James Cameron: '3D was a novelty but it's a consumer choice for Avatar 2'

In 2009, the release of James Cameron's epic-of-epics Avatar triggered a decade-long boom for 3D cinema - and his long-awaited sequel has hopes to do the same all over again.
"If you think about the way it worked back then, [3D] was a novelty," Cameron told Yahoo UK, explaining that the landscape has shifted since he debuted Avatar in stereoscopic form.
He added: "Now it has found its level as a consumer choice. At the time we had 6,000 screens worldwide that were 3D screens, now we have 120,000.
"Most big blockbuster movies are made in 3D, so people have a choice - if they like it they can see it in 3D and if they don't like it they can see it in 2D. I author it both ways."
Avatar: The Way of Water is available in UK cinemas from 16 December.

[@ModernCollector]

Upvote for Cameron not the interviewer. James definitely knows his art.

[@pascalgruger2102]

Cameron is spot on. I've never seen action scenes in 3D that felt so coherent.

[@tsenam3247]

This movie gonna b the game changer in terms of cinematic experiences n filmmaking👌👌👌👌👌

[@senpai919]

Lol 😆 I highly doubt it

[@zackmac5917]

Agreed.

[@zackmac5917]

@@senpai919 The first one was. And this one has everything going for it once again. Why not.

[@g_s_subhash]

100% 💕💕

[@tsenam3247]

@@zackmac5917 💯

[@ChristianKrogh-Denmark]

It’s crazy. I HATE 3D, but I HAVE to see Avatar 2 in IMAX-3D, lol. In Cameron specifically, I trust!

[@ubernaffa]

I feel you, but you're right re watching Avatar 2 in 3D. The point that he made in the past about 3D is that most films aren't created to be 3D films, they're just made into 3D films in post. Cameron conceives his films to be in 3D from the onset, and his photography/capture is all in for creating a 3D film. I'm pretty stoked to watch this bad boy in IMAX-3D. 😎

[@KerioFive]

Same here, got those tickets no hesitation

[@Shahaneh]

Make sure to watch all the Trailers before the movie, also in IMAX 3D.

[@simonbellmont]

Yes

[@Shahaneh]

@@maxotto9877 if you're talking about Avatar 1, it doesn't even make the TOP 25 Best 3D films of all-time, and 3D conversions like Doctor Strange and Ready Player One far outclass it. Hell even Daily Kos list/rank Avatar 1 at #9 for best 3D.

[@dianewiegel7136]

I saw it in 3D with my kids today and I thought it was totally worth it

[@tsenam3247]

This gonna b unstoppable at box office n run in cinemas for ages💓💓💓💓💓

[@klickj26]

why do u care? honestly. why the fuck. do. you. give. a. fuck? Are you getting any of that money? Will you wake up on monday morning the weekend after with a big goon'd smile on your face that this movie has made X billions of dollars?

[@cal5754]

I often get headaches watching films in 3D. I didn't know this was the reason until now so this was nice to know and hopefully because of this increased frame rate, I won't get a headache watching this film in 3D on Friday

[@MrPreet23]

James you totally nailed it… I missed 3D technology for years most of them don’t know how to implement the technology.. Thanks to you I see 3D coming back with better technology

[@andrewreynolds912]

Exactly because it's 48fps

[@rp_batis5724]

Interviewer manners please

[@topkho]

Thank you

[@ProMontreal]

Wow, dude how unprofessional are you!? Damn Yahoo’s got gotta hire you again. I think the mistake of this interviewer was instead of giving actual statistics of his statements, he gave his own opinion own opinion instead. If venues have grown in 3D, clearly it hasn’t died out. Don’t get me wrong, I understand his point, 3D is not for everyone, and after avatar a lot of companies simple converted their movies into 3D for the extra dollars, that’s where the devalue of 3D comes from. There’s a difference when your intention is a 3D experience, which James gives the opinion for

[@justincrossley1913]

That’s exactly what I say .Home theatre you can get 3d only on front projector no tvs do it now

[@cody8860]

​@@justincrossley1913 Yeah but we have VR headsets now that can do 3D better than any TV or projector. I can see 180 degree 3D films being a future format that is an evolution of cinemascope but there's still two major issues. The first is brightness and colour space which is limited to sRGB/Rec.709. The second is file sizes because of the resolution and frame rate. Eventually I think we might settle for 120fps for the immersive action but drop the judder down for dialogue etc as James pointed out and what Douglas Trumbull envisioned with Magi.

[@pandorantourist8907]

@@cody8860 It’s not a real 3D. Nothing can replace 3D Home Screens for Home 3D.

[@bobsmith1754]

@@pandorantourist8907 What? VR 3D is absolutely "real" 3D. Why speak if you have no idea what you're talking about?

[@id104335409]

Let's hope they bring 3d for TVs and Blurays.

[@ethanholgate2512]

I know I want one so badly

[@purefoldnz3070]

He's like Ralph from the Simpsons all grown up!

[@theechosenone4471]

I wear glasses and went to see Dolby 3d so I had to put 3d glasses over mine and at times I wasn’t wowed but others I was smiling and in awe because I’ve only seen like 3 movies in 3d lol particularly the scenes with rain or particles and arrows being pointed

[@williamhornabrook8081]

It's been a long time since I saw a 3D movie before Avatar 2. That last 3D movie was Toy Story 3 and it was completely pointless to make that movie in 3D. Avatar 2 in 3D, on the other hand, was jaw dropping and I think I did myself a disservice never watching the original in 3D.

[@rjmb4687]

I remember I first watched the hobbit high framerate on imax. it was amazingly good. i did not get motion sickness. and it was really fun to watch

[@ajv802]

Its parallax its edge detection… now I’m getting technical

[@jeroen_vz]

It worked AMAZINGLY during the underwater scenes. Pure magic. Yet, he also applied it A LOT during regular talking scenes. Contradicting his own vision in this interview. Switching the framerate constantly in regular scenes which was quite jarring and quite frankly ugly AF. I'm right up there with him that I see the potential of 48 FPS, but he didn't use it as sparingly as it should have been used or as he declares here.

[@ArcherRtM]

Same for me. I understand why it's not a problem for people who don't see the difference or at least don't experience the lag effect, but when you do it hurts the experience. I would have prefered watching it in full 48i/s.

[@two-keytech7578]

I knew it was in a higher frame rate! I kept questioning because I'd notice when it wasn't but then some scenes I was like yup this is higher. Now I know. Smart use of it!!!

[@germanantor2455]

I wish the release 3D TVs again miss my old 3dtv best 3d ever seen

[@olorinhaha6073]

tbh avatar imax 3d was extremely good. real 3d in most cases wasnt worth it for me though unless the movie was specifically designed for it like avatar

[@cody8860]

That's cause most of the films you saw had 2D perspective framing. Directors need to follow rules like panning speed with more care and ideally use the viewfinder in 3D live like JC. Some of the worst examples like Clash of the Titans just converted the whole film to 3D through rotoscoping which was a waste of resources and a horrible experience.

[@garycambridge5513]

Wonder how this will look on home video then ? Don’t really like 3D so seeing the movie in both formats ❤

[@MGRogue]

Such an intelligent guy. We should all be glad that he is alive today to bring us epic cinematic experiences such as Avatar: The Way of Water. Once the dreadful news comes one day that he has unfortunately passed away, then we can look back at all of the successes that he achieved in his life. Until then, perhaps he has some new surprises coming our way in the very near future.

[@danoshollanda2708]

He is is incredible smart but his writing 😅

[@kaister901]

I have not been more excited to go to the cinema as I am now. I would have to say I am more excited than I was for Avengers: End game.

[@HenggaoCai]

James Cameron is back to save the movie industry.

[@IvanSkaro86]

Nice to hear that this movie 3D won't cause any head problems.

[@Ramramram786]

What a confidence 🎉

[@SBandy]

I think 48fps would benefit 2D as well, especially action scenes. Avatar 2 also avoided making the HFR scenes have the soap opera effect unlike The Hobbit trilogy which helps (Also helps it was a good unlike those films).

[@JG-gn9oq]

its true, the avatar 1 kinda gave me a headache for a few good minutes until my eyes adjusted to the screen, But avatar 2 tho its abit darker than avatar 1 on 3D glasses, it never gave me a headache not once from start to finish, thats maybe because of the HFR he was talking about.

[@SuperDenizen]

If I don't butcher this and i might but some movie at a full 60 fps fix looks so bad uaing 60 fps tv. I agree that sometime you just have to adjust the frames.

[@HybarfTics]

I wen to se it they gave us 3D glasses and it worked better with glasses than without.

[@grantlauzon5237]

It looked smoother than 48fps (or even 60fps). Is it 48 fps per eye offset per eye? If so then your brain would interpret it as 96fps.

[@Biotechnick]

Best IMAX 3D experience of my entire life!!!!

[@LoDaKid]

Is that right???? Was the plot good as well?

[@srivigneshsp9u]

Sir l am sundaram. I Am request you are come to our Krishnagiri district Sir because here having more natural mountain and natural resources Sir. It is helpful to you r upcoming movies. I will give support you sir when you are coming to Krishnagiri district Sir.

[@giganooz]

I mean I do honestly think him saying it's a tool and not a format is kind of a way to cope. In the movie, when it switches between 48 and 24 fps, that's really noticeable and pretty annoying still. Especially if it happens mid action scene, which sometimes it does. If anyone could count the amount of times it actually changes in this movie, that would be appreciated. But I think it's safe to say that it's too many. The only reason why you wouldn't just shoot it in straight 48 fps is because compared to 24 fps, I think it would double the rendering cost and duration it takes to render. And I do think that that's probably the reason why he wouldn't shoot straight 48 fps. It could also have to do with the regular cameras being in 24 fps, whereas any scene where it's purely animated, performance capture can be interpolated to generate extra frames without really creating artifacts. That can't be done with pixels from cameras, only with tracked positions.

[@kane4013]

I didn’t know movies could change frame rates between scenes 🤔

[@petercornwell5880]

The film was rendered at 48 frames, and he just rendered the same frame twice for the 24fps scenes.

[@Dholoko]

The only one reason that 3D wasn't a complete sucess. Is because hollywood didn't followed the Cameron guide.

[@kranwa15]

JC is king of tech in movies.

[@adamplotagonart]

greetings

[@tbugtreybob]

The movie should have stayed 48 fps the whole time.

[@breakwoodhopper6739]

Any seen it in 3d

[@DS_Gaurav]

😎

[@srivigneshsp9u]

I am giving below links sir. Our Krishnagiri district on tamilnadu India Sir.

[@Meteotrance]

People hate 3D, because 80 % of the stereoscopic movie market are 2D shoot movie post convert in 3D, if the shooting and CGI render are true left and right cameras, it's real stereoscopic experience.

[@hiawa23]

James Cameron is my alltime fav as his movies are some of my favorites, but what he did in the new Avatar, he has exceeded his best work. In 3D it was like sex to my eyes. It was incredible. Thank You!

[@srivigneshsp9u]

I am giving below links about our Krishnagiri district Sir.

[@Shanethefilmmaker]

I get the feeling BTS became an Abyss 2.0

[@redsungaming]

3d make me feel sickkkk sadly 🤒

[@Emtrax.]

College student who thinks he has to debate anything he hears

[@navylaks2]

3D? You barely notice any of it. More like 2 and half D.

[@thundercracker303]

RealD 3D sucks... And Avatar rerelease was in IMAX 2D but not Avatar 2 so how is that a consumer choice? L

[@stevencord292]

Cameron is just a glorified IT guy

[@geert574]

'consumer choice' nah it's a gimmick to charge some more money

[@Cactusfruitsquisher]

Gimmick how?

[@drewhender3999]

Someone didn't watch Avatar in 3D

[@cinemapigeon4898]

3D is 99% of the time a gimmick sure, but Avatar is that massive 1% exception.

[@drewhender3999]

@@cinemapigeon4898 100%, James Cameron makes sure it's done properly

[@AdvaitJoshisweg998baller]

Dude Avatar 1 in 3D was a super experience

[@aloha270999]

If you watch 3D of first avatar you will be thoroughly disappointed with Avatar 2 in 3D it lacked colors especially underwater everything was just flat I will not be watching in theaters for next one but wait for 3D DVD for home theater.

[@beastmode3370]

Fuck 3D bro Cameron literally made all theaters put it in 3D. Barely had any screenings in 3D. I almost didn't want to watch it because of that reason.

[@ArcherRtM]

In France we have a lot of options. 3D or not 3D. HFR or not HFR. Isn't it like that in tour country ? (the USA ?)

[@ben.g.414]

3d sucks, ruined the experience a little for me. Id see it again though just not in 3d because the movie itself was incredible

[@המכונהשבאופנוע]

Cameron my friend, I watched it in 3D and the result is terrible!!! To say the least. The only color that dominates the entire film is blue All other colors do not exist. It's Horrible! The first movie was amazing! The second movie is rubbish... I left after 20 minutes A waste of your time

[@ArcherRtM]

Come on man, you can't judge un entire movie based on 20 minutes. And I don't where you've seen it but in my movie theatre we had an entire array of different colors, not just the blue.