Alita: Battle Angel (new Cameron/Rodriguez SF epic)

I have no problem at all with this sort of thing. I'm not sure if it was my years working in 3D animation that made me more forgiving of that last 5%, or if I have less problem surrendering disbelief than other people for other reasons.

I want to see more of this type of thing, and I think that all the people who have knives out for James Cameron are going to eat crow yet again (remember how Titanic was going to be the biggest bomb ever? As was Avatar?)

 

Yup, proving it can be done if one is willing to write it that way.

 

You laugh, but Christoph Waltz was in the film Big Eyes with Amy Adams about Walter and Margaret Keane.

 

Normally, I'm not a fan of 3D, but Rodriguez and Cameron are extremely hip on the project and Alita was one of the rare movies actually shot in 2-camera 3D on the set. So I have no doubt it looks terrific.

 

I can't see 3D (I can see out of both eyes, but like 12% of the population, cannot integrate forced 3D perspectives) so I don't care, but Hollywood's insistence that post-produced artificial 3D is "good enough" is as dumb as shooting in monochrome and colorizing everything.

 

Actually, really good dimensionalizing can work very well. The problem is that it costs about $100,000 per minute ($12 million+ for an average 2-hour action film) and takes 4-5 months for 2000 overseas artists to accomplish. So it's a ton of trouble to do. The first 3D film that made me sit up and take notice was Alice in Wonderland in 2010, which I worked on a little bit for Technicolor. In this case, they designed the film from start to finish in 3D and deliberately staged every shot for 3D, so it all came together very well (done by Sony Pictures Imageworks). A couple of years ago, I saw The Avengers in 3D in 2012, and after seeing it I thought, "wow, they must have shot it in 3D." But it was totally dimensionalized in post by StereoD. So it can be done if they really want to spend the time and money at it.

No question, the results look better when the depth information is captured during production, as with Hugo and Avatar. There are techniques now being used where instead of using 2 video cameras, they use one camera and a bunch of sensors and then use the sensors to feed the computers and technicians involved in dimensionalizing the film. I don't know if this is being done yet, but one hopes it'll be a simpler, more effective way of producing 3D without any compromise.

I used to hate 3D because the image was so dim, but once Dolby Vision & Imax started using Christie CP42LH Laser projectors that bumped the brightness up about 25fL (which becomes about 10fL with the glasses), it was a lot harder for me to criticize the image quality. I sympathize with anybody who can't experience 3D imagery, and I get that this is an eye/brain issue that does affect a certain part of the population.

 

Yes......I do laugh.....

 

the best visual effects (motion capture) I've ever seen.

 

I'm seeing this comment a lot from people who've seen it, how was the story though? was it engaging enough?

 

The story is fine, my favorite visual action movie I've seen in the last 3 years.

 

I saw it. It looked good for the most part, however I wish it was Rodriguez all in. “Basic Story is good. Exact script is very weak. All Cameron’s fault imho.

But I did enjoy it, but I kept thinking; WTF, this could be so much better.

 

For one the violence is toned down considerably from the manga in order to get a PG-13, it makes me wonder if they should've made an "R" rated movie and let the chips fall where they may.

The writing credits for the movie show Laeta Kalogridis, James Cameron and Robert Rodriguez based on the graphic novel series by Yukito Kishiro. Who knows what the real % contribution was from each.

 

They might release an unrated cut on disc.

 

no matter what they say the eyes creep me out! if this turns up on Netflix I will watch it and be freaked! LOL...

 

that's what they usually do...gotta bring ya in!

 

remember the big eyes dolls?

 

Curious how you know it’s all Cameron’s fault.

 

Thanks for that. I generally don't go to 3D that was upconverted so this info tilts the scales!

 

By deduction:

I’ve seen most of Cameron’s films and Ive seen most Rodriquez films. Cameron gets pretty schmatzy in a portion of his films with some exceptions. His writing if very different than Rodriquez.

Rodriguez goes the opposite way. Even in his Spy Kids film , he presents an edge in those fairly family friendly movies.

Since this was Cameron’s baby for almost a decade, it seems Rodriquez was somewhat of a hired hand after Cameron solidified his ideas . It certainly didn’t seem to be Rodriquez’s vision.

I could be wrong, but this opinion is based on seeing almost all of their individual films.

 

... Uncle Machete, for instance.

 

Big eye fatigue here. Also primary colored hair in strange shapes fatigue.

 

And just to cover the other side of opinions, Deadline: Hollywood just gave the movie a surprisingly positive review:

The human actors also include a mysterious Jennifer Connolly as well as Mahershala Ali as Vector, a villainous role for a change. Waltz fares best among them, showing real compassion for his creation. But the movie belongs to Salazar, who shows that motion capture doesn’t have to be fake or stiff and really digs into the soul of Alita, making her well worth watching. But I have to say the real stars here are WETA and the digital wizardry that lets this come so vividly to life. It might not be The Terminator, but it’ll do. You’ll have a good time, especially in 3D and Imax; the bigger the better for this one.

‘Alita: Battle Angel’ Review: James Cameron & Robert Rodriguez Make Cyborg Girl Power Action-Packed Fun

 

Based on a very recent interview from Jon Landau they gave RR a 186 page script written by Cameron and 600 pages of notes, he chopped 60 pages or so out of it.

(see his Feb 12 posting if interested - 53 minute interview)
Jon Landau

 

There's a definite disconnect between reviewers and the general audience. 60% from critics and 93% from fans on Rotten Tomatoes as of this morning. Near unanimous praise for the visuals, a good pre-cursor for what's coming with the Avatar sequels.

 

So why bother? If there is such a need for 3D, one would thing RED or ARRI would make cameras that could be paired to shoot stereo without the need for a half-silvered mirrors. I understand the issue of focusing two lenses, but is it really such a hassle that it's always going to be cheaper to do fake 3D?