OgreMkV Posted December 27, 2009 Share Posted December 27, 2009 Trust me. Go see this movie. The story line is better than expected. Pay the $14 bucks for the IMAX 3-D version. The cinematography will blow you away. The science (for those of us so inclined) is fascinating. It is really a stunning movie... by far the best movie I've ever seen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brooks Posted December 27, 2009 Share Posted December 27, 2009 Literally, the best movie I've ever seen in my life. Ever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diabeetus Posted December 27, 2009 Share Posted December 27, 2009 thats what i have heard!! i think i will see it in 3d! thanks for the confirmation! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wippit Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 I did the 3D, but non-IMAX version. I'd go see it again easily, and may just do that to see the IMAX version. I'm a professional geek and the technology behind the film was what appealed to me the most. The "earth mother is good, but all corporations are evil (except the one that spent $200+ million to make this film, of course)" theme strikes me as a little hypocritical. ON a scale of 1 to 10: Technology -- 11 (a la Spinal Tap) Storyline -- 6 Ability to immerse the viewer -- 8 All that said, I'd still go pay another $14 to watch it again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wippit Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 BTW, if you want to go IMAX you might think about Fandango. My first choice was IMAX but the days I could go were sold out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisfowler99 Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 Story was predictable, but fun. Imagery in 3D was fricken amazing! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kkiel02 Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 These arent the reviews I expected. After the previews, it looked lilke an expensive flop but now Ive heard from a couple people that it was better than expected. 3d Imax does sound appealing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doktorstick Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 I avoided the 3D version... not a fan of the presentation in general. I thought it was a good movie. Not too heavy handed on gaia, evil corps, etc. but you get a lot of "humans are superior". It's one of the few I might actually pick up on blu-ray. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisfowler99 Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 I avoided the 3D version... not a fan of the presentation in general. I thought it was a good movie. Not too heavy handed on gaia, evil corps, etc. but you get a lot of "humans are superior". It's one of the few I might actually pick up on blu-ray. I would highly recommend seeing the 3D version and making another evaluation of that presentation. This was simply the best 3D presentation I've ever seen (though I admit to only having seen a few). It was not done to be "in your face" or "ooh! something's coming at you!" It was done to enhance the look of the movie. And it does it in spades. The depth of the picture is simply amazing. :yesnod: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wippit Posted December 28, 2009 Share Posted December 28, 2009 /agree with Chris. The technology has gotten better than the cardboard with blue and red cellophane lenses. Now it's fairly clear optical grade plastic in a one-size-fits-none frame that makes me think of those Groucho Marx glasses sans the nose and crackerduster. This is a good chance to reaquatint yourself with 3D. As before IMAX is probably the best version. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rjohn Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 do you have to wear glasses in the IMAX version? I thought the 3-d was right out of the 50's. The glasses are plastic instead of cardboard but that is the only significant improvement. I got the same old headache I always get with the 3d technology.The story itself was a remake of a Jimmy Stewart movie from the 60's named "Broken Arrow". It had a few new wrinkles but still the same movie. Did they HAVE to make the blue people sound and act like Hollywood Indians? They even used the same bow and arrow technology. That was the most disappointing part. I did like the movie but I think I'll go see the non 3d version with the wife. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisfowler99 Posted January 1, 2010 Share Posted January 1, 2010 The 3D technology in the 50s was blue/red lenses. then they went to alternate flickering lenses. Then to polarized lenses. This is the latest step in polarized lenses, and from what I can tell is by far the best. The catch seems to be that anyone that has problems with motion sickness is still going to have problems with the 3D movies. Not sure when/if they'll get past that one... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rjohn Posted January 1, 2010 Share Posted January 1, 2010 I am old enough to remember TV going from only black and white to color - a major enhancement. When movies went from VHS or Beta to DVD it was a major enhancement. When TV went to HD, it was another major enhancement. The current 3d technology is NOT a major enhancement, IMHO. It can be distracting cause the 3d sweet spot is so small and the images outside are fuzzy or slightly doubled. Frankly, I think that is why we get headaches. I don't think the current level of 3d technology adds anything major to a movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.