Avatar 3D (Blu-ray) Official AVSForum Review - Page 2

I thought 3D was dead.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...val-2011-1.DTL

Err... That score was for the audio visuals, stand alone. The film got a 4 out 5 star rating for the story... No perfect score there. How long has Ralph been doing these reviews and in all that time you have been mistaking the ratings he has given?

Err.. No "no matter the visuals"

I don't understand what you are trying to say?

I thought Avatar got Oscars in in visual effects and art direction, so it stands to reason that the Audio and visuals were of very high quality, hense the 100 score on Ralphs review. So where does the story of film come into this? It didn't get an Oscar for the story and Ralphs score of 4 stars also was pretty much in line with this as well.

Could you expand a bit of why it does not deserve 100 for the audio visuals?

thanks Ralph

if available, where to buy?

Wow, I'd like to check this out, as I have all the same problems with 3D that Ralph described.

Yes, of course, that's fine. Just adding my salt as I think it's a singular rating. Also 100 for anything in a rating system...??? Leaves it closed at the top. And that can't be.

But I do appreciate your work, no doubt.

I believe he use the word subjective!

Djoel

Maybe I missed it, what is the screen format of movie? 16:9 or 2.35:1?

Don't quite understand this myself. I see these as two separate issues at play. The quality of the key framing of the CGI and the process of the stereoscopic compositions aren't one and the same. Otherwise, the 3D clips of Beauty and the Beast would be downgraded for looking unrealistic as opposed to the stereoscopic renderings enhancing the 2D image already there.

16:9

Not sure why this is so difficult to grasp...this is a relative rating...i.e. this represents the best video/audio/3D quality that Ralph has experienced on his system. Of course, anything else that achieved this quality could receive the same rating. Those of you who have seen better video/audio/3D quality than offered by this disk please identify it as it would be of interest to the rest of us.

Thanks again Ralph.

Bought a new Panny VT25 and have this coming. Can't Wait..

As a fairly new 3D owner, and using a small old 50" Samsung DLP TV with the necessary add-on components for 3D viewing, I'm wondering how much (if any) those referenced size changes possibly have to do with the 3D's intended forward/outward depth perception, aka out in front of the TV's screen, and how well viewers' equipment makes that translation (screen type, glasses type/brand/etc i.e. DLP-Link vs IR, DLP vs Plasma vs LCD, etc) as admittedly I wasn't trying to critique the movie when I watched it at home in 3D but with the handful of 3D content I've watched so far I believe I know what you're referring to and I didn't notice it happening in Avatar 3D, plus I remember situations with older 3D stuff that when the "stereo separation" wasn't being fully portrayed the object would simply seem to get larger and larger instead of staying the same apparent size and coming further and further outward toward the viewers. I remember in the old-time 3D, if they tried to push objects excessively outward and did it often enough, some viewers would "lose their stereo lock" on the scenes with those objects in them and by the end of the show they'd complain and report an experience similar to what you're describing...
I DID see that sort of thing appearing to happen somewhat on Guitar Center Sessions' Jane's Addiction episode depending on the camera angle when the center stage bass player was the camera's target. Although it did appear to come waaaay out of the screen, several times the bass guitarist's arms and the guitar's neck seemed to be getting stretched and looked like 4 feet long all of a sudden at one point and then quickly snapped back to normal as they changed camera angles around him, and other things like that.
I haven't watched any of the "cartoony" movies yet, only the 3D Avatar and Resident Evil Afterlife 3D Blu-Ray movies (both fairly real live-action films) and a handful of other current DirecTV VOD content so far and found both Avatar AND Resident Evil thoroughly enjoyable without any of the 3D depth sizing/stretching wierdness I saw on that Guitar Center Sessions episode...
In that same Guitar Center Sessions episode the audio was also a bit out of sync so it was basically an example of what strange things can happen when shooting live subjects in real-time for 3D.


Although I wouldn't personally call the 2D Na'vi world unconvincing it definitely had that "watching TV" feel to it for me as my first Avatar experience.
Regrettably I missed Avatar 3D in theaters and saw the movie for the first time in 2D 1080i with DD 5.1 sound a couple hours after getting home from seeing Tron in IMAX 3D as my DirecTV HD-DVR captured Avatar's first (post-PPV) "movie channel" (commercial free HD) showing while I was at the local IMAX Theater watching 3D Tron and it's not that I was disappointed by the 2D version of Avatar, more like it felt like there was something missing as the audio fully drew me in and surrounded me and the extremely colorful and detailed 2D picture did not, and between virtually almost losing an eye during the Pirates of the Caribbean 3D preview at the Tron showing and what I saw of the 2D version of Avatar while knowing a 3D version exists I became totally intrigued as a result...
That began my quest for trying to make my unsupported DLP "3D-Ready" Samsung HDTV actually do current technology 3D as my "merry christmas to me" and here we are weeks later with my initially low expectations totally blown away and me totally floored at seeing both Avatar and then Resident Evil Afterlife with real and total "in your face" visual depth right there in my livingroom off my little old cheap 50" DLP TV...
Staring directly down the barrel of numerous large guns that appeared to be only inches from my face in both of those movies, and the clarity and detail in so many scenes, makes regular TV almost disappointing now.

Plus Tonight a friend convinced his kid to bring "her" new PS3 and the Call of Duty Black Ops game over to see if it would even work in 3D at all and once again we were all amazed and what we saw, at how clear and precise everything looked, and the fact that we had no obvious problems with the system that was providing us with that incredible 3D experience for hours and hours continuously until he pretty much peeled the controller out of her hand and dragged her kicking and screaming out the door... If only they'd left the PS3 behind, doh!

I bought really good IR Glasses and a genuine Mitsu/Samsung IR Emitter and the 3DA1 format adapter and a brand new S570 Sony BDP to test out this whole 3D-HDTV thing in addition to already having a DirecTV HD-DVR that could access their n3D offerrings and all I can say is WOW! Some of the DirecTV n3D content like ESPN 3D (720p!!!) is mediocre but some of it is simply amazing.

So back to this Avatar review...
Compared to the 3D Resident Evil Blu-Ray they were both good enough that I feel like it's going to be difficult for anything else with real live people in it to beat them, sight, sound, and all... Between my 3DTV setup and my Harman Kardon DD/DTS Decoder/Amp and 2 pairs of vintage mid 1970's "Advent Large Loudspeakers" providing the digital Surround Sound we finally felt totally involved and "up close and personal" in the whole home theater experience and I'm just that much happier with my decision to purchase this TV in 2008.

I sort of agree that the main reviewer set the bar pretty high right off the bat but from what I've seen of the latest commercial 3D movie and show content offerrings so far I have absolutely no complaints to offer about the Panasonic Avatar 3D BluRay disc whatsoever and feel that it's really going to be challenging for the movie industry to top the experience this disc gives you when viewed with good equipment for both sight and sound...

Thanks for the great review!

I am totally immersed when watching avatar in 2d, no TV feel here.

You need to read the criteria. Ralph (who can defend himself) did not give the movie/story a perfect rating. I know that seeing a perfect rating for a movie with a less than satisfying story can be misinterpreted, but Ralph only gave 4 out of 5 stars for the movie/story. This is an A/V forum and often his rating of the A/V quality outshines the quality of the movie itself.

I didn't watch this in the theater, either. The last movie I seen in the theater was Land of the Lost, LOL (I enjoyed it at the time and had discount tickets from my credit union).

I'm contemplating buying this movie and getting the free Panasonic BD player that is currently being offered on Amazon right now...however, I have watched this movie a few times since the release and even bought the extended edition (but haven't been able to complete the entire thing - I usually get bored of it and turn it off) so i don't know. Is it worth $155? I mean, it's still the same movie, only with depth. I would like to watch it at home in 3D as I just got my 3D system working yesterday, but I guess I can wait even longer when the movie is more affordable. I could get a couple more 3D glasses for the price of this admission.

Relative to WHAT??? If I'm not mistaken, this is Ralph's first and ONLY 3D review and he gives it a perfect score? Where's the benchmark? The first time I saw Captain EO 15 years ago I would have given it a perfect score. It was the most amazing thing I have seen and i had nothing to compare it to. Does that mean it is the best 3D rendition ever?

I'm not hacking in Ralph here specifically. I think a lot of his other reviews are spot on and some I disagree with. It's the purpose of a forum community in the first place, to share different opinions. I just think it is wrong to give a perfect score to a film in a category where it is far from perfect based on..... well, Im not sure what he based it on... It's not as bright as it should be, there are geometry errors, and the depth in spots was enhanced for the wow effect instead of actual depth.

I enjoyed the movie. but now a question. should the newer 3-D movies have it's own
forum section and should it be under the 3D section/3D central?
that's not to say you should still copy the 2D parts into the 3D review.
I just feel as 3D rolls out maybe it should be a standalone section.

Nonsense. It's a matter of perspective. He's not writing a white paper here, he's giving his evaluation based on his subjective reasoning, nothing more. I think the real issue is the assumption that a perfect score now somehow precludes the same from happening again which is silly and short sided. You can have a 100 now and a 100 five years from now because the review stands based on the fact that it's not written to be somehow set in stone for all ages. It's a brief glimpse into his analysis of the material at hand at this moment. What's so hard to understand about this?

You don't get it, he expects Ralph to make a rating on all the up-comming 3D movies over the next 100 years, so it can't be a 100 point rating.

I'll wait for Pocahontas to come out in 3D.

You must be one of those softcoks. And I can make a smily mark too!

Avatar, as 3d might be 100' not seen yet, but as a film, 100 score is entirely subjective IMHO, I never thought story wise, length was too much for my patience and story, lost the right tones, making those under tones.

The replies in this thread are staggering. Why don't you people read the review before posting critiques?

Excellent review, and I couldn't agree more. Looks absolutely brilliant on my Sony 55HX800.