Orange Wednesday + Student Discount = £2.50 odd

We haven't been as much this term but we used to frequent it quite regularly last year...

I'm tempted only for the novelty factor, however I am put off by knowing that after 10 minutes I will have "been there done that", and I won't have any money left for the pub afterwards. It always happens when a new technology comes out, the technology steals the show, it becomes the raison d'etre of the films, these films age terribly and couldn't survive without the hype machine. And the blue faces annoy me.

Is IMAX 3D different to other 3D?

Are there different technologies involved?

I'm with the egg on this one.


Oh and I can't stand cinemas.

IMAX just means it's on a huge screen... huge.

clicky

Ratings and opinions are always going to carry a certain amount of subjectivity. There are people out there who have convinced themselves they aren't going to like the film before they even watch it, or worse - don't go to see it because of preconceptions.

My advice is - just go and see it, pay your £10 and at least take the opportunity to view the film in the medium it was made for.

Exactly.

I happened to love the plot. But I recognise that as a personal preference, not a statement of fact about how "good" the story is. Like The Matrix 10yrs ago, this in an industry game changer and IMO is worth seeing purely for that. Others may disagree. But please disagree once you've seen it at the cinema!

JJ £20 might buy you a lot in St. Austell, or wherever it is you are now, but this movie was £7.50 in Truro in 3D. It would've been £10 in Plymouth or Exeter, and then there's food. I'm sure we've had this debate here before but it seems the majority here just don't appreciate the cinema like I do and would rather couch it up with the Mrs/Mr. Each to their own I suppose

ZOMG, don't say people might not go and see it!!

People would rather go and watch some chipmunks.

http://www.imdb.com/news/ni1336177/

*sigh* It isn't a competition Chris, it's just my opinion (and others) based on actually seeing the film. Also your link is actually viewing figures for the two films on their first day head to head. Bear in mind Avatar had already been out for 6 days by then.

Tell you what, you go and watch Alvin and the chipmunks, I'm sure you'll love it and the plot is not to testing, but if you do decide to tear yourself away from your keyboard and find out for yourself whether Avatar lives up to the hype or not - take some I.D. it's a '12'.

Me either. It's bad enough spending the best part of £10 (ticket, splitting the car parking money) for a film that turns out to be 'meh' at best



+1 to all that

No.

Another +1 for Mark's thoughts on the matter.

I want story first and foremost. Effects are amazing the first time you see them, but a good story will keep people coming back for more. A lot of the films I watch the most have little or no effects, but excellent storytelling and good acting. If a film doesn't have those two, it just isn't going to appeal - I fell asleep in Transformers, it was so boring.

There is nothing wrong with including visual effects, but it needs to add to the story and acting, not replace them.

Likewise 3D, until I can watch the film without having to wear stupid glasses, I'm not going to bother. I heard a review on a podcast, where the reviewer said that he happened tilt his head to the side and the whole thing was unwatchable, because the 3D glasses stopped working. Considering I spend half of most films cuddling up with my girlfriend, with my head at an angle, that would negate the 3D effects and probably just cause a headache...

What are you talking about?

It doesn't make a difference what angle your head is at - I certainly wasn't making sure my head was dead straight, and spent a lot of the film with my head rested on my arm - nowhere near straight.

The film still looked great.