xezton posted:

Have any movies come out recently that were mostly non-cg?

xezton posted:

I agree. But I worry that in this day and age doing something like that would be pretty difficult, given how used to CGI the industry has become.

Have any movies come out recently that were mostly non-cg?

(I guess the video I linked there is mostly just backdrops and stuff... but still.)

YourEvilTw1n posted:

With you on this. I really hope they stick with the classic puppets and composites, using CGI to fill in the gaps and clean it up, rather than just CGI.

haveblue posted:

LOTR has less CG in it than most people think. Pretty much only characters and animals are pure CG, buildings and structures are models touched up with a few CG bits here and there. Even the flooding of Isengard was largely done with models and the digital orcs and ents were composited in later.

YourEvilTw1n posted:

With you on this. I really hope they stick with the classic puppets and composites, using CGI to fill in the gaps and clean it up, rather than just CGI.

YourEvilTw1n posted:

Just throwing this in here:



From: http://www.flickr.com/photos/dalbyspook/4381639787/

vladimir posted:

I feel like I should understand this movie poster (??) way more than I actually do in reality.

YourEvilTw1n posted:

(look at the lights)

vladimir posted:

Oh good Lord that was obscure. I don't feel so bad now, though I'm not sure I belong in the same ranks as obvious die-hards that picked up on that immediately.

Cdishwalla posted:

I don't know who else caught Bill Murray on Letterman tonight. I watched on the off chance that he'd get a Ghostbusters III question, and, well, http://www.aintitcool.com/node/44129

He confirms the whole idea of killing him off, and according to him they found a way to do it, but he still seems to doubt the thing will actually get made (he also doesn't seem the least bit enthused about it).

Judging by the way he talks about it (specifically the "crazy talk" comment), it also seems to confirm what I've kind of thought all along - that telling Aykroyd/Ramis/whoever that he'll come back if he was a ghost was his way of saying "I really don't want to do this", not because he seriously thought it was a good idea.

At this point, I really hope this thing doesn't collapse. My balls will be blue for a very long time.

Cdishwalla posted:

I don't know who else caught Bill Murray on Letterman tonight. I watched on the off chance that he'd get a Ghostbusters III question, and, well, http://www.aintitcool.com/node/44129

He confirms the whole idea of killing him off, and according to him they found a way to do it, but he still seems to doubt the thing will actually get made (he also doesn't seem the least bit enthused about it).

Judging by the way he talks about it (specifically the "crazy talk" comment), it also seems to confirm what I've kind of thought all along - that telling Aykroyd/Ramis/whoever that he'll come back if he was a ghost was his way of saying "I really don't want to do this", not because he seriously thought it was a good idea.

At this point, I really hope this thing doesn't collapse. My balls will be blue for a very long time.

DrVenkman posted:

I've always just thought that Murray told them that because he reasoned there was no way they'd ever actually do it. I mean maybe that idea could work, but I really can't think of a way to kill off Venkman without the film being a downer.

I'm sure if they turn in a genuinely good script then Murray will think "Oh ok that's cool I'll do it", but by all accounts he was burned so badly with GBII that it'll be a surprise to see him come back.

YourEvilTw1n posted:

Come on, the guy did Garfield 1 and 2! Can't he just suck it up?

Eyre Kneed posted:

What exactly happened during GB2 that left such a bad taste in Murray's mouth?

Eyre Kneed posted:

What exactly happened during GB2 that left such a bad taste in Murray's mouth?

toxick posted:

He's either going to decline to be in it, or phone it in as a ghost.

egon_beeblebrox posted:

At least the game was pretty awesome.

YourEvilTw1n posted:

Just throwing this in here:



From: http://www.flickr.com/photos/dalbyspook/4381639787/

Lobok posted:

Ray Stantz always was Aykroyd.


Not only is this a cool, understated graphic of the proton pack, but you could also look at it as Venkman/Murray burning just a bit brighter than the other three Ghostbusters.

YourEvilTw1n posted:

I was thinking that the four lights also represent the four 'Busters too. I love that poster so hard.

echoplex posted:

Rikolai posted:

I think Venkman was always just Murray more-or-less playing himself, and the problem with his performance in the game is that he's still doing just that; you have the voice and personality of an almost-60-year-old man coming out of a digital representation of the same guy in his thirties. He probably didn't even re-watch Ghostbusters to get a feel for the character, because Venkman came so naturally to him back in the day.
Just comparing Bill's first appearance on Letterman to his more recent interviews shows how much more manic and lively he was in the '80s. More than anything I was shocked at how quiet his lines in the game were, but when I think about it that's how Murray sounds in a lot of his movies nowadays. He probably did enjoy the recording sessions but forgot that he was playing a younger version of himself.

Lobok posted:

Ray Stantz always was Aykroyd.


Not only is this a cool, understated graphic of the proton pack, but you could also look at it as Venkman/Murray burning just a bit brighter than the other three Ghostbusters.

HalPhilipWalker posted:

Of course he isn't as energetic now that he's thirty years older. Few people are.

Blast Fantasto posted:

Bill Murray IS Ghostbusters. The first film wouldn't work without him as the anchor. I'd rather there just not be a Ghostbusters 3 than have one without Murray or with him in an extremely reduced/indifferent role.