When I first saw Avatar, like pretty much everyone else on the planet, I saw it in 3D. Like I said in my review, Avatar is at the moment the only film I’ve seen in 3D where I thought it added rather than detracted from the film, but I was still anxious to see it in 2D and play spot the difference.
So, did losing a dimension make the film less enjoyable? In a word: No.
Before we’d even made it through the first bit of dialogue I’d completely forgotten the film had ever been made in 3D. The wide-angle shots still had the same depth and I actually preferred the look in the “human” scenes because it seemed more real. There weren’t any points where I thought a section had looked better in 3D, not even the flying scenes.
It’s the incredible CGI effects that make Avatar an amazing feat of movie making, not the 3D technology. While in the cinema it did add to the experience and was a fairly cool added extra, it really had no effect on the overall enjoyment of the film.
I’ve said many times on here, and on other people’s blogs, that I’m not a fan of the 3D revolution. I truly believe that it is just a cheap studio tack, trying to make more people go out to the cinema in a time when home cinema systems can equal the theatrical experience. Avatar is so far the only film I’ve seen where the 3D didn’t get in the way, but nothing is lost when you watch it in 2D. As far as I can tell it’s just a gimmick.