely stated (again and again) that Avatar had the most spent on marketing in history.

So its not the definition of a straw man argument IMO, but we'll agree to disagree on that too I think

Galvasean

jaykhunter wrote: »

I've said my piece so I've no want to re-thread old ground, but I thought i'd pass this info along from Boxofficemojo.com :

AVATAR : TOTAL LIFETIME GROSSES

Domestic: $268,886,074 36.1% + Foreign: $476,192,825 63.9% = Worldwide: $745,078,899

Big money. And it doesn't appear to be slowing down just yet.

L31mr0d

Galvasean wrote: »

Big money. And it doesn't appear to be slowing down just yet.

Went to see it a second time with my Dad there yesterday (first film hes actually wanted to go to in a decade). Was fully expecting the cinema to be empty at around lunchtime on New Years Day but it was completely packed.

Opinion is still the same for me though. Amazing film. It's definitely up there with one of my all time favourites. Neytiri steals the show, her character is utterly compelling to watch.

Raging Bob

I'd rather stick my head in an oven than endure this film again. I always find it amusing to see so many flock to see this and fail to turn out to view other far superior films throughout the year. Suppose that's how it works but it still sucks.

L31mr0d

Raging Bob wrote: »

I always find it amusing to see so many flock to see this and fail to turn out to view other far superior films throughout the year.

and then there are also those, like me, that watch all these "far superior films" and still found Avatar to be excellent for what it is.

These "far superior films" you speak of btw. Are they visually and technically superior? Again we come back to this subjective weighting each of us gives to varying aspects of a film. Take "Coffee & Cigarettes" for example. No plot to speak of, fairly muted visuals but it still holds up imo due to the dialogue alone.

The premise and stunning visuals of Avatar are enough to make it an excellent film for me. It's a narrow perspective imo that can't weight the achievement of Avatar accordingly due to wearing blinders and only seeing it's plot and characterizations (which aren't actually bad, just not great). I can guarantee you've weighted plenty of films higher even though they've lacked or failed in numerous other facets of cinematography.

amdublin

I'm confussed!

Are some cinemas showing Avatar in 3D? Or are they all 3D??

Also then what is this imax - available anywhere in Dublin?

Please can you advise me which cineman and format would be best to watch the film in - any cinema in Dublin city or Blanchardstown.

Thanks!

poisonated

From what I gather some cinemas have both versions available also.There used to be an imax in Dublin(parnell street) but that closed down.At the moment there isn't any imax in Dublin.Imax is just a really big screen I think.I don't think that there in any other difference between it and normal cinemas but I could be wrong.

I always thought the point of the IMAX cinema was that it was like a simulation ride? (I may have made this up in my own head!)

OP some cinemas do not have the license to show in 3D so if you want to see it in 3D just check with the cinema you are going to.

I'd say the majority of cinemas are showing 3D - but not all.

Edit: I like Dundrum cinema or Liffey Valley. Definitely go for 3D - this film was made for 3D!

Niall F

Not all cinemas have 3D but UCI Blanch does have 3D. They're showing Avatar in 2D and 3D. 3D is dearer but I'd go for it.

Wolff

some cinemas are equipped with 3d projectors - some are not - avatar is released in a 2d and 3d version -

just check to see if the cinema has a 3d projector

jaykhunter

CineWorld in town in Dublin has Avatar in 3D - this film is meant to be seen in 3D! It's definitely one of it's selling points.

You might be thinking of that 4D thing that's on O'Connell St; you see a screen but the seats move, spray you with water and air, timed with what happens on screen. It's a total gimmick but if you've never been in one I'd give it a go.

iMAX is no longer available in Ireland or NI. Real Shame. It's just a massively big screen in 16:9 or a dome-shaped screen. They specialise in educational/nature documentaries (the moon, deep sea, dolphins, dinosaurs, space etc etc) but over the last 5 years Hollywood have been filming some scenes in iMAX - this means that instead of the "black bars" 2.35:1 aspect ratio, for the iMAX scenes, it goes to 16:9 (i.e. the aspect ratio of your TV) with startling clarity. It's roughly 4 times clearer than Blu-Ray. (Resolution is about 8,000 lines). I'd really recommend seeing something in iMAX - but just make sure it's an iMAX film, not a film that's shown on an iMAX screen (like bloody Star Trek 2009)

I can't really explain adequately how different it is seeing something in IMAX than in the Cinema - especially the dome-shaped iMAX where you're looking up and it encompasses your entire field of vision - it's awesome and weird too.

Bottom line, if you're in another country and have the chance to see something in iMAX, go see it! It's an experience!

(for an at-home comparison, pop in The Dark Knight on Blu-Ray and look at the opening scene, or when Batman finds the two-face coin amongst the rubble against the rest of the film. It's amazing. Or even when Batman kidnaps Lao - some scenes intersplice with iMAX and High-Def.)

amdublin

Thanks for all the info Jayk. Much appreciated!

Is the 4D thing in the Savoy or Cineworld??

Driver 8

If box office is an indicator of a films quality, then Transformers 2 is the masterpiece of the year, and hell, its visual effects are technically very strong, who cares about its plot/characters/dialogue/simplicity?

Coriolanus

amdublin wrote: »

Thanks for all the info Jayk. Much appreciated!

Is the 4D thing in the Savoy or Cineworld??

The 4d thing is beside/part of (afaik) Dr Quirkeys. It's more like a ride than a film. Think Magic Mountain or something along those lines.

Galvasean

I probably will go see Avatar again. Of course, I'm a special effects junkie. Some people are screenplay junkies, acting junkies or theme junkies. It's different strokes for different folks. It saddens me to see that the special effects fan is so looked down upon by other film fans.

amdublin

Nevore wrote: »

The 4d thing is beside/part of (afaik) Dr Quirkeys. It's more like a ride than a film. Think Magic Mountain or something along those lines.

Oooh! Interesting.

And is it the full film etc?

Guys, I know I am pushing it here, would anyone have the name of the above cinema or ph no./website for it?

Thanks in advance!