Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 Aren't the glasses for 3D TV's like completely different and need batteries and cost like a frakking ton Why would they be? 3D is basically just two images of the same thing from slighty different angles overlapping to form one image. A pair of 3D glasses separates the two so the left eye only sees the left image and the right eye only sees the right image, giving the brain the impression that you're watching a 3D image. The 3D of home television sets to my understanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happenstance Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 Im pretty sure Mokong is right and for 3D tvs you need the stupid 90 quid pairs instead of the cinema ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mokong Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 Why would they be? 3D is basically just two images of the same thing from slighty different angles overlapping to form one image. A pair of 3D glasses separates the two so the left eye only sees the left image and the right eye only sees the right image, giving the brain the impression that you're watching a 3D image. The 3D of home television sets to my understanding. Well for some strange reason 3D Tv's to my knowlegde work differently from the cinema 3D And everytime I see an advert for the 3D tvs, there's always a note saying "includes 2 pairs of glasses worth X amount of euro" http://www.popsci.com/gadgets/article/2010-01/its-about-time-3-d-comes-home http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_crystal_shutter_glasses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 Well, that fucking blows. Why does it need to be so much more difficult? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mad Monkey Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 Well, that fucking blows. Why does it need to be so much more difficult? Because they said so, accept it and move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happenstance Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 (edited) Because they said so, accept it and move on. Dont spread your childish attitude into other threads Monkey Edited April 29, 2011 by Happenstance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReZourceman Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 Actually I think it depends on the 3D TV....I'm convinced not all of them need uber ones that you plug in. Well not convinced, I'm "certain". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mad Monkey Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 Dont spread your childish attitude into other threads Monkey Shut it and accept what you are given. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daft Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 Fuck. I hate 3D. Film was good. Was overwhelmingly an origin story but I'm not going to hold that against it. I loved Thor. He rocked. Natalie P's character, I was less convinced by. At the end it just seemed like he had fallen for her and she just wanted to get a good bonking from him. Also, some explain the after credits stuff to me? I understood little to nothing. Also, Thor can fly...right? Im pretty sure Mokong is right and for 3D tvs you need the stupid 90 quid pairs instead of the cinema ones. From my experience 3D on TVs blows crappy cinema 3D away. Bar, maybe the IMAX but I think the smaller screen is an advantage for 3D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chairdriver Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 (edited) Fuck. I hate 3D. Film was good. Was overwhelmingly an origin story but I'm not going to hold that against it. I loved Thor. He rocked. Natalie P's character, I was less convinced by. At the end it just seemed like he had fallen for her and she just wanted to get a good bonking from him. Yeah, in some ways I loved. How she was literally only interested in him because of his body. Also, some explain the after credits stuff to me? I understood little to nothing. Scientist friend guy goes to meet Nick Fury, head of SHIELD, who shows him the Cosmic Cube, a cosmic artifact of near-infinite power. We see Loki in the reflection of the plane of glass, and it transpires that Loki has been controlling the scientist friend guy the whole movie. Also, Thor can fly...right? Only when he's in possession of Mjolnir. I love how the majority of the time he poignantly doesn't. It's more stunning to walk sometimes. --- I love how the after-credits scene makes the whole movie worth watching. Before the credits I was like "Fuck is this shit? Why was Loki so untricky?". Then I saw. And was literally like "Oh fuuuuuuuucccck, put it in my v quickly, I need it now, this is too much." Edited April 29, 2011 by chairdriver Automerged Doublepost Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daft Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 Scientist friend guy goes to meet Nick Fury, head of SHIELD, who shows him the Cosmic Cube, a cosmic artifact of near-infinite power. We see Loki in the reflection of the plane of glass, and it transpires that Loki has been controlling the scientist friend guy the whole movie. The whoooooole movie? That seems unlikely and kind of dumb. What the Hell is the Cosmic Cube and what happens with it? Sounds like something the Silver Surfer would touch up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chairdriver Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 (edited) The whoooooole movie? That seems unlikely and kind of dumb. What the Hell is the Cosmic Cube and what happens with it? Sounds like something the Silver Surfer would touch up. Well, Loki is great. He knew that N-Portz was conducting experiments and was on the brink of discovering the Bifrost bridge, and he didn't want Thor to return to Asgard, that's why the scientist guy was like "You have to leave town and never come back". Presumably when Thor didn't leave Loki dropped that tactic, and was more subtly manipulative. [Loki is kinda like the Cylons. Has joke tricks up his sleeve, rather than just stabbing them in the night.] In the comics the cube is like a constant of the universe that has taken different forms throughout history (or something like that). Grants power to create etc etc. Can warp reality. Scarlet Witch magicks etc etc. The main plot point was that Red Skull gets hold of it and became near-omnipotent, and beat the Avengers easily, but then Winter Soldier killed him. Then a joke storyline happened when a random guy in New York finds a fragment of the cube, which is now in the form of a ring, and becomes a superhero called Freedom Ring. It's notable because the guy is gay, and its dealt with really satisfactorily [he's on a date with a guy, and the restaurant gets attacked, and he runs off to quickchange (referencing Superman)], which was really rare before this arc in Marvel comics. But then he gets killed 2 issues later -- really abruptly, and realistically. Like, what would happen if you randomly decided to become a superhero and couldn't control your reality-warping ring properly. [Also it turns out his friend is a Skrull, randomly, which is a joke foreshadowing of the Secret Invasion storyline.] Obviously it was always intended to a short-lived character (evidenced by the shit name, and the fact its an obvious transition story to explain what happens to the cube), but certainly didn't help with the conspiracy theories that someone high up in Marvel is a massive homophobe. But yeah, its obvious Red Skull will be great with the cube in Captain America / Avengers. Edited April 29, 2011 by chairdriver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daft Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 Ah, cool. Thanks for the explanation. I look forward to a Thor film that doesn't have to deal so much with the origins but I did like how relevant Asgard was to the story. Really did get across the whole linked universe thing. I reckon Green Lantern is going to suffer from origin overload, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bryanee Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 I think I'll love this film. Me loves a good origin story with Batman Begins and Iron Man being the best so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chairdriver Posted April 29, 2011 Share Posted April 29, 2011 I don't mind origins so much. If they actually tell you something you're interested in. Like, I'm bored of like... Robin's origin, where's its cliche "My parents died, so I've become great to avenge them!!". But Asgard was actually interesting, and stunning to look at, and felt more relevant than all the bits in New Mexico -- mostly because N-Portz' character was really bad, and pretty much a non-event. I kept wishing they'd introduce more lovely Asgardians, like Lorelei, or Amora, or the Valkyries. (I loved the Mother's hair.) (I don't mind about GL origin, because in the latest Green Lantern trailer there's RR in just his pants, which I am fan of, therefore it's justified.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Konfucius Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 Why would they be? 3D is basically just two images of the same thing from slighty different angles overlapping to form one image. A pair of 3D glasses separates the two so the left eye only sees the left image and the right eye only sees the right image, giving the brain the impression that you're watching a 3D image. The 3D of home television sets to my understanding. In the Cinema they use two projectors each emitting light with a different polarisation (horizontal and vertical). The glasses then filter out the light of opposite polarisation, so each eye sees a different image. On a TV the tech has to be different due to the technology. There they use shutter glasses. These alternate between the right-eye glass and then the left one going black. This is in sync to the TV, so if the right eye is "shut" the TV displayes the picture for the left eye, then the left eye is "shut" and the TV displayes the picture for the right eye. This process happens 60 times per second. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReZourceman Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 (edited) Well, Loki is great. He knew that N-Portz was conducting experiments and was on the brink of discovering the Bifrost bridge, and he didn't want Thor to return to Asgard, that's why the scientist guy was like "You have to leave town and never come back". Presumably when Thor didn't leave Loki dropped that tactic, and was more subtly manipulative. [Loki is kinda like the Cylons. Has joke tricks up his sleeve, rather than just stabbing them in the night.] In the comics the cube is like a constant of the universe that has taken different forms throughout history (or something like that). Grants power to create etc etc. Can warp reality. Scarlet Witch magicks etc etc. The main plot point was that Red Skull gets hold of it and became near-omnipotent, and beat the Avengers easily, but then Winter Soldier killed him. Then a joke storyline happened when a random guy in New York finds a fragment of the cube, which is now in the form of a ring, and becomes a superhero called Freedom Ring. It's notable because the guy is gay, and its dealt with really satisfactorily [he's on a date with a guy, and the restaurant gets attacked, and he runs off to quickchange (referencing Superman)], which was really rare before this arc in Marvel comics. But then he gets killed 2 issues later -- really abruptly, and realistically. Like, what would happen if you randomly decided to become a superhero and couldn't control your reality-warping ring properly. [Also it turns out his friend is a Skrull, randomly, which is a joke foreshadowing of the Secret Invasion storyline.] Obviously it was always intended to a short-lived character (evidenced by the shit name, and the fact its an obvious transition story to explain what happens to the cube), but certainly didn't help with the conspiracy theories that someone high up in Marvel is a massive homophobe. But yeah, its obvious Red Skull will be great with the cube in Captain America / Avengers. I disagree that he was Manipulating him the whole movie. I don't think they'd reveal something so integral to the plot in the after-credits scene. I reckon Green Lantern is going to suffer from origin overload, too. Lolsauce. Edited April 30, 2011 by ReZourceman Automerged Doublepost Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happenstance Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 Your right ReZ, it wasnt the whole movie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro_Link Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 (edited) I saw it yesterday, in 2D which had to be done, and LOVED it!! My only complaint would be... I wanted more!! I cannot express how much I loved the opening 40 minutes or so. Asgard was fucking stunning! As a world it just felt perfect and I wanted to see more of it. And I just loved the opening battle with Thor and his comrades, riding out across the bridge, the bifrost, the fight scene was epic and looked spectacular! And I loved it more because I wan't expecting any of it. What a great decision to hold back on all of Thors fighting and moves in the trailers! Throwing Mjollnir, the tornadoes, the flying... fantastic! Then he came to Earth and I was so glad to see that they carried over the sense of humour from the Iron Man movies. Perfect! And I thought they told Thors story perfectly, setting up his arrogance and faults, so that when the scene came around of him trying to reclaim his hammer, you genuinely felt sorry for him! Great scene! The pacing for me was off however after he came to Earth... pretty much just down to the fact that as I've already said, I just wanted more of everything. I honestly think the film could have comfortably been a good 30mins longer, if not more! But Marvel unfortunately seem to have a pretty set 2hr time for these movies. Despite the Earth scene dragging a little in the middle, the relationship with Jane felt too rushed and a little unbelievable. I just had to put it down to her obsession with Space and the unknown. And even for Thor it felt a bit rushed, as though she'd taught him about himself to quickly. The fight with Destroyer could have been longer. And even the final scenes for me could have been longer. So basically, more, more, more, but it was great! Actually, I will say the story suffered from being a bit too predictable and able to read throughout. Loki was of course fantastic. As was The Gatekeeper, who managed to really assert hiself in the film in quite a small ammount of time, so you actually really felt for him. Basically great acting all round. Dissapointed to see/hear Natalie Portman doesn't seem to be in The Avengers, which makes the films ending pretty confusing! Also, because I didn't know what on Earth I was looking at, I can't say I really enjoyed the end of credits scene as much as others. I was looking forward to something Captain America related, but it makes perfect sence that it was Loki, because making him the after credits scene for Captain America wouldn't have felt quite right I suppose... actually it might have worked. Anyways, Thor is brilliant! Awesome!! Edited April 30, 2011 by Retro_Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReZourceman Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 Although the after scene might hint to the plot of Captain America The Cosmic Cube (" belongs to legend and history") and is a weapon that Red Skull uses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro_Link Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 (edited) Yeah I mean, when he opened the case I kinda assumed that was what it was, as I think we've talked about it a bit here, but unless I was looking at it wrong somehow, it didn't look like I thought... like in the picture above. When the Ice Giants power turned up in Thor, I actually thought maybe that was the Cube for a bit, until it blasted Ice, because that's how I expected it to look. Also, the setting of the after credits scene, looked reminiscent of the bunkers labs shown in the Captain America trailer. But it's an extremely vague Captain America nod, unless you're totally clued up, which was dissapointing. I also agree that Loki was only possessing that guy in this scene. Wonder where Loki is, where he's doing this from? Edited April 30, 2011 by Retro_Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReZourceman Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 Ah you need to watch the Avengers cartoon. :p. I wouldn't even have known what the Casket of Ancient Winters was. But it was in an Avengers ep like 2 weeks ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retro_Link Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 (edited) The Thor/Jane ending is actually pretty confusing. Because you'd imagine as soon as he lands on Earth (which ever way he finds of getting there, or if Shield or Jane find a way) he's going to be asking about her/wanting to see her... to gloss over that would be terrible. You can only imagine that Loki will show up first in The Avengers... mention Thor... and thus Shield will bring him to Earth (having been close to a solution for some time?)... or maybe Loki brings him to Earth, but I'm not sure why he'd do that. Thus Loki is Thors primary concern/threat on arrival? But they better at least name check her and say where she is! EDIT: Actually maybe The Gatekeeper (though there's now mention of him being in it either) see's the havoc Loki is causing on Earth, and him and Thor find a way to get him there. Maybe Thor only turns up in the final third?... deals with Loki, and then is off to find Jane! I'm gonna go with this one, because it seems unlikely Thor will be in the movie from the start now. Edited April 30, 2011 by Retro_Link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chairdriver Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 The thing is, Loki is great. He can do things without Heimdall seeing. And, technically, only Thor, Sif, Heimdall and the Warriors 3 know he's evil, but then, they don't even have any evidence for it -- because to anyone else, Loki was a great king, killing the Ice Giant king, and trying to fight the arrogant Thor and stop him from destroying the bifrost bridge. And also, Loki is still a brother to Thor. It's hardly like they're archenemies. Considering Natalie Portman's prolificness as an actress, she'll no doubt be drafted in as an advisor to Nick Fury or something, so she'll be present. I love the feeling of so many massive actors in one film: Samuel L, Scarlet, N-Portz etc etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mundi Posted April 30, 2011 Share Posted April 30, 2011 Well fuck the 3D in this film, this might be because I only got a seat 4th row from the left but most of the environmental shot were really blurry for me and my friend. But despite that, I really liked it. I was hoping that Loki would be more of a trickster than a clever mastermind, but his was still good in the film. One really minor thing that ticked me off, how they pronounced Bifröst as Bi-frost.... Not that every pronunciation was perfect but most of it was pretty damn close to being correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts