Based solely on viewing a tiny preview clip, (a) the quality of the animation in this movie is breathtaking; (b) I feel no urge to see it because it looks like every fantasy story that I despise ("And then Dweezil summoned the elders of the Fribble clan to perform the Schwagga-song of quickening, to teach the sprite-lings the ancient art of <snore>")

As for (a), you haven't even seen it in 3D.

As for (b)... I don't do elfy-welfy either and this looks e-w to the nth.

The buzz on the hardcore movie boards I frequent is that it looks like either Dark Crystal or Ferngully reimagined, nothing anyone would pay to see much less remake.

OTOH, I'll cut Cameron enough slack to go see it opening weekend. The man has turned out one or two truly legendary stories on celluloid and I trust that this one, his dearest baby and fifteen years in development, holds up. I'm hoping a little more for... Last (of the Mohicans) in Space.

If not, it will be 9 in 3D... fabulous visuals, story-what-story?

Without peering too closely at it yet, I'm hoping for a mix of Alan Dean Foster's Midworld and John Scalzi's Old Man's War.

I've heard it's originally a comic book, though, so I'm tempering my expectations. The commercials do look lovely, though.

Uh, no, it's an original story by James Cameron (as was Terminator). It has no formal predecessors of any kind.

It may be the only sci-fi-ish thing in years that didn't start as a graphic novel or comix, though.

I was invited as a member of my local Cinema Club to an extended 3-D preview a couple of months ago, and I'm pretty excited about it. Consider the source, though; there isn't any aspect of the film that represents anything I explicitly try to avoid in movies, as is true for some of you. Unfortunately, its release corresponds to my departure on a 2-week Christmas vacation out of range of the multiplexes, so I don't expect to be able to see it until after the first of the year. But as soon as I get back, I plan to see it at the big *real* IMAX theater in the Metreon in San Francisco.

I am hoping to see it this week sometime - even my wife (who is normally bored silly by sci-fi - she is the mother of my children, so I have to keep her around! lol) wants to see it!

I want to do the 3d thing as I have never seen a 3d film, and this one is supposed to be a doozy!

If no one else posts a review I will do so when I can.

I shudder at the last movie I heard Cameron making after he held onto the story for years....The Abyss.

I'm afraid Cameron may be on that track....but I'll go see the eye candy where it belongs, up on the big screen.

Worth a shot.

But then, I thought the same about the last three Star Wars films...shudder....

I wouldn't peg it at an all-time great, but it was a decent little flick.

The Abyss is one of my all-time favorite movies. I wouldn't give it an Oscar in any category but I'll watch it once or twice a year unto my dotage. Especially the full-length cut; the original theatrical cut was weak in spots.

For my money, the best sequence Cameron has ever done (non-3D, at least) is the final battle between Ripley and the queen in Aliens. I think many people who've formed opinions of The Abyss have done so on the basis of the theatrical version, not the extended cut. As for the "original story" of The Terminator, I'm sure most people here know about the end credit "acknowledgment to the works of Harlan Ellison" added as a result of legal action by Ellison on the basis of similarity to one or both of his Outer Limits scripts of 20 years earlier. Scalzi, on his blog, indicated in November that he believes Cameron's script does indeed predate Old Man's War (see whatever.scalzi.com/?s=cameron), but then he hasn't seen the movie yet.

If the Avatar technology is any good, maybe someone can use it to make a film of Stephenson's Snow Crash?

Seen, in IMAX 3-D. I will post some longer reviews and critique later, but for now, it met all of my fondest expectations, barely brushed my fears, and all in all lives up to the tremendous hype. James Cameron has now officially gone from King of the World to God.

About half an hour from the end, you get a good sense of how and where it's going to end. In the brief lulls, I thought about how I'd do it - what the final, closing shot had to be. Either I should have gone into filmmaking or Cameron simply laid his groundwork well, preparing my thinking, but it got to the final scene, the final shot... and Cameron nailed it, nailed it like Pavarotti hitting the most difficult note of his career. I honestly wanted to jump up and scream, "YESSSSS!!"

If anyone wants to jump the gun on detailed discussion, please start a SPOILER thread.

My first 3-D movie; saw it as IMAX today. No spoilers but encouragement to go see it, even if only for the technology. For what it's worth, neither of us felt we had been there for three hours when the credits rolled.
Do suggest you buy your tickets online if you're going soon; our Sunday am showing was sold out by Friday morning.
Will probably see it again.

I liked the Abyss - but the ending dissapointed me a bit. A little weak! Good movie though and Effects were pretty gopod for the day.

As long as the scraps from the proverbial "cutting room floor" are preserved, there are always endless opportunities for alternate releases, since directors almost always shoot many more hours of footage than appears in the threater. Before the advent of home video, there was never much of a market for such product.

I saw it wed. afternoon, sold out show. Be sure to see in 3-D as I beleive that is where it shines. It was my first 3-D film, since a truly horrendous "Metalstorm" in the 80's. I couldn't believe how the 3-D has improved. The movie was visually stunning. As far as the story was concerned, I found the plot to be very derivitive and predictable. The only truly inovative element in the movie, was the neural connection between the Na'vi and the animals of the planet. A feature that I have encountered in a few books, but never encountered on screen. I'm going to give it a thumbs up for the CGI and 3-D and thumbs down for the plot. Still go and see it if your a geek like me.

I saw it last night in 3D IMAX. Enjoyed the hell out of it. My son, the artistic one, spent the entire drive home explaining to me the technical aspects of the film. I feel really old.

Ok, I confess to not knowing that there was an extended version of The Abyss that improved it. The same improvement is true, btw, of the first Star Trek film. For some reason, in the theatrical release, they cut most of the humor, mostly from McCoy. When I found the extended version, it wasn't quite good, but it became at least watchable.

As for Avatar, I have seen it, and I think the author of Dances with Wolves, and Anne McCaffrey, should be suing for massive plagiarism.

Especially McCaffrey.

Robert

I ran across a nice post on Dark Roasted Blend on , going beyond the obvious overlaps with Dances With Wolves, Ferngully, and Pocahantas.

And, of course, now Cameron announces... it's a trilogy.

I wrote a 5 page article obsessively discussing the 3-D technologies that are being utilized for the projection of the film. Basically, I've seen Avatar 3 times with a different type of projection each time, and each time I had a less than ideal experience. I'd be happy to post the article, but it's pretty long and very neurotic. Basically my conclusions are:

Most people won't get much of a choice which screening to go to, but there are about 7 kinds of ways to view Avatar. Here in los angeles I can see it all 7 ways--

there are different ways to see it projected on film or digital projection, either in 2-D and 3-D... Most people see it in 3-D. (If you wear an eyepatch, go to the 2-D.)
there are aspect ratios that range from 1.78:1 (16:9), which is actually the native resolution, to 1.85:1, 2.35:1, and 2.7:1 (Cinerama Dome in L.A. or Seattle).
there are at least 4 rival companies that compete to present the 3-D experience using digital projection: Linear Polarization, Dolby 3D, Real D, and XpanD.

unfortunately theaters almost never tell you in advance whether it will be film or digital projection, the aspect ratio, the 3-D experience, or the type of projector used (newer projectors are brighter and brightness is key if using 3-D glasses that dims the light by about 5%. I always sit in front at 3-D movies to compensate).

Having seen it 3 times, I can say without reserve that if you have the opportunity to see Avatar using XpanD LCD shutter glasses, it's by far the best 3-D. Real D is considered 2nd best, and is usually the best option available in smaller cities (Real D glasses look like big Ray-Ban Wayfarers). IMAX 3-D looks awesome, but you have to sit near the front because the cheap linear polarization glasses they give you dim the light and reduce your peripheral vision.

Not sure what to say about the film itself other than I hope it inspires young people to want to become astronauts and scientists. It's not exactly hard SF, but I can sort of believe that somewhere there could be a moon where all the life forms are connected to a giant living Gaia-like organism via tendrils and ganglia. And I just want a hot blue catwoman to be my girl.

Here's an article from Digg that claims Dolby 3D is as good or slightly better than Real D. If XpanD is not an option where you live (it is brand new), then I think the most important thing is to ask a manager ahead of time which screen is the largest in the theater and which projector and sound system is the newest.
http://3dvision-blog.com/what-to-choose ... 3d-movies/

Just finished watching the special edition of The Abyss, and very satisfying it was too. Bordering on all time great, I would say.

I know few movies in which the story arcs keep rolling and getting bigger for such a long time - I don't think anyone sitting down to watch the film in ignorance could predict any of the major plot points before they unfolded.

It owes a lot to Orson Scott Card - Cameron hired him to write the novelization and the massive backstory he wrote for all the characters, especially Bud and Lindsay, filtered back into subtle interactions and fill in the film.

It also has much of the greatest, most believable dialogue in any film. For example, I spent some time working with a firm that provided materials to oil drillers. Bud's dialogue is spot-on down to the last nuance even though most terms and phrases will go right past most of the audience. (F'rex, Bud says, "He don't know his butt from a rat hole." Funny in any context... but a rathole is a specific part of the oil drilling setup. There's also a mousehole.)

Abyss has been in my top ten movies since I first saw it.

Just got around to seeing Avatar (with a 3-month old, even this took a stretch). Um, like, wow. My initial impression that I opened the thread with couldn't have been more wrong. This is a landmark effects movie and an instant classic with the emotional appeal of Titanic.

Story-wise, I'd class it as a cross between Star Wars and Dances with Wolves. The message is blatant, but it's a good one to harp on in an age when Fox is the most-watched news channel (that still depresses me). It's the American Indian and the rainforest natives meeting Apocalypse Now. Works for me.

Every movie from now on is going to be released in 3-D: it's a perfect antidote to piracy. But Avatar should be remembered as the one that put the technology on the map. (To forestall nitpicking: I know it wasn't the first. That's not what I'm talking about.)