Avatar 2D or 3D?

[admin_exported]

Having watched both versions, I have to admit that i prefered the 2D version. While the 3D was awesome, i found myself looking at the effects more than concentrating on the movie. Then i watched the 2D version and totally got into the movie. And enjoyed it more.

But i'm sure that as we get used to 3D, i'll start enjoying the movie as opposed to the 3D effect.

Any one else think the same?

Rocky

 

[Alantiggger]

Nah, not for me.... i've watch both in 2D and 3D ... in my opinion there is no comparison, though it IS still a decent enough movie in 2D

I'd still say the 3d is waaaaaay better. I have no idea as to why you say ''Then i watched the 2D version and totally got into the movie. And
enjoyed it more.''

Maybe see a doctor ? perhaps an optician ?

 

[Anonymous]

Agree that I liked the 2D more, and still cannot imagine people sitting for hours watching tv with the glasses, Avatat was 3 hours long and I ended up with a headache imagine that for everyday use.

 

[Anonymous]

Alantiggger:

Maybe see a doctor ? perhaps an optician ?

There's no need to get personal, my friend. It was just my opinion. But thanks for you input.

 

[Anonymous]

xon501:Agree that I liked the 2D more, and still cannot imagine people sitting for hours watching tv with the glasses, Avatat was 3 hours long and I ended up with a headache imagine that for everyday use.

Yes, i agree it was a bit too long.

 

[Sliced Bread]

I've not seen it in 3D, but I thought the 2D picture on the Bluray was stunning. Definitely the best I have seen.

I really enjoyed it!

 

[Cofnchtr]

Hi,

Have to admit I've seen the film also in 2D - and the visuals were top notch. Not sure 3D would have enhanced anything and may even have been a distraction.

Cheers,

Cofnchtr.

 

[Anonymous]

Totally agree the 3D for me WAS a distraction and was not a real enhancement except for the high definition.......

 

[Anonymous]

rocky66:
Having watched both versions, I have to admit that i prefered the 2D version. While the 3D was awesome, i found myself looking at the effects more than concentrating on the movie. Then i watched the 2D version and totally got into the movie. And enjoyed it more.

But i'm sure that as we get used to 3D, i'll start enjoying the movie as opposed to the 3D effect.

Any one else think the same?

Rocky

Pretty much agree with that.

I thought the 3-D version @ the cinima was a great experience, but deffo got into the film more when watching on BD.

Big screen for 3-D

2-D (BD) for home viewing,(Surprisingly good)

Wouldn't have a 3-D TV I'm afraid.

 

[chudleighpaul]

For me the 2D version was more enjoyable. IMHO 3D is a passing phase which will be forgotton in a few years.

This is what happened before in the previous 3D era in the 1950's

 

[Anonymous]

JohnNewman:I've not seen it in 3D, but I thought the 2D picture on the Bluray was stunning. Definitely the best I have seen.

I really enjoyed it!

Agree with you there John. I havent seen it in 3D either but I thought the picture quality was the best I have ever seen.

And although the film wasnt a classic in the same way as say Titanic was, I did really enjoy the film. Obviously helped by those stunning visuals

 

[Anonymous]

seen the film in 3D in the cinema and got the Blu ray on 2d..

To be honest after watching the blu ray i rather not go for the 3D as can remember it being that much difference plus the glasses really hurt me especially near the ears.

i for one rather have super picture quality then waste more money on 3D its not like the 3D films are going to be the same price when released on blu ray these companies are going to make a killing in it when the release them 25 per blu ray dvd possibly may be more its all a big con in my opinion

 

[Anonymous]

Neither.

 

[Anonymous]

xon501:Agree that I liked the 2D more, and still cannot imagine people sitting for hours watching tv with the glasses, Avatat was 3 hours long and I ended up with a headache imagine that for everyday use.

Agree

And still can,t believe it how some people are falling for thise nonsense gimmicky 3D effect that only add's artificial depth to movie's followed with headache and distraction for many of us....

 

[Anonymous]

On the basis of what I have seen so far, I don't like 3D films.

 

[Anonymous]

Havent seen it in 2D yet but saw it at the cinema twice in 3D and i found brilliant both times, never got a headache and found that at times you just forgot about the 3D then suddenly something grabbed your attention and it was oh look at that it looks stunning! I will buy it in 2D but feel that if it becomes affordable would upgrade to 3D. I dont think it will ever take off or was ever meant to be for day to day viewing,its like buying a great film to watch its a treat, get some popcorn turn the lights off and enjoy!

 

[Anonymous]

eremis6:Havent seen it in 2D yet but saw it at the cinema twice in 3D and i found brilliant both times, never got a headache and found that at times you just forgot about the 3D then suddenly something grabbed your attention and it was oh look at that it looks stunning! I will buy it in 2D but feel that if it becomes affordable would upgrade to 3D. (1)I dont think it will ever take off or was ever meant to be for day to day viewing,its like buying a great film to watch (2)its a treat, get some popcorn turn the lights off (3)and enjoy!

(1) I certainly hope you are right and it does not take off or become regular viewing material.

(2) I would dispute that watching a 3D film, at least those released so far, constitutes a "treat." In fact, these days, finding a good film is treat enough for one's troubles.

(3) or not, as the case may be.

 

[Deleted member 2457]

I have not seen the Avatar in 3D but monster's Vs Alien's in 3D and at the same time on demostration was avatar in 2d on virtually every other tv in the shop and avatar looked much better, for me 3d is all about images popping out of the screen if it did not do that then it would be pointless.

for me it takes away the brilliance of 2d.

 

[Anonymous]

Totally agree with you gel. I've seen Alice In Wonderland 3D (shot in 2D but 3D added post production) as it was utterly rubbish! A waste of time. Tim Burton should stick to the old proven formula. 2D. IMHO.

 

[Cofnchtr]

Hi,

Rocky - was the film rubbish or the 3D (or both).

I wanted to go see this but it was only screening in 3D locally - not in the slightest bit interested in the 3D experience so stayed at home.

Cheers,

Cofnchtr.

 

[Anonymous]

Cofnctr,

Both i'm afraid. Bear in mind that Alice is not in true 3D, and it gave us a headache! save your £.

Cheers,

Rocky

 

[Anonymous]

sorry, spelt your name wrong

 

[Anonymous]

Watched both 3d and 2d, colours and images are sharper and much more vibrant in 2d. 3d cinema glasses in my experience always darken the image too much.

 

[Anonymous]

Just seen he 2D Blu ray Version and I was blown away by the immaculate picture, altough the colour palette is not the most natural around, the image is breath taking, really a great Blu Ray and is very 3 dimensional too, so the 3D gives only the benefit of something different and does not add anything to the movie IMO, except from lower brightness levels.

 

[Anonymous]

Na , sorry guys have to disagree, Avatar in 3D was truely amazing and if they started making all the action blockbusters in 3D I would be a very happy man. This is what folk do in this country if something becomes really popular we feel the need to tear it to pieces. This is the biggest grossing film of all time. I heard the critics responses, it has no great vision or artistic merits, its done by the numbers, bla bla bla. The film was 3 hrs of pure entertainment and i think that is what most people went to see at the cinema. As to whether this transfers to a 42 inch screen is another matter but im hoping so.