Meant to be Seen

It’s been awhile since we did a 3D movie review on MTBS, so what better film to review than The Avengers?  Having already made well over a billion dollars in revenue, this superhero mash-up is the culmination of years of Marvel movie releases, post-movie credit snippets, and self perpetuating hype, hype, hype!



The movie opens in a private lab where S.H.I.E.L.D. Director Nick Fury and his team are studying the Tesseract, a cube of immeasurable power that can act as a gateway to another world.  Without warning, the Tesseract activates, a portal opens, and arch villain Loki appears with mind controlling scepter in-hand.  In one fell swoop, Loki steals the Tesseract, destroys the lab, and makes it clear that he is too powerful a dude for the human race to handle on their own.

Read full article...

Well I actually enjoyed the movie itself, it was fun. I didn't think the 3D was as bad as you say, but it was pretty mild. Par for the course these days.

Its unfortunate that some places do not know how to properly set the projector brightness. Its a problem. I've seen it quite a few times. Try Imax versions. They are usually much better for brightness of the imaging. And thus produce a better 3D effect.

Cheers

Funny, I actually thought the 3D was pretty good, especially for a conversion. Quite similar to Avatar in a lot of the indoor scenes despite not having unique eye information. Avatar also have very low separation. I experienced none of the brightness issues, etc. The biggest problem with the 3D I noticed was that in the last action sequences it was very low. Some of the action sequences such as the restart of the fan used 3D to create a 'set' pretty well.
I'm glad I saw it in 3D rather than 2D, I think it definitely added to the movie - it was pretty much the best conversion i have seen so far.

Well I actually enjoyed the movie itself, it was fun. I didn't think the 3D was as bad as you say, but it was pretty mild. Par for the course these days.

Cybereality, as a fetching young bachelor, had you been on a hot date and paid for two tickets instead of one with your hard earned money, you too would have been doubly horrified by the devastatingly bad 3D quality presented by The Avengers. The anomalies were so bad and distracting, I seriously considered the possibility that I was having mini strokes. I've been at this for a long time, and I never considered walking out of a 3D movie until now - and this is coming from a guy who truly loves 3D.

That said, despite the theaters dimness, Spider-Man in 3D looks promising. We'll see!

Just so I'm clear, the 2D version of The Avengers probably rocks! I wish I got to see it.

Regards,
Neil

Funny, I actually thought the 3D was pretty good, especially for a conversion. Quite similar to Avatar in a lot of the indoor scenes despite not having unique eye information. Avatar also have very low separation. I experienced none of the brightness issues, etc. The biggest problem with the 3D I noticed was that in the last action sequences it was very low. Some of the action sequences such as the restart of the fan used 3D to create a 'set' pretty well.
I'm glad I saw it in 3D rather than 2D, I think it definitely added to the movie - it was pretty much the best conversion i have seen so far.

The brightness issue was because of the theater, which is why we went marching down to customer service right after the showing. As for this being the best conversion seen in a long time, I don't know what to say. I was very unhappy with the 3D experience, and Metalqueen kept saying under her breath "this is the worst 3D I have ever seen" and "I can't watch this much longer". In her case, she remarked that the 3D made people look like paper dolls. I was more bothered that there were blurry patches and conflicts between what the left and right eye was seeing. I just felt stupid for sitting in that otherwise good movie and being forced to watch it in the condition it was in. I've never felt that way about a 3D movie before.

Regards,
Neil

I've a "Gaumont" theater at ten minutes walking from my house. On first 3D times they was using xpand system with a good result, then moved to reald with a not very good quality (ghosting, reald filter mis-sync, 2D projection with projector in 3D mode making flickering). I don't know exactly what they've done but over time the quality of the 3D projection become as good as it was when they was using xpand system.

I saw Avengers in 3D in this theater and I didn't saw big 3D artifacts. I felt the 3D was clear but not totally perfect, and depth was adequate: in example I have never to ask myself if a scene was really in 3D (which happened with avatar). But it's true I do not search for some kind of "waow" out of screen effect, I just simply attempt the 3D to make the movie more realistic. I think that S3d waow effects are disturbing making the spectator focusing on the effect instead of the movie itself, so I think it's bad for the immersion.

Normally, when we go to a 3D movie, we forget that we have the glasses on. This was not the case here. The dimness of the image was the theaters fault, but unless there was something seriously wrong with the film itself (was the file corrupted?), the anomalies were unavoidable. I've never complained about a movie to a theater's customer service before.

If it was just me, I'd argue that maybe my eyes are a little different and I don't see things quite the way others do. However, I went to the movie with Pam, and she couldn't keep her 3D comments to herself through the whole movie. Is this 3D movie quality considered the norm now?!?

Regards,
Neil

The 3D was not that good, but it was not terrible, either. Hard to give it a fair review without seeing it on a good screen.

I'm looking forward to see the movie.The mixed 3d-reviews kinda makes me curious but for conversions i'm generally out of any glimmer of hope...
I'm so out of time these days but hopefully, maybe i can go see it this weekend.

Palmer: Had those anomalies been further brightened, I'm certain my mini-strokes would have been exacerbated into a full-on vegetative state.

Likay: Curiosity is not worth the time and money to waste on the 3D version of this movie. SAVE your money! Better yet, see the movie in 3D, and if you don't like it within 10 minutes, ask for your money back and see the 2D showing. Longer exposure to this 3D crap isn't good for your eyes anyway. I'm certain a naked eye eclipse would be far more entertaining, and yes, it would be a wiser investment for your hard earned dollars.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdFLPn30dvQ[/youtube]

Forgive the lack of taste in the above video (from Animal House), but seriously - since when do people think it's acceptable to voluntarily pay extra money for supposedly status quo lousy crap?!?

Regards,
Neil

Well I will say this: if 3D does end up dying, it will be because of cheap conversions and ultra-conservative depth in popular movies.

I'll go see the 3d-version anyway but due to Neils review i'll make a pair 3d-to-2d glasses with clockwise polarization only, just in case. Amazing how the 3d-evolution goes!

This movie would be a nice fit for a survey about how the 3D was perceived by people who watched it. And a good indication for the future of 3D conversions too...

3D is definitely not going to last if cinemas are able to pass off dim, artifacty crap as '3D'.
Despite the conservative 3D, I do like the way more filmmakers are using 3D to create a 'stage' where the actors are walking around in. I find it adds to the movie when done correctly.
However, nothing is ever as cool as 'Treasure of the 4 Crowns' which I saw in the 3D revival early 80's, which threw everything at the camera possible and really hammed up the pop out effect. I want a modern 3D movie like that...

So,quite since so long!!!
let me first put some questions Where are the reviews of

Darkest Hour 3D
Jhon Carter 3D
Green Hornet 3D
Green Lantern 3D
Lion King 3D
Harry Potter 3D
Puss in Boots 3D
Smurfs 3D
Ghost Rider 3D

Journey 2 The Mystreious Islend 3D
TINTIN 3D


Out of first nine only Marked bold has impressed rest were ok some are CRAP (Of course 3D point of View)

I Seriously loved JOURNEY 2 and TINTIN

Again for TINTIN hates off to Steven Spielberg SIR.
its beyond argue MUST WATCH for every 3D/ANIMATION/COMIC & MOVIE lover
with FULL FAMILY (My grand pa loved TINTIN in 3D)

Why so long silence??

Yep,Agree Avengers do not have good 3D effect sadly i have also noticed this case that in some scenes one eye has blurry picture which disappointed me for otherwise good movie
most people in movie hall & even after leaving were discussing HULK and IRONMAN so yes they have stolen attention. Always loved Robert Downey Jr as IRONMAN so no point in appose
i think a few actors can exhibit better attitude of IRONMAN though he started looking old but see some times oldies look much impressive as i liked sean connery more in THE ROCK & ENTRAPMENT then in & AS JAMES BOND

I have seen this movie in Active 3D system theater may be DLP Linked i don know but those are bulky shades with dark red plastic around LCD which is way thicker then usual i think those are DLP link glasses but don know it can be RF Glasses also

They were making skin tone unnatural every thing looked little darken and with less vibrance and sort of you look through dark sun glasses at 1600Hrs when world is bright and you percive late evening

I know i have to avoid this theatre but its really near by my home (1Km away) so i go there same franchise (CINEMAX) has passive theater also but its around 10KMs away and there is Horror Traffic in peak hours.once your city become megacity and you start pay for it by facing hell traffic problems,but i think will go REALD Passive Cinemax only now onwards as QUALITY MATTERS!!

Sorry got little side tracked

So agree with bad conversion and yes this movie has some sort of one eye bluriness problem and bad conversion with said "Conservative" flatness

I think i hate conversions its just cheapo way to encash 3D Hype and will eventually drain interest of people from powerful medium and its said in our country INSTANT RIPED MANGOES TASTE TWICE SOUR EVEN IF THEY LOOK GOLDEN

WHEN there will be MOVIEGRADE 3D??

I think every 3D movie must clearly quote its SHOT IN 3D or CONVERTED 3D as most conversion don give good results (Except TITANIC as it was a master piece and converted only as it was a master piece and converted FRAME By FRAME with Director's Touch)but no one does it that way i love to see original JURASSIC PARK in 3D if Steven Spielberg SIR consider conversion.

Sure there should be a dedicated section for movie....

Yep,Agree Avengers do not have good 3D effect sadly i have also noticed this case that in some scenes one eye has blurry picture which disappointed me for otherwise good movie

I'm not crazy...not crazy...not crazy am I....not crazy.

Regards,
Neil

Not crazy...

Still haven't seen it or even made a pair of "stereo to mono"-glasses yet. Had to do some work in the weekend and the rest of the time the beautiful weather forced room for some grilling and socializing. I will, however, see it someday!

It's weird, I saw more depth 3D in Avenger than in Prometheus.

It's weird, I saw more depth 3D in Avenger than in Prometheus.

While watching the Avengers in 3D...were you watching it in 2D, but standing at the back of the theater? It's the only explanation I could think of.

Regards,
Neil

I actually went to see this twice at the cinemas, both in 3D and both using RealD. As a side note, this is in Australia $21 a ticket and both times I went with my partner so was a $42 experience for us (each viewing).
First time - this was in a Village Vmax http://villagecinemas.com.au/Cinemas/VMax.htm cinema which are pretty big screens. Watching this I thought it was amazing! The 3D was varied in terms of depth, but was always reasonable to me, and was there for certain during the points where I felt it mattered most. The projectionist at that cinema must be given praise because it was setup perfectly with brightness obviously at the correct level to compensate for the 50% loss due the 3D. The sound in the cinema was also set to the right level so that it was loud, but not hurting or distorting.
Second time - I went to a smaller screen cinema. This was pretty underwhelming, especially since the experience the first time was pretty much spot on. The brightness seemed half what it should be. The sound was (as seems common these days) far too loud, to the point that the speakers were constantly distorting. The smaller screen size meant that the 3D appeared really shallow, and nothing in comparison to the first time.

One comment is that neither times did I notice the extreme anomalies with the conversion to 3D that Neil is referring to! There were times when it was a little flatter then it should be, but overall it was a great experience in 3D. Maybe I've just got so used to the regular customer experience that I don't notice it as much now since I've not bothered with custom 3D implementations in ages due to time constraints.

I think one lesson here is that we really need to learn which cinemas have projectionists that know there stuff, and stick with them!

Well Confirmed
REALD has much much better 3D results

I have seen MB3 and was quite impressed with good 3D
Nice and clear 3d Effect throughout movie storyline is little weak
but overall good movie a nice addon in mib franchise