Avatar

[cutmymilk]

I've seen it in Real D. Didn't realise it was different in an IMAX. What are the differences? I know Real D is more about depth, does IMAX make stuff stick out?

[nonny]

I think the bottom line here is this is the first movie in ages that has made me want to return to the cinema for a second viewing.

On a personal point this is mainly because I own a front projector HT setup which would almost compare with general cinema viewing when you factor in Blu-Ray but having seen this in 3D Gold Class luxury on the weekend it has actually been in my mind for the whole week and I want to go and see it again in IMAX if I can.

Is the IMAX 3D really that more significant? I was already massively impressed with the 3D I watched in the normal cinema.

[Matt]

I've seen a few 3D films, and nothing has come close to the imax 3D presentation of this film - which was my first time at the imax.

Now it wasn't perfect, but the 3D was more focused. I find "regular 3D" can be blurry with items close to the camera (I don't mean camera out-of-focus, I mean the 3D effect falls apart). At the imax it seemed more solid.

And I can't emphasise the difference in picture quality. It was brighter, which helps with the dimming effect of the glasses, but also you could see a lot more small detail like particles.

And the sound during the explosions - WOW

I've no idea what each cinema used for their 3D projection. I was honestly surprised when the imax glasses didn't work, so much so I ran out just before the film started to grab a pair (I didn't bother "trying" them during the 3D trailers, I was too busy eating ice cream ). For anyone interested, I saw the imax at The Odean, next to the O2/Dome, and today Cineworld in Crawley, screen 11.

I'm planning on many trips to the imax in future, even though it's around a 160 mile round trip for me. Cost £15 per seat, but the quality far surpasses any other cinema I've been at. Has nice seats as well

[Matt]

I've seen it in Real D. Didn't realise it was different in an IMAX. What are the differences? I know Real D is more about depth, does IMAX make stuff stick out?

I think the 3D may be pronounced, but would need side-by-side viewings to really know for sure. The effect is more solid and believable at the imax, it's hard to explain - I thought I could touch Sigourney Weaver

[cutmymilk]

Was the screen curved? I have been looking for articles comparing technologies and found this:

http://3dvision-blog.com/what-to-choose-imax-3d-versus-reald-versus-dolby-3d-for-3d-movies/

[Matt]

Nope, flat screen.

Thanks for the link. I can only go by my own, limited, experiences. Despite what that article said, the imax 3D was a much better experience for me.

What they say about imax 3D having more things popping out of the screen may be correct, Cameron seems aware of making it gimmicky and avoids that, other than one or two shots. I'm sure the increased resolution helped.

You know that bit right at the start where

->Open Spoiler<-

Jake just wakes up from the 6 year trip, and the technician floats over to him and hovers above his bed? At the imax that stunned me, at Cineworld it was kind of blurry and undefined.

There are lots of examples of that.

I hope you get to sample the imax so you can let us know your opinion

[Bydo]

Did anyone see this at the Print Works IMAX in Manchester?

I saw it there on Sunday. I loved the film, and the experience on the massive screen was fantastic, but myself and the misses found that in some areas of the screen the 3D was blurred - all the way through the film.

I can only describe it as having a 'sweet spot' where things looked great, but the rest didn't (like mild tunnel vision). For the record, we were sat in the premier seats.

[elaniel]

I'm planning on many trips to the imax in future, even though it's around a 160 mile round trip for me. Cost ?15 per seat, but the quality far surpasses any other cinema I've been at. Has nice seats as well

Wow... ?15 a seat? My IMAX was a bargain. Only ?9 a seat.

I'm going to see it in standard 3D next week, I'm preparing to be disappointed

[cutmymilk]

Nope, flat screen.

Thanks for the link. I can only go by my own, limited, experiences. Despite what that article said, the imax 3D was a much better experience for me.

What they say about imax 3D having more things popping out of the screen may be correct, Cameron seems aware of making it gimmicky and avoids that, other than one or two shots. I'm sure the increased resolution helped.

You know that bit right at the start where

->Open Spoiler<-

Jake just wakes up from the 6 year trip, and the technician floats over to him and hovers above his bed? At the imax that stunned me, at Cineworld it was kind of blurry and undefined.

There are lots of examples of that.

I hope you get to sample the imax so you can let us know your opinion

See, I was wowed by that too at Cineworld, Cardiff. It was like I was looking into a tunnel. Nothing blurry through the entire performance. I did make a point of getting there 30 mins before showtime to get a central seat... not sure what difference that makes as its where I always sit (for 3D especially).

After reading Bydo's post, maybe it's just how well the equipment has been set up.

That said, in a week or two I will take a trip to the newly opened (literally 2 weeks ago) IMAX screen in Odeon Cardiff Bay to see for myself. I have only seen the short films in IMAX previously which are very much in-your-face tech demos.

Stunning film, regardless.

[Atticus]

Was so looking forward to this but thought it was pretty average. Yes it works as a spectacle and 3D showcase but as a film it's not up to Cameron's usual standards. Great theme park ride but a great film? I didn't think so

[spagmasterswift]

Seems to be the prevailing opinion - hype levels are very low for me now.

[NW2013]

Just got back from the Imax 3D at the Metrocentre. I haven't read all of the opinions in the thread yet but it was an awesome technical spectacle. I haven't seen any other 3D films yet but this was brilliant. Perhaps the extra size of the screen helps with the immersion? I'd definitely recommend it to anyone.

As I'm sure others have pointed out the story itself is no great shakes, predictable and cliched and you can see where the story is going after 10 mintues. They could have shaved an hour out of the film (at least) and still told the same story although you would have missed some great effects.

It was &#163;10.50 a seat (standard) just in case anyone is curious.

Reading that article someone linked to, is it correct? The Imax I went to was absolutely pin sharp and had a good pop out effect as well as great depth of field into the screen too. If other technologies are better my gob will be well and truly smacked!

Oh: that Dreamworks dragon tamer film had some impressive 3D too from the trailer.

[MJ]

Was the screen curved? I have been looking for articles comparing technologies and found this:

http://3dvision-blog.com/what-to-cho...for-3d-movies/

All of the 3D films I've seen have been an our local Empire Cinema and they use Dolby 3D Digital.

[hudson]

Saw this in 3D and it was an excellent looking film. The blue 'eads looked dead good

The first 1/3 of the film was ace. Discovering this new planets with Jakesully was brilliant. There were certain parts that dragged slightly, well I was either tired or the film made me drop off ever so slightly a couple of times. Could of been the reclining seats too. When I say drop off, I mean like a split second.

Still I recommend you go and see this. In 3D too if you can.

Question about 3D movies. Is the film displayed a bit more brightly than usual due to the 3D specs being like shades?

[spagmasterswift]

the film made me drop of ever so slightly a couple of times.

They should put that on the poster!