Avatar Teaser Trailer – Featuring Zoe Saldana August 20, 2009
by TrekMovie.com Staff , Filed under: ST09 Cast, Sci-Fi , trackback
Usually we wait until our weekend sci-fi wrapups for new genre trailers, but this morning was the highly anticipated debut of the teaser trailer for what is being touted as a ‘game changing’ new 3D sci-fi movie, Avatar from James Cameron (The Terminator, Titantic, Aliens). The film features Star Trek’s Zoe Saldana, who plays a CGI created character.
The Avatar teaser trailer
The trailer can be viewed at Apple.com.
CLICK TO VIEW AT APPLE TRAILERS
(According to the Official Avatar Twitter, it is also available internationally on YouTube )
The story of Avatar takes place on an alien moon called Pandora, which is home to the Na’vi race, and where humans are encroaching. Humans cannot breath the air, but they have created special Na’vi/human hybrids which can be controlled as ‘avatars’ by humans. Jake Sully, an injured marine played by Sam Worthington (Terminator 4), takes on an ‘avatar’ to act as a scout and he goes deep into Pandora and eventually joins up with Neytiri, a Na’vi female warrior played by Zoe Saldana (via motion capture technology and rendered in CGI).
Cameron conceived of the film back in the 90s, but couldn’t realize his vision until the CGI technology caught up to what he had in mind. Fox promises that Avatar is “a fully immersive cinematic experience of a new kind, where the revolutionary technology invented to make the film, disappears into the emotion of the characters and the sweep of the story.”
Avatar opens December 18th, more info at avatarmovie.com.
Loading ...
Comments»
Zoe looks great…no matter what color she is!
Go Zoe & James C!
Looks great!
They speak on AICN about how this film will…copulate…our eyeballs. And Cameron himself said that this was going to change the game.
It looks good and all, but I don’t think it is as photo real as they said it was going to be. And at a reported cost of $350 million (!!) it probably will change the game. Start looking for more studios to see how they can do movies on the Cloverfield and District 9 budget.
So, why is it that the trailer did absolutely nothing for me? I was looking forward to seeing what all the hype was about. Guess it wasn’t anything like I expected.
I was more excited about this movie before I saw the trailer.
I’m a little worried that this is going to turn out to be another Final Fantasy: Spirits Within, but I’ll give it a watch.
Looks amazing. I’m really excited for this.
It’s made for children and young teens. District 9 was made for adults and it was awesome.
6
Yeah me too. But let’s remember this IS a scifi movie from James Cameron.
Even it’s not terribly original or revolutionary, it’s bound to have an engaging story and some kickass action.
4. JimJ
I have read a few reviews of the footage that was screened at Comic-Con, and most agreed that while the footage shown was impressive, it seemed to leave a few people with a “Meh” feeling. I think I can already see what direction this movie will take. I feel like I know how this movie wil end, having seen most (but not all) of the teaser.
3. THX-1138
I find myself thinking this movie may wind up being a noble failure. It may be pushing the boundaries of filmmaking, but its’ colossal budget (and the fact that it’s a new franchise) will make it hard to turn a profit.
I don’t know about “game changing”, but it definately seems worth a look.
Mr. Cameron has a bit of thing about hyperbole, don’t you know.
I dunno, Cameron going back to scifi seems a good thing in my book.
its hard to judge this movie by the glimpses of scenes, when i am, able to see a scene with the aliens talking and moving in a casual way, i will decide then if it’s believable. i see influences of star wars (prequel) as well as final fantasy and starship troopers. I’m not sure if cameron wants to make a profit here, I think he may be making his dream film, I will go see the film regardless, for some imaginative sci-fi.
I really liked the trailer (be sure to watch it in HD), but I’ll admit it didn’t blow me away.
However, I’m more excited now than I was before for “Avatar Day” tomorrow. Seeing it all in IMAX 3-D should be an amazing experience.
Oh and by the way, the reported budget is $240 million.
I love it. This looks great. Cameron is my all-time favorite director and screenwriter of sci-fi and I think this movie will surprise a lot of people. He knows what he’s doing. And no, he doesn’t make action for the sake of action — there’s always something driving it in his films… so I suspect his emphasis on curiosity and intellect in this trailer, over the action, is just to let us know that his won’t be a no-brain blockbuster. I’d love to see a Star Trek movie attempt this scale of exploration of a new world.
The money I could have used to check out just how bad Transformers really was, will be going into this baby instead. Go James Cameron.
Yawn. Another movie about humans and the military being evil. How about an original idea for a change?
It does look amazing, probably even more so in 3-D. I just hope the technology doesn’t smother the story.
#6
I had a similar feeling. The one thing that keeps my optimism afloat is the fact that Cameron has en eye for good storytelling, so hopefully the special effects won’t overshadow the emotion and scope of what he’s trying to accomplish. However, I still think District 9 will be the true sci-fi winner this year.
well that trailer just killed my expectations, I was expecting revolutionary realistic imagery I got a cartoon.
Same ol’ as every other movie cgi the past few years. OMG LOOK GUYS GI JOE, IN SPACE!
So many haters….
I can remember the negative comments prior to Titanic – everyon especulated it would suck, bomb, sink (insert your own iceburg metaphor).
Then it played for over a year in theaters, and was the first single film to break the billion dollar mark.
Maybe he’s done it again.
Looks fun. Don’t know that these CGI creations are any more real looking that Golem or Jar Jar, but I know with Cameron directing, I won’t be bored!
Man, CGI Andy Serkis all you want to, but Ms. Saldana is too pretty to hide!
#20
This isn’t even close to hate. Go to AICN for that. I think it is reasonable to say that the visuals don’t exactly match up to the hyperbole that was being put forth about the look of this film. Still, I will be there in line to see it and enjoying every minute of it.
Epic. Epic, epic, epic.
I’m almost as eagerly anticipating District 9 (no, haven’t seen it yet), but frankly, I think AVATAR is going to put Star Trek to shame. (And I love Star Trek; sorry, folks.)
@ #22
Amen!
Video is now missing. I was too late!
The embed stopped working, but the link to the Apple trailers still works. I removed the embed
JC should direct TREK12!!!
hey she kinda looks cute in a creepy knda way.
Those little flying vehicles look like Hornets to me, from Halo 3.
But damn, this looks impressive.
The reason this movie is called a “game changer” is that the technology that had to be created for this movie will be used to make other movies.
Kinda like they had to invent PhotoShop in order to make Cameron’s The Abyss. That actually happened.
Technology aside though, I am really hoping to get an immersive view at a truly different world. The trailer gave me hope for that.
Just watched the trailer and……………………..m’eh!
That’s it??
I am so nonplussed by this. I wasn’t excited by this before hand and now with the trailer I am even less intrigued. I hope I’m wrong but this movie will fall on its face. The budget is way too much for a movie and in order for it to make a profit (by studio standards) the movie will have to make at least $450 million dollars if not more. It can’t make back only its budget in box office terms or otherwise its deemed a failure. I am not a huge fan of Cameron (although Aliens is good) but I tried to not let that interfere with my critique.
If they created technology for this movie and we are seeing the results of said technology in this teaser then they wasted their money. It’s looks good…sure, but it most certainly doesn’t look like anything else that could be created with current technology.
Now if Cameron comes out and says that the humans in the trailer were CG then maybe it was worth it. Quite frankly I’m not seeing the revolutionary look like we saw with The Abyss and T2.
I haven’t really followed the stories about this movie, other than it would be “revolutionary” Uh, based soley on this trailer, not so much…….
I was struck by the obvious distinction between the CGI scenes and the live-action scenes. Actually, the distintion was quite glaring and obvious. I have yet to see convincing “live action” CGI involving life forms. They all look like video game characters. Uh, no thanks!
Is it just me, or are the CGI characters created for LOTR more realistic that what was shown in the trailer? And that was made how long ago?
Revolutionary? Not so much. Time will tell. But what do I know, I’m sure it will make a bazillion $’s at the boxoffice.
First off, keep JC the hell away from Trek XII. JJ’s our man!!
Two trailers were released today, Avatar & The Wolfman.
Wolfman already looks better.
I was SO looking forward to the Avatar teaser and, while I will still hold out for the actual movie before I make my judgement (unlike a lot of people over at AICN), my anticipation level has diminished greatly today.
It’s like Final Fantasy meets Dances with Wolves. And not in a good way!!
# 3 -
I totally agree. Bloated budgets don’t guarantee profit, or even a good movie.
#9, #20 –
Yeah, just like Titanic, which made viewers watch Leonardo and Kate pout for 2 hours before the REAL story started…… Don’t confuse “box office” with “good movie”. They’re not the same thing. Nor are “hype” and “quality”.
The hardware looked good. The critters not so much.
I’m like Anthony Lewis at #34 above — if the humans in that trailer are CGI, well then, that IS a game-changer!
Scott B. out.
it looks incredible, the trailer was okay, but i’m sure the movie itself will be something else.
#37: “Don’t confuse “box office” with “good movie”. They’re not the same thing. Nor are “hype” and “quality”.”
That song doesn’t play very well at _this_ saloon, partner ;)
And as for Avatar … argh. Requires Quicktime. No good. I’ll wait for later versions. I like the still, though! Good still.
# 38 -
Uh, it’s as obvious as the nose on my face, or yours. The difference is glaring, obvious, and distracting. No game changer, sorry.
Brian K out.
#40 -
“That song doesn’t play very well at _this_ saloon, partner ;)”
It plays very well, thank you. We all can hear it. We’re well aware of your dislike of the new film. Has your song ever been shut down? The fact that the majority of us heard your song, disagree, and think your song is off-tune and unlistenable is irrelevant. To each his own ;-)
And, as for Avatar: if you have seen or played any video game (like Halo 3) over the past year, you’ve seen the “revolutionary” aspects of the film. BTW, there are free Quicktime alternative players available, without the hassles of Quicktime. That’s what I use.
It looks like World of Warcraft.
Zemeckis’s “Beowulf” eclipsed this two years ago.
Massive production delays can always be disguised as “CGI technology needed to catch up with the director’s vision” in corporate-speak. Judging by the trailer, we’re not in for anything particularly innovative.
If it’s a good Cameron flick, it’s probably worth a rental.
Just watched the trailer again, and was reminded of a thought I had the first time I saw it: Did it occur to the genius Mr Cameron that the “Vulcan pointy-ear thing” has been done maybe once or twice before?
I wasn’t moved by this…the effects were not all that impressive to me.
It looked very cartoony I thought and I was expecting very realistic rendering.
#42: “We’re well aware of your dislike of the new film.”
Buh? I like the new film. Heck, I seem to be one of the tiny handful around here who really liked the Spock/Uhura thing and had no complaints about the Engineering sets :/ Loved the pacing, loved the comedy. Liked Keenser, too, which seems to also make me a minority.
Are you confusing me with another poster? (or – and I hope not – are you confused by the idea of someone who likes the new film simultaneously having critiques of it? There are _aspects_ of the film I dislike; does that make me a “hater?” do I fail to live up to some fanatical idea of what a “true fan” is?)
“And, as for Avatar: if you have seen or played any video game (like Halo 3) over the past year, you’ve seen the “revolutionary” aspects of the film.”
Heh. I haven’t, but the techie/SFX stuff isn’t of interest to me (I know, I know, I’m a bad geek for not caring about SFX; can’t help it – I dig the genre for reasons other than the sparkly whiz-bang).
“BTW, there are free Quicktime alternative players available, without the hassles of Quicktime. That’s what I use.”
Yah … I had one of those on a previous install. Just haven’t had anything claw at me affectionately enough to inspire me to re-install.
I remember when Cameron said that ‘Sphere’ was going to change the way effects in movies will be made. And the game changer was CGI. And from what little I know about ‘Avatar’ may change how the Virtual Actor is used, also known as a Vactor.
Just think if this comes true we may be able to write and create our own Star Trek episodes.
P.S. Star Trek refers to TOS, TNG, DSN, VOY, ENT. and let us reset all the 4:3 TV shows into the new 16:9 HD format. Like I’ve written about many times before.
Well, I saw the trailer this morning and I was kinda expecting something fantastic and instead I got a plainly obvious cg effect and a predictible storyline- sorta of like the cg B.O. bomb The Battle for Terra.
James Cameron had been obsessed with 3-d filmmaking so much since “Titanic”. He has not directed a movie since Titanic and has only produced 3-d documentries and the tv show Dark Angel. He was set to do a remake of Fantastic Voyage but his script was turned down as too much like INNERSPACE and not enough Fantastic Voyage. I think it will do well as even a crappy film like Spiderman 3 can do well, his name will get people in the theaters but the end result will be like Watchmen- fans of the book loved it but not much from there. But I really don’t see any major “game-changing” potential in it and I agree “the Wolfman” trailer was better-that I am looking forward to!
Looks amazing. In one sense, the CG could be a lot better, but I think its just the look and feel of the movie, which so far seems to work. Either way, looks original, which, aside from Star Trek, this year’s been lacking.
#41 – I totally agree with you. I was joking in a way that was not as plain as a (catlike) nose on a (cartoony-looking) face. I shoulda put a smiley. My bad.
Scott B. out.
I can’t believe how nitpicky some of you guys are…
It looks great! I hope it’s good!
Well, I’ll still go see this movie, but from all I’ve read…this movie is not going to make it’s money back. The buzz is killing it WAY before the film is even released.
I don’t think any of the backlash is about weather the movie will be good or not. James Cameron has a pretty good track record when it comes to good SciFi by-in-large.
I believe the backlash is coming from the fact that the internet was a fire with word that this movie would contain revolutionary never-before-seen cutting edge stuff. And the backlash is from its apparent inability to deliuver on the hype they built for it.
Looks ok…but i expected it to be something else…..
I’m going to see it not because of the visuals (which I found beatutiful), but because it’s a new James Cameron movie….he creates good sci-fi like no one…his last sci-fi flock was Terminator 2 back in ‘91….so I’m excited to see Jim Cameron’s comeback….
I sadly agree with the post #52 all this buzz is going to kill the movie….but I’ll go see it anyway!=]
greetings from Brasil
\\//
That movie looks so good. I’d say it looks… epic. ;D
I DON’T THINK I SHOULD JUDGE FROM SO LITTLE IN THE TRAILER, BUT I’M WONDERING HOW MUCH OF GETTING THE EMOTIONS RIGHT WAS REALIZING THE LIMITATIONS OF THE TECHNOLOGY AND WORKING WITHIN IT (A LA JIM HENSON) VS. HOW MUCH OF IT IS ADVANCEMENT IN TECHNOLOGY.
Dont know if anyone else has noticed, but this movie bears a remarkable reseamblance to World of Warcraft to me. I thout the ships flying by all the floating landmasses were the Outlands and the Avitars look an awlful lot like Night Elves to me. The glowing flowers and flying things look straight out of the game as well, hell the mounts they ride on are similure as well. Oh well…heres hoping Sam Raimi’s WOW movie lookes at least this good.
Trailer is less than impressive. looks like a computer game….
Lets see i saw mr and ms spock with braids, looking smurf blue, halo bioshock world of warcraft video/computer game scenes, and the stargate travel efx, add 3d and voila James Camerons dream movie—hmmm
‘Elves in Space!’
The avatar-awakening sequence looked like a million bucks…. but the sequences on Pandora look unfinished as far as details in the CGI. They should have kept the trailer with the medical sequence more. That’s the key sci-fi idea they should be selling… not the visuals.
As to recent CGI advances… I thought the Chipmunks movie did a pretty good job… as did G-Force. The Pandoran animals in this trailer all look unreal, and I don’t mean that in a good way.
And, how about some dialog? Supposedly this movie has a great storyline. Well, I got no sense of it from this trailer!
It looks pretty, but lifeless.
The Star Wars influence goes back to Ryan Church, I guess.
I’ve been in the video game industry for 25 years – reminds me of the eye candy we’d put together just before E3, the big trade show of the year. Lots of smoke and mirrors and the final game rarely lived up to the pre-rendered art.
Bottom line – this’ll do OK until you consider the budget. I wanted to be impresse but wasn’t.
AVATAR looks very different in 2D and 3D! In 3D looks absolutely great – better than 2D!
I wish that I was as impressive as some of you Negative Nannies out there complaining about this teaser trailer. Hold on a second, I think I here your mothers calling you to take out the trash! Geez!
Very nice… but it didn’t blow me away. I don’t see any of the ‘photorealism’ that has been touted around – it looks like Star Wars Episodes II and III. A video game on the big screen.
And the effects they have done with faces/bodies really looks like it could have been done with make-up and prosthetics – and would look substantially more real.
I keep watching the trailer and I still keep on NOT understanding what is so fantastic and revolutionary about it. I keep asking myself if it weren’t due to the hype of who the director is….would I even consider seeing it? The answer to that question is no. Since it’s Cameron, I MIGHT consider seeing it, but future trailers are going to have to convince me. I guess if that makes me a “negative nanny”, so be it. But, I am usually very open minded to new stuff, including new Star Trek & Star Wars. This just doesn’t “do it” for me, so far. $350 million? I don’t see that as even being sensible, no matter what the movie is!
Ha. I believe I’ve seen this somewhere– oh yeah, I recall how ‘unimpressed’ everybody was with the initial ST footage. Everybody went to see it though, didn’t they? As we will with this. I am willing to bet this film will be huge at the BO.
T.’.
The self-generated hype-machine is this movie’s biggest enemy. The constant messages online from the production staff, Cameron included, telling the fans that what we were going to see would revolutionize visuals and blow us all away, and then never show anything until yesterday was a mistake. They set the expectations so unrealistically high that anything short of actually taking the audience to the real Pandora was bound to be a disappontment.
It looks great, all things being equal. Much better than most stuff out there. And maybe there is a sequence that will visually blow our minds. But they led us to believe that we were in for a huge visual step forward. And don’t give me the whole 3D argument. I have yet to see a movie in 3D that didn’t look off and had a hazy color. I will wait to see about that. Until then, 2D is still superior for clear imagery.
And of course I will be there to see it on the big screen. It’s James Cameron. But for those who don’t understand why people are being so harsh on what looks very good, that was the problem: Advance hype was a bad idea.
#69, you probably have to see it on a big screen to appreceate it. Cameron hasn’t let me down yet so I will try this movie out.
The setup for the story sounds a lot like Pike’s from the Menagerie: A guy in a wheelchair has a chance to travel to a remote planet and live a normal life via virtual reality, and must put up with the local aliens to do it.
http://img.denihilation.com/delgovatar.html
Comparison shots of Fox’s Delgo and Avatar!
It’s good, but not great. It looks like highly imaginative CG blending, a la Revenge of the Sith — top of the line, but nothing that made me say, “I doubt the evidence of my senses!”
Computers smooth motion out – they can’t help it. This is why it never looks 100% unless it’s a starship (we have no real-world reference for how it would behave) or someone in a lot of armor (because we are familiar with how that alters movement). There are a lot of tiny movements that a body makes all at the same time, a lot of which are unique to each person; a computer can’t make sense of that. Human/animal movement is very herky-jerky.
Cameron has unfortunately fallen victim to himself and created something that was too big for anyone to handle.
That said, I thought that the design elements were very nice. But as many people in front of me have said, the advance hype is going to kill this. Titanic’s success was because it was expected to underperform (after an ‘unnecessary’ 6 month release date delay) and it stunned everyone that it was good. This will be like TPM – probably a great movie for which everyone has set their expectations waaaaaaay too high.
Thank you Dom in message link in nessage #74 for the nice still images, now to make them into wall papers.
i’ve seen the Preview two hours ago in 3-d on the big screen and the pictures are absolutely brilliant and breathtaking. The trailer gives not ten percent of the impression of the complete scenes that were shown. The trailer shows only small glimpses but the preview shows some short episodes of the movie. The 3-d effect was perfect. There is a scene where scully catches a dragonlike animal, breaks like a horse and tries to ride. Unbelievable that this could be done by Cameron’s mind and CGI craft. Can’t wait to see the whole movie.
I too have just caught the preview in 3D at our UK Manchester IMAX and i have to say that although the trailer didn’t do that much for me the 15 minutes i saw in 3D were mindblowing especially the sequence where the dino creatures are are at a stand off and then chase the main character through the woods.
Bring December on, i’m ready!!!!
Just got back from the 20 minute preview and i feel somewhat the same as after seeing the trailer. The cgi looks pretty good, aside from some awkward looking things, and the 3D aspect is what will probably have me in the theater-but the story seems crap. The Dances With Wolves meets sci-fi elements are what will weigh it down for me, and the romance that is inevitable is something i could care less about seeing. Also the actual design of the navi looks pretty dumb. The best part of the sneak peek was at the very end when they show the humans blasting the crap out of the planet. I thought with the 3d that the actual human parts were better than the complete cgi parts as well, which is why i liked the end segment of the sneak peak. They shouldn’t have hyped this so much and my gut feeling is it will tank at the box office. It will make its money but nowadays that isn’t good enough. With this price tag they’ll have to triple there money and id be surprised if that happened. Maybe im wrong but bad word of mouth could totally kill this and the 3d gimmick won’t be enough to save it. Thats my prediction, but if im wrong thats ok.
Looks like more syrupy-sweet, over-active, too-much-crap-on-the-screen-at-once CGI to me. I’m really beginning to hate it.
I can barely watch movies now with tons of CGI because it looks so sugary and silky, even when they fill the screen with bits and pieces.
Stop already!!
Use some models and real stuff again and use CGI to take the wires out and mat the backgrounds.
While I’m ranting, can we have shaky-cam banned as well. Dollies, tripods and steadicams were invented for a reason!
Looks like crap.
i guess the movie would be aight but i still think Zoe looks cute as an alien as well as being human.
If this Avatar movie trailer brushed up against sh*t, sh*t would try to rub it off!
I saw the 10 minute preview tonight and it was amazing. I wasn’t blown away but the trailer but seeing those scenes in 3D really did it for me. The kids that were with me were terrified of those creatures. I’ll be in line opening day. James Cameron will deliver. Have a little faith. 1 minute in 2D does not a movie make.
Trailer looks MUCH better on a 40″+ HD TV.
The detail surpasses anything that WETA did for LOTR.
IMHO.
I was not impressed. It looked like a video game. Most of it was obviously CGI. I’ll give it a watch just because it looks cool. But the trailer didn’t show anything that looked any better or more realistic than the Star Wars prequels. But we’ll see.
Abrams, Orci & Kurtzman would have made a much better movie.
Looks pretty freakin’ sweet to me. Music for the trailer is typically trailer music so I hope that the films music is better. Judging from what I’ve seen this is certainly a DVD I’ll want to buy, and I hope the music score is equally as lavish to listen to as the visuals are to look at.
Mind you this is Cameron we’re talking about .. and he does know a good music score when he hears one. So I feel sure he’ll get that part right. Looking forward to this.
Anyone else get the impression that this might be Pocahontas in space?
@ 89. lorD revaN
That sounds pretty epic, actually.
Want breakthrough CGI?
District 9.
(And a hell of a lot cheaper too.)
Meh is District 9 really worth seeing? I read some reviews that were not very good on it…Is it just me or are there too many scifi/fantasy type movies this summer? After new Trek not much has measured up to worth being nearly as good…
@92: Yeah, it’s totally worth seeing. It was really amazing, imo.
This trailer reminded me of Delgo, and those comparison pics really didn’t help. Here’s to hoping this film is better. :(
#92: There’s no way to know if District 9 would be to _your_ tastes, but I found it one of the best SF movies in the last few years, and at the very least the best since last year’s Wall-E. It’s a smart redemption story that manages to juggle a strong character arc with real humanity, political insight, wicked satirical notes AND some kickass action to amuse the drunks back in the seventeenth row.
It’s a movie about the kind of actual “evil” that flourishes in the real world on every street in every city there is, made the protagonist and warped through an SF-action lens with clever turns, well-drawn characters and a backdrop (urban South Africa) we don’t see every day at the movies.
Yes indeed. D9 exceeded all of my expectations. It really is that good.
I’ve not talked to anyone who didn’t love it.
Cameron just may end up with a Waterworld on his hands… looks kind of Episode 1- ish, to me.
Well what impresses me here is that I can recognize the actors under the CG. I can see facial expressions and characterizations that I don’t recall being able to notice in other fully computerized characters, and the mixing just looks seamless. I can recognize beyond a shadow of a doubt that the alien Zoe Saldana is playing _is_ Zoe Saldana. I’d love to see more of characters interacting to cement this, but right now I’m stoked!
I saw the 16 minute preview on IMAX 3D in Houston Friday.
I was blown away at the “performance capture” and never before, including ILM’s work, have I been convinced that I might actually be looking at a character who is “real”, not artificial. The skin texture, light and shadow, etc. all came together to imitate flesh and blood. And this MUST be seen in 3D, preferably IMAX.
This is a game changer as a medium for Fantasy/SF storytelling. I can only imagine that this was the way many must’ve felt when they first saw Star Wars in a theater in 1977.
Yes. I only saw 16 minutes, but…
I think we would all love the next Star Trek to be in 3D. Wouldn’t that be awesome?!
99. “I think we would all love the next Star Trek to be in 3D. Wouldn’t that be awesome?!”
Totally had the same thought during the preview.
I watched the trailer 6 times so far, at first i was impressed, then i went and looked at the spoilers on another website, and once i understood the story, i became very excited to see this…i believe that avatar may blow even titanics box office away, not because of bringing more women into the theaters but instead by multiple viewings by sci-fi and cameron fans..i may have to see this movie a few times just to see and appreciate all of the special effects. and yes CGI still has a ways to go to look real but you cant ignore how far it has come….imagine what will be possible in 5-10 years? no wonder lucas wants to wait a few more years to bring out another star wars movie.