[Mike_Young]

Director Ang Lee creates a groundbreaking movie event about a young man who survives a disaster at sea and is hurtled into an epic journey of adventure...

more film info at www.facebook.com/films3d

[Harper_Milne]

Yeah, the visuals look really cool

[Mike_Young]

Originally Posted by Harper_Milne

Yeah, the visuals look really cool

The critics have been harsh on it, but they say the 3d effects are good

[TheToonArmy]

Originally Posted by Mike_Young

The critics have been harsh on it, but they say the 3d effects are good

No they have not, at least the 5 or 6 I have read.

Only the ending has come under criticism

[Inkblot]

Five stars in the Telegraph, four in Time Out, two in the Guardian.

Reading comments below those reviews, it's clear that many people still think that 2D looks better than 3D. Even though Lee's use of 3D is highly praised, they say that the colours are brighter in 2D and the 3D "draws attention to itself". The Telegraph's Robbie Collin says "With enough money and technology, any studio-backed hack can make objects jump out of the cinema screen. Lee makes us yearn to jump into it". So it's the director's skill that makes us feel the film is real, not the 3D.

Maybe in the future technology will catch up with directors' imaginations, but for now it sounds like 2D is the way forward.

[derek500]

Originally Posted by Inkblot

Five stars in the Telegraph, four in Time Out, two in the Guardian.

Reading comments below those reviews, it's clear that many people still think that 2D looks better than 3D. Even though Lee's use of 3D is highly praised, they say that the colours are brighter in 2D and the 3D "draws attention to itself". The Telegraph's Robbie Collin says "With enough money and technology, any studio-backed hack can make objects jump out of the cinema screen. Lee makes us yearn to jump into it". So it's the director's skill that makes us feel the film is real, not the 3D.

Maybe in the future technology will catch up with directors' imaginations, but for now it sounds like 2D is the way forward.

You've got the wrong end of the stick.

He's praising the way Ang Lee uses 3D. He's making the point, like I'm always doing, that 3D should not just be about pop-out but depth.

It's that depth that the 3D creates that "makes us yearn to jump into it".

[Inkblot]

Originally Posted by derek500

You've got the wrong end of the stick.

He's praising the way Ang Lee uses 3D. He's making the point, like I'm always doing, that 3D should not just be about pop-out but depth.

It's that depth that the 3D creates that "makes us yearn to jump into it".

Fair enough - I read his comments about Buster Keaton creating "reach out and grab realness" as meaning that it's the director's skill that creates the yearning. He does mention Keaton's ability to create palpable objects on screen several times.

I guess I should see Life of Pi in 3D and decide for myself. It would be good to see a film where the 3D adds something to the experience rather than just inducing a headache.

[cunningham1471]

Only if it's in 2D and also only when the kids are back at school

[Boselecta]

My wife and grown-up daughter saw it today and loved it. One thing, my wife said there were a load of kids there and they were obvioulsy bored witless - wife says it's absolutely not a kid's film.

[Scubamonkey]

Seen it three times already ( at various preview screenings). It is certainly not a 'kids film'. It is more about religion and faith. There are few action scenes and not a huge amount of dialogue. The film is visually driven and the tiger is a persistent menace, not a cute and cuddly one. As for the 3D, when it is done well it is brilliant. But where it falters is the numerous 'poking out is the screen' moments which were unnecessary. That's said it is a great film which gets better with each viewing. I would like to see it in 2D though

[TheToonArmy]

Film of the week by Kermode and he even did not mind the 3d

Mayo and Kermode

[jalal]

Several kids saw this today, was surprised as most of them found it kinda boring.

[Helbore]

I saw the trailer for this and haven't a clue what the film is about. Consequently, it left me with no desire to see it, but some random assumption that it is somehow "something I should know about."

All I could really tell you about this movie, based on the trailer, is that there is a tiger in it.

[Jonwo]

It's a very good film, the 3D is used well and there was one scene that made the audience jump. I did like the twist at the end although I can see why people didn't like it.

[TheToonArmy]

Originally Posted by Helbore

I saw the trailer for this and haven't a clue what the film is about. Consequently, it left me with no desire to see it, but some random assumption that it is somehow "something I should know about."

All I could really tell you about this movie, based on the trailer, is that there is a tiger in it.

Then maybe you should watch it a bit more closely if all you learnt is there is a tiger

[PunksNotDead]

Originally Posted by Jonwo

there was one scene that made the audience jump.

Spoiler

the tiger jumping out the cover to attack the hyena? If so it was a great use of the 3D and made the audience at my screening jump too.

It's an amazing looking film, one that needs to be watched a few times to appreciate and fully understand it Also i can imagine it not being to everyones taste and there might be a few posts in this thread saying it was boring and nothing happened, but i liked it

[Inkblot]

Originally Posted by Helbore

I saw the trailer for this and haven't a clue what the film is about. Consequently, it left me with no desire to see it, but some random assumption that it is somehow "something I should know about."

All I could really tell you about this movie, based on the trailer, is that there is a tiger in it.

The past couple of times that I've been to the cinema, the trailer for Life of Pi has been the only one that grabbed my attention. It didn't give away an awful lot about the story but it gave a sense of what the film's about and what kind of film to expect. It's way more enticing than the horrible mess that they've put out to promote Jack Reacher.

[Granny McSmith]

Originally Posted by Helbore

I saw the trailer for this and haven't a clue what the film is about. Consequently, it left me with no desire to see it, but some random assumption that it is somehow "something I should know about."

All I could really tell you about this movie, based on the trailer, is that there is a tiger in it.

The trailer I saw was quite clear about how and why the tiger and boy came to be where they were, and showed some of the boy's story, including his feelings about events preceding the tiger bit, and hinted at events after.

Perhaps you should have watched more closely, Helbore!

There were a few trailers I saw at the same time as this (sadly none for Star Trek; the Jack Reacher one looked dreadful) but this was the only one that made me really want to watch the film.

[Kevin1960]

I saw this earlier today and thought it was fantastic; quite definitely the best film I've seen this year - and I've probably seen around 50 or 60 at the cinema in 2012..

Don't take children to see it; they won't appreciate it.

[Stansfield]

Originally Posted by Helbore

I saw the trailer for this and haven't a clue what the film is about. Consequently, it left me with no desire to see it, but some random assumption that it is somehow "something I should know about."

All I could really tell you about this movie, based on the trailer, is that there is a tiger in it.

A BIG one at that.....Trailer doesn't do it Justice.

A Magical Mystery Movie....8/10...simples.

[Rincewind78]

I saw it on Friday and I liked it. It's a very beautiful movie, but just falls short of being an Epic. Not quite sure what. The music is very beautiful, and it stays with you, especially the opening sequence music. It reminds me of The Fall for some reason, which again is a very beautiful visual movie, but just lacks something to make it an Epic (in my view anyway).
As others have posted, some little kids where there, aged 3-5, but I would regard it to boring for young minds. And could scar them for life as

Spoiler

there is a lot of death, particularly loss of family and animals dying and suffering! It upset me a bit!!!!! I almost greetin when that orangatang and zebra was being attacked to death wasn't so keen on the last 1/4 of the movie. Think the revelation of what really happened could have been done better

I also always thought this was based on an old world classic novel for some reason, and not so modern.

[TheToonArmy]

Originally Posted by Rincewind78

I saw it on Friday and I liked it. It's a very beautiful movie, but just falls short of being an Epic. Not quite sure what. The music is very beautiful, and it stays with you, especially the opening sequence music. It reminds me of The Fall for some reason, which again is a very beautiful visual movie, but just lacks something to make it an Epic (in my view anyway).
As others have posted, some little kids where there, aged 3-5, but I would regard it to boring for young minds. And could scar them for life as

Spoiler

there is a lot of death, particularly loss of family and animals dying and suffering! It upset me a bit!!!!! I almost greetin when that orangatang and zebra was being attacked to death wasn't so keen on the last 1/4 of the movie. Think the revelation of what really happened could have been done better

I also always thought this was based on an old world classic novel for some reason, and not so modern.

Do you mean.....

Spoiler

I have not seen the film so not sure how they play it, but the book, he tells the story about the animals, which they dont believe so he then tells another story about being adrift with his mother, a sailor and a cook.

Basically the animals represent the people, orang-utan represents his mother, the zebra represents the sailor, the hyena represents the cook and Richard Parker, himself.

There's a good "Ending Explained" here ( Don't read if you have not read the book or seen the film )

Life of PI Ending Explained

[Harper_Milne]

Saw it today. It was soo awesome. Deffo reccomend it.

[Rincewind78]

Originally Posted by TheToonArmy

Do you mean.....

Spoiler

I have not seen the film so not sure how they play it, but the book, he tells the story about the animals, which they dont believe so he then tells another story about being adrift with his mother, a sailor and a cook.

Basically the animals represent the people, orang-utan represents his mother, the zebra represents the sailor, the hyena represents the cook and Richard Parker, himself.

There's a good "Ending Explained" here ( Don't read if you have not read the book or seen the film )

Life of PI Ending Explained

Spoiler

yes, it's exactly how it is in the movie, but...it is just briefly explained and thrown in there and over within 5 minutes. I fully appreciate how it's played out - but unhappy how that revelation was actually explained, kind of would of preferred it done better, then him simply VoiceOvering with a flashback of the Japanese Insurance guys interviewing his younger self. Can fully appreciate it being different in novel form - just wished it had been done better on film. I wished it was played out more basically.

[Mike_Young]

Yes the ending has been up to scrutiny, and would the film stand up without being in 3d