The Avengers The Avengers: News and Speculation - Part 27A sub-se - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 62

[HighFivingMF]

I'm not sure I understand that scenario.
If you *bought* the DVD/BR, why would you have any need to watch it at home on anything *other* than your DVD/BR? Unless you're saying that your DVD/blu-ray player is broken/in the shop or something.

He means watching it after it leaves theaters but before it hits Blu-Ray/DVD when he plans on buying the movie once it's out.

 

[Brian Braddock]

Bingo; 'months in between' and all that.

 

[Shadow Moses]

uk tv ad I captured with some new hulk shots

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhSDzddCCWI

ignore if old

 

[RaZaTrOn]

uk tv ad I captured with some new hulk shots

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhSDzddCCWI

ignore if old

No new footage mate, that's the We are at War spot I believe. I also caught the Headcount spot on TV earlier today!

 

[TerryMcGinnis]

I think there's different embargoes for different countries.

Kind of pointless in this day and age, isn't it? It's not like news travels via carrier pigeons.

 

[Son of Coul]

So does anyone know when exactly the overseas embargo is expected to lift? I've heard 14th, 16th, and 20th. Figure the May 2 date can't be since it wouldn't make sense for UK to put the movie out with zero reviews unless it was a turd. Plus Empire said their review would be up on the 20th.

Based on those dates, I guess we'll know tomorrow though.

 

[snowball's mom]

Didn't Thor and Captain America come with digital copies you could download?

You can by the blue-ray with a regular DVD and a digital copy, but I have not seen digital copies packaged with regular DVDs.

 

[Brian Braddock]

Yeah, my regular DVD copies didnt have 'em.

 

[spidey-dude]

So when does the embargo lift on reviews from critics? At first someone said the 16th, then it became the 2nd of May, yet Empire have stated that their review will be online on the 20th.

So does anyone know when exactly the overseas embargo is expected to lift? I've heard 14th, 16th, and 20th. Figure the May 2 date can't be since it wouldn't make sense for UK to put the movie out with zero reviews unless it was a turd. Plus Empire said their review would be up on the 20th.

Based on those dates, I guess we'll know tomorrow though.

it is the 20th in the UK (and presumably worldwide) we will have one up as the clock turns midnight on the 20th

 

[Brian Braddock]

EDIT: Nevermind

 

[Kane52630]

I just have a question, for those who have seen it how was the 3D?

 

[flickchick85]

I just have a question, for those who have seen it how was the 3D?

Completely unnecessary. 2D is the way to go on this, imo.

 

[jaqua99]

alright. Done with spoilers lol. back on the hype haha

 

[MOVIELORD101]

Completely unnecessary. 2D is the way to go on this, imo.

I disagree. The IMAX 3D version was fine for me IMO. Just because there wasn't **** flying at your face doesn't mean the 3D was "unnecessary". There's a difference between "fine" and "unnecessary". LEARN IT!

 

[MahvelBaby!]

My midnight release is in 3d it was the only way they had it, so 2d will have to wait till friday when I go see it again

 

[MOVIELORD101]

AGAIN, why do you people keep *****ing about if 3D is necessary or not! I'm REALLY getting sick of this. Just because it's not COMPLETELY IN YOUR DAMN FACE doesn't mean the 3D use sucks. Yes, there are one or 2 examples of bad 3D conversion (Clash of the Titans and The Last Airbender being those examples), but that doesn't mean it hasn't sucked lately. They've learned from those mistakes in regards to converted 3D. John Carter's 3D was FINE, same with Harry Potter's and ESPECIALLY Captain America's and the Avenger's 3D. Not every movie HAS to be in 3D, yes, and 50% or more of them lately haven't been, as evidenced by this summer's movie line up. Only a FEW are in 3D. Stop whining about how much you hate or don't hate 3D, and just ROLL WITH IT. It has nothing to do with the quality of the film. It's just an enhancement technique if anything. THAT'S ALL!

 

[04nbod]

Speaking as a man,
There were times during Thor When I thought Sif was The Leader of The Warrors Three .

I had a problem with that. Not because she was a woman but because she didn't belong with them. The Asgard side was too crowded which is why that happened. It should have been either The Warrior's Three by themselves in that role (where they could have got actual lines!) or they could have put Sif with Balder and had them do the role. It needed streamlining.

I do love the Ultimates. But it's hard to get used to the change in the characters I know and love.

Sometimes. But Ultimate Thor is great and out of all the Ultimates its that interpretation that stuck out along with Cap. Mark Millar just got Thor's heroic archetype and reading the non-Loeb Ultimate Thor is often a better 'Thor' experience than reading 616 Thor. Millar really knew how important Thor's human life and his devotion to humanity is and how that needed to be played out. And yes, he used the bible as the basis of his Thor but its not like the Bible has an exclusive on the evil serpent or the dying and resurrecting god. Its a tangible living mythology and that is what Thor should be in the 21st century. I'd love to read more Millar Thor. I get the feeling he's a Journey into Mystery era fan.

 

[mc7791]

I disagree. The IMAX 3D version was fine for me IMO. Just because there wasn't **** flying at your face doesn't mean the 3D was "unnecessary". There's a difference between "fine" and "unnecessary". LEARN IT!

I plan to see this movie in 3d (not to mention for free, when I get bad service at the theater I get results!!!) so I hope the overall visual enhancement is good and am mot looking for things coming at the screen but a good enhancement of perspective with regards to background and foreground.

 

[Kane52630]

See most likely I'm going to see it in IMAX 3D, Cine Capri (aka like IMAX but in 2D), and in regular 3D. From the 3D trailer I saw for this, it looked decent.

 

[MOVIELORD101]

For me, The AMC IMAX 3D took up the WHOLE SCREEN, which was awesome! Dunno about my local regular IMAX, as I have yet to hear if they'll be getting it in, but I'll find out soon enough.

 

[Mjölnir]

AGAIN, why do you people keep *****ing about if 3D is necessary or not! I'm REALLY getting sick of this. Just because it's not COMPLETELY IN YOUR DAMN FACE doesn't mean the 3D use sucks. Yes, there are one or 2 examples of bad 3D conversion (Clash of the Titans and The Last Airbender being those examples), but that doesn't mean it hasn't sucked lately. They've learned from those mistakes in regards to converted 3D. John Carter's 3D was FINE, same with Harry Potter's and ESPECIALLY Captain America's and the Avenger's 3D. Not every movie HAS to be in 3D, yes, and 50% or more of them lately haven't been, as evidenced by this summer's movie line up. Only a FEW are in 3D. Stop whining about how much you hate or don't hate 3D, and just ROLL WITH IT. It has nothing to do with the quality of the film. It's just an enhancement technique if anything. THAT'S ALL!

Pirates of the Caribbean 4 was another example of where the 3D made the film worse. Nothing was better for it and all people looked like they were cardboard cutouts (zero depth to them, only to where they were positioned). Since it didn't enhance anything it just hindered you from choosing what to look at, since more things were out of focus than normal.

That's the only 3D movie I've seen yet and I really hope The Avengers will be a lot more enjoyable in that regard.

 

[Sockin]

I am not a proponent of 3D. I don't think it added a whole lot here either. Save some money and see it in 2d.

 

[TheIrishAvenger]

Have you guys seen this?

[YT]DodcXZfrO1c[/YT]

Maybe you will see yourself in the video if you saw the film yesterday

 

[MOVIELORD101]

Pirates of the Caribbean 4 was another example of where the 3D made the film worse. Nothing was better for it and all people looked like they were cardboard cutouts (zero depth to them, only to where they were positioned). Since it didn't enhance anything it just hindered you from choosing what to look at, since more things were out of focus than normal.

That's the only 3D movie I've seen yet and I really hope The Avengers will be a lot more enjoyable in that regard.

EDIT: Wait a damn minute! I though Pirates 4 was a good movie, and I actually enjoyed the 3D! It wasn't Avatar-quality 3D, but it was OK. Also, I double-checked. The 3D camera being used for The Amazing Spider-Man and both the Hobbit films is NOT the same camera used for Pirates: On Stranger Tides!

 

[Figs]

AGAIN, why do you people keep *****ing about if 3D is necessary or not! I'm REALLY getting sick of this. Just because it's not COMPLETELY IN YOUR DAMN FACE doesn't mean the 3D use sucks. Yes, there are one or 2 examples of bad 3D conversion (Clash of the Titans and The Last Airbender being those examples), but that doesn't mean it hasn't sucked lately. They've learned from those mistakes in regards to converted 3D. John Carter's 3D was FINE, same with Harry Potter's and ESPECIALLY Captain America's and the Avenger's 3D. Not every movie HAS to be in 3D, yes, and 50% or more of them lately haven't been, as evidenced by this summer's movie line up. Only a FEW are in 3D. Stop whining about how much you hate or don't hate 3D, and just ROLL WITH IT. It has nothing to do with the quality of the film. It's just an enhancement technique if anything. THAT'S ALL!

I think you may be right about people expecting cheap gimmicks where they have **** pop out in your face when they judge 3D. I saw the trailer for the Avengers in 3D and there was actual depth to the scenes I was watching, just like Avatar's 3D. That's the kind of good 3D, where it's a bit subtle but still noticeable.

I'm not a huge fan of 3D, but I'll give it a shot for this film after seeing the trailer.