Roger Ebert Home

Thank you, James Cameron...

... for confirming a few details in Entertainment Weekly: about CGI techniques (and your intentions) that I noticed when I saw "Avatar." James Cameron, I see you:

"[Bob Zemeckis ("Polar Express," "Disney's A Christmas Carol"] essentially is making animated films using an actor-driven process. His visual choice on 'Beowulf' didn't require photo-realism. 'Avatar' is a different kettle of fish. We were intercutting live-action footage with CG footage, so our CG had to be interchangeable with photography."

* * * *

There's a rumor going around that some of the humans in "Avatar" are CGI creations. Any truth to that?

''There are a number of shots of CGI humans,'' James Cameron says. ''The shots of [Stephen Lang] in an AMP suit, for instance -- those are completely CG. But there's a threshold of proximity to the camera that we didn't feel comfortable going beyond. We didn't get too close.''

* * * *

What's the difference between normal 3-D and RealD 3-D? And is it better to see it in one format over another?

''The differences with the types of 3-D are just the mechanics of how it gets up on the screen,'' producer Jon Landau explains. ''There's really not much difference visually, except in the type of eyeglasses you're wearing.''

Latest blog posts

Latest reviews

Film About A Father Who
MLK/FBI
Outside the Wire
The Marksman
One Night in Miami
News of the World

Comments

comments powered by Disqus