|
This is just coming down to a taste in aesthetics thing now. Like the CGI in Jurassic World looks better than Jason and the Argonauts' stop motion when it comes to just being an effect. But yeah I like Jason and the Argonauts' skeletons more than the dinosaurs we seen so far but that is just because they look stylin and are cool.
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 05:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 07:48 |
|
|
virtualboyCOLOR posted:has male lead playing as a raptor whisperer that is so comical it might has well be a Parks and Rec skit. virtualboyCOLOR posted:Jason and the Argonauts also this is pretty silly
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 05:35
|
|
|
mr.capps posted:taste Something this movie and those who are excited to see it don't have The only acceptable way to watch this is to pretend its a special episode of Johnny Karate
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 05:37
|
|
|
Now watch as you slowly become noise
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 05:40
|
|
|
Burkion posted:Mind you I can't speak for the person who you quoted, but I don't give a drat if the effects aren't as good as when I first saw them, because I understand that while these are technically superior, they are shot in So... you totally understand that they're not trying for naturalism in the way the original JP did. Why do you keep judging by those standards? I mean it's fine if you prefer one thing over another but it's pretty dumb to critique a Picasso for not being photoreal. Burkion posted:They're lazy with the effects and it shows. Which is really bad because of how it affects the special effects people who have to make this stuff. You admit the effects are technically more advanced and far more ambitious, but then call the people who made this stuff lazy, then lament that people like you, saying things like you say, further devalue already massively overworked and exploited artists. What? Burkion posted:In that movie, you totally bought that the humans were interacting with cartoons- but you never once thought the cartoons were real. That's because they were, in the end, cartoons. The dinosaurs aren't real. You seem to understand this. Aside from just being a fact (dinos are extinct IRL) that's, like, a specific theme of this movie. Why should the themes of the film conflict with the visuals?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 05:40
|
|
|
It sucks that people work 100 hour work weeks for so little pay and the end result is pure poo poo that is awful. I'm sure the talented people who put this together could and would love to make something truly special but that happens so rarely that it would be better if they all found better professions if they can.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 05:46
|
|
|
How good everything looks in the final assembly is still up in the air. The real X factor will just be how well everything's paced, cut, whether or not we give a poo poo about anyone involved, etc. The writers have done good stuff but I haven't seem anything of the director's, so I'm wavering.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 05:50
|
|
|
virtualboyCOLOR posted:It sucks that people work 100 hour work weeks for so little pay and the end result is pure poo poo that is awful. I'm sure the talented people who put this together could and would love to make something truly special but that happens so rarely that it would be better if they all found better professions if they can. "Why isn't every movie iconic and special? Why can't they all be in my top 1%?! Clearly it'd be better if all VFX people quit their jobs and dissolved the industry. After all, their output isn't quite to my taste." 
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 06:01
|
|
|
Basically yeah. Either that or work yourself to death to make just enough money to be able to afford food for the sake for the sake of creating "art" that's been manufactured like a one hit wonder pop song. And hell, if these media conglomerates are asking for 2+ hours of my time it better be special.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 06:08
|
|
|
virtualboyCOLOR posted:Basically yeah. Rants against the superficiality of pop music are not helping your case. We're talking about a sequel to a film that was manufactured and hyped to the heavens from the instant the book was optioned.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 06:11
|
|
|
Prolonged Priapism posted:Clearly it'd be better if all VFX people quit their jobs and dissolved the industry. Oddly enough that's already happening. The article I linked said almost all cgi is done by 6 studios but don't really mentioned that's because the rest went bankrupt or scarpered. People are getting warned away from pursuing a career in cgi and a lot of people, from what I understand, are switching over to other jobs. In a way cgi studios are going the way of traditional animation. Traditional animation rose in the 90's died in the 00's and came back in the 10's. Granted that had more to do with Disney loving up and then rebuilding but same diff. Imo, if all cgi looked like District 9's did I would die happy but that was a somewhat unique case in that it started as a Halo film, with a halo budget and switched gears over to another movie entirely.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 06:37
|
|
|
Red Mundus posted:Oddly enough that's already happening. The article I linked said almost all cgi is done by 6 studios but don't really mentioned that's because the rest went bankrupt or scarpered. People are getting warned away from pursuing a career in cgi and a lot of people, from what I understand, are switching over to other jobs. Good. CGI is used so often without restraint that it should die out. If big budget hollywood film's can't achieve District 9 quality effects then its all the better. Unfortunately Avatar was praised for it's CGI and it looked like cartoony poo poo that would look more suited as a trailer for a video game. Thanks for linking the documentary btw Shame that such talented people waste their lives on this trash and you have idiot posters here defending it.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 06:45
|
|
|
I'm willing to forgive some mediocre CG if it's doing something cool at least. Like, compare it with practical effects and props for Buckaroo Banzai, they look cheap as hell but somehow the movie's energy glosses over it and you just roll with it. CG is certainly used about 10x as much as it should be these days though.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 06:49
|
|
|
You're really conflating two at best tenuously related things here. One is a very real problem in the VFX industry that could become a genuine crisis, and while all the FX companies going away would force some change in how Hollywood does things it would likely mean even more people going broke before studio executives feel any pinch, so it would be nice if they changed sooner instead of later. The other is your judgment of how good Jurassic World is going to be based on the trailers. It may well end up terrible but if it is it won't just be because the CGI looks a little ropey.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 06:51
|
|
|
Sure but that doesn't change the fact that the CGI is an abomination and the trailer presents a premise that is too comical to even pretend it has any chance of achieving worth that is higher than gutter trash for the adam sandler crowd
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 06:56
|
|
|
With the power of CGI we could make your posts good.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 07:57
|
|
|
SweetAsselin posted:If some kid swiped at a dog with a blunt object the way the girl in the background does the kid would get bit. Teach your kid to play gentle with animals. Darko posted:I can't stop looking at that petting zoo gif and have been laughing at it for the last five minutes. I now think this movie will be great. When I was 9 and I saw the first JP, I desperately wanted Jurassic Park to be a real place that I could visit, and the first movie came just close enough to that and didn't even feature a fully functional park on-screen. This movie is outright showing an operating park, and it's including a ton of stuff that I wouldn't have expected to see but makes total sense and would have made 9-year-old me go even more insane. A dinosaur petting zoo? Getting right up close with a T-rex? Getting to ride in a hamster ball right up next to a herd of dinosaurs? Floating downriver as a bunch of dinosaurs are grazing on the shore? Hell yes. It's looking like a big portion of the movie will be Jurassic Park: Operation Genesis: The Movie and I think that's completely awesome, and it's what I've been waiting for for 20 years.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 07:57
|
|
|
I doubt those are compys running around the petting zoo. While cute they would probably bite like an otter or meerkat and then some rear end in a top hat will demand that they all get put down because they were loving stupid http://archive.kare11.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=131535
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 10:01
|
|
|
virtualboyCOLOR posted:Has something changed in CG (or not changed) because lately every film has the worst CG I've seen since phantom menace. It's hard to judge CG on trailers. They all use unfinished/not final shots. It's not unique to Jurassic World, its common to most VFX heavy movie and trailers. Plus we have no control what the internet guys do to the footage.. they'll change the color grading/crush colors/change compression and everything can look completely different than what we see in dailies. Whelp. 
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 13:06
|
|
|
Big K of Justice posted:It's hard to judge CG on trailers. They all use unfinished/not final shots. It's not unique to Jurassic World, its common to most VFX heavy movie and trailers. Plus we have no control what the internet guys do to the footage.. they'll change the color grading/crush colors/change compression and everything can look completely different than what we see in dailies. Sure I get that. I mean I still remember the star wars white glowing light sabers from its first trailer. However the movies I referenced were complete productions and looked like poo poo that was farmed out to a bunch of local college freshman and so far Jurassic World doesn't look any better. There's no wow factor like the first film. There's no magic.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 13:42
|
|
|
Red Mundus posted:
District 9's CGI looks really bad now. Also on a sidenote I find it funny that people were championing how scary the Prawns looked when they literally had giant puppy dog eyes.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 14:51
|
|
|
virtualboyCOLOR posted:And hell, if these media conglomerates are asking for 2+ hours of my time it better be special. Don' t flatter yourself.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 15:44
|
|
|
Prolonged Priapism posted:It's kind of amusing, your mindset here is exactly the issue this film is going to address - "These objectively awesome technical achievements aren't as real or exciting as they were when I first saw them, why can't they wow me now? Why aren't they trying? I'm bored! Blow my mind again! Do something better!" There's actually a really good Cracked article/listicle/whathaveyou about why the effects look better in the older movies. http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-reasons-expensive-films-end-up-with-crappy-special-effects/ Jurassic World is probably going to be terrible because it goes just beyond the level of suspension of disbelief and the conflict is stupid. The effects and such don't help. Groovelord Neato fucked around with this message at 16:24 on May 17, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 16:22
|
|
|
"beyond the level of suspension of disbelief" pfffffffffffffft
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 17:30
|
|
|
what lies past beyond the level of suspension of disbelief? past the highs and lows of uncanny valley? what, wise one, the one our village calls "keeper", what lies there?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 17:35
|
|
|
mr.capps posted:what lies past beyond the level of suspension of disbelief? past the highs and lows of uncanny valley? what, wise one, the one our village calls "keeper", what lies there? Tammy and the T-Rex?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
mr.capps posted:what lies past beyond the level of suspension of disbelief? past the highs and lows of uncanny valley? what, wise one, the one our village calls "keeper", what lies there? It's almost like it's entirely subjective and doesn't apply to everyone in the same way
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 17:47
|
|
|
Burkion posted:It's almost like it's entirely subjective and doesn't apply to everyone in the same way it is almost like saying "beyond the level of suspension of disbelief" is an incredibly stupid thing to say, because it sounds incredibly stupid
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 17:49
|
|
|
mr.capps posted:it is almost like saying "beyond the level of suspension of disbelief" is an incredibly stupid thing to say, because it sounds incredibly stupid I won't disagree with that, but something that breaks the suspension of disbelief is a valid thing. Dunno why some one would add all of the extra words to it, but you know whatever. The idea is the same. This is something that breaks MAH IMMERSION and doesn't make up for it in other ways. Mind I'm not really on that side of the fence. I'm willing to put up with a lot of bullshit. Nothing in this movie strains my own credulity, though the noted 30 pound pterodactyls picking up much, much, much heavier dinos is rather hilarious when pointed out. For me this is just a dumb monster movie that looks kind of boring for being a monster movie. But if we get a full on dino civil war with T-Rex vs I-Rex then sure I'm OK with that.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 18:06
|
|
|
Awful lot of posters getting defensive about lovely CGI in a lovely summer film.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
Thing is, I grew up on Godzilla movies, Doctor Who episodes, and cheap 50s B flicks. Bad special effects rarely bother me unless they're aesthetically unpleasant (like, say, all the ugly mattes in the original Clash of the Titans.) Sure, Jurassic World cost multiple hundreds of millions of dollars and so on, so you expect them to be better to start with, but it won't make a huge difference unless it actually makes the film overall look bad.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 19:55
|
|
|
I wonder what movies from the past 5 years people felt actually had good CGI.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 19:57
|
|
|
Dawn of the Planet of the Apes was decent. Chappie and Life of Pi were as well. That's about it. CGI is pretty garbage.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 20:05
|
|
|
How could you forget The Wolf of Wall Street?? Oh, right, it's because you didn't notice that basically every film now employs at least dozens of CGI shots to do set extensions, swap backgrounds, add/remove people, completely redo backdrops, and on and on and on. You have no idea what you're talking about.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 20:18
|
|
|
Prolonged Priapism posted:How could you forget The Wolf of Wall Street?? Oh, right, it's because you didn't notice that basically every film now employs at least dozens of CGI shots to do set extensions, swap backgrounds, add/remove people, completely redo backdrops, and on and on and on. I didn't see it because it was 3 hours long and looked boring, but wutev. Most CG looks like garbage and it's pretty obvious no one in Hollywood cares. Why does it make you upset when people point this out? Do you have the stunted emotions of a small child? Edit: lol I just watched the vid you linked and, save for a few scenes, holy lol if you thought looked impressive instead of cartoon video game poo poo virtualboyCOLOR fucked around with this message at 20:27 on May 17, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 20:24
|
|
|
virtualboyCOLOR posted:I didn't see it because it was 3 hours long and looked boring, but wutev. Aahhahah.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 20:27
|
|
|
For 3 hours it better be as amazing as the new Mad Max film or its just a waste of my time.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
virtualboyCOLOR posted:For 3 hours it better be as amazing as the new Mad Max film or its just a waste of my time. All of these incredibly stupid posts have been very much worth it just for that so thank you.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
virtualboyCOLOR posted:I didn't see it because it was 3 hours long and looked boring, but wutev. wutev
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 20:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 07:48 |
|
|
virtualboyCOLOR posted:I didn't see it because it was 3 hours long and looked boring, but wutev. No offense but I feel like GBS would suit you better at this point. They got a good Mad Max thread going there for you to roll around in.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2015 20:32
|
|
