|
https://twitter.com/neilcic/status/1066040173341884416
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 19:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 15:36 |
|
|
Robindaybird posted:While I go gather 'Hartmann is loving cray cray' resources, here's something fun: Pages ago but holy crap  I had no idea this is who Butch is now. That sucks, I really hope all his efforts fail.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 20:20
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 20:51
|
|
|
What really gets me are the people responding to this with "it's just a rock dude". Like, the original was just a rock too, but it was a good-looking rock.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 22:46
|
|
|
I knew that my entire perception of the live action version was gonna rest on Pride Rock. They bungled it right up.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 23:10
|
|
|
The biggest issue for me isn't even the rock. Look at the clouds, in the original they're a gorgeous peach. In the remake they're loving grey.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2018 23:11
|
|
|
Pigbuster posted:What really gets me are the people responding to this with "it's just a rock dude". Like, the original was just a rock too, but it was a good-looking rock. Pigbuster posted:The biggest issue for me isn't even the rock. Look at the clouds, in the original they're a gorgeous peach. In the remake they're loving grey. I mean the clouds look how clouds do sometimes look with the sun shining behind them during the morning. Nimbus clouds can look grey even though the sky is yellowish/peach/etc. Look at the outline of the clouds. The clouds are probably thick with rain.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 00:44
|
|
|
Senior Scarybagels posted:it looks like a real stone structure. Senior Scarybagels posted:I mean the clouds look how clouds do Well, exactly. It's somewhat of a let down.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 01:03
|
|
|
the clouds and rocks shouldn't look real. they should look good.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 01:15
|
|
|
I've seen some wild rocks. Makoshika, Black Hills, Kathmandu, Phuket... Lotta good rocks. Ain't nothing in the play book say a rock can't be sheer and jagged. Or that morning clouds can't be amazing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 01:23
|
|
|
Senior Scarybagels posted:Pride Rock looks great, it looks like a real stone structure. The animated ones look both real AND good. The two are not mutually exclusive. Yes, those clouds are grey because they’re thick with rain, but they aren’t real clouds. They didn’t have to put them there, but they did, because it didn’t occur to anyone that maybe they should not put a grey smear across the sky for no reason whatsoever.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 01:49
|
|
|
Schwarzwald posted:Well, exactly. It's somewhat of a let down. Yeah, that's the problem with photorealism as an end goal. Film as a whole is all about manipulating reality to achieve a desired aesthetic effect in support of a story—and as a result, making things look more real doesn't necessarily make it look better. Like, look at the comparison. There's nothing wrong with the rock—it's a nice rock! It's very detailed, there's some nice lighting effects, it's clear the artists put a ton of time into it. But is it better than the original? Do the more realistic effects actually add anything to the scene? Is it artistically different in a meaningful way? And if it isn't... what's the point? Das Boo posted:I've seen some wild rocks. Makoshika, Black Hills, Kathmandu, Phuket... Lotta good rocks. I guess  technically evening clouds but you get the point
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 01:52
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/LightsCameraPod/status/1065747231607795712 It's not entirely fair to compare a trailer for an unfinished movie to a complete one, but it's striking how the CGI version loses so many of the artistic flourishes of the original.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 03:05
|
|
|
9/11 destroyed western art
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 03:10
|
|
|
Pick posted:9/11 destroyed western art Mad Max: Fury Road was a masterpiece. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 03:20
|
|
|
here's something interesting an Indiegogo campaign for a documentary on modern day hand drawn animation. It's fully funded already, but hasn't reached the stretch goal where they'll go to japan and france and interview animators there yet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 03:24
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:Mad Max: Fury Road was a masterpiece. australia is south
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 03:32
|
|
|
Pick posted:australia is south  Fair.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 03:48
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:https://twitter.com/LightsCameraPod/status/1065747231607795712 See it's not the same at all, in the cartoon breaks open a fruit or whatever and in the live action version he tears apart... I dunno is that saffron?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 05:41
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:It's not entirely fair to compare a trailer for an unfinished movie to a complete one, but it's striking how the CGI version loses so many of the artistic flourishes of the original. If they're shown to the public then they're probably as complete as they're gonna get. Also, it's an entirely CGI movie. Everything we see on the frame is there by choice. So, the team behind the original made the choice to have the opening morning sky be a deep red with an orange sun rising centre frame, while the CGI team made the choice to have the sun rise to a more golden hued morning with rain clouds shading the off centre sun in the distance. The original team made a deliberate choice to have that shot of the mountain be orange tipped at the top while purple hued at the bottom to show how huge it is, while the CGI team made the choice to have it be a little brighter at the top but all foggy and hidden below the snowline. ... yeah I think the remake looks bad, too. Beyond desaturation, it's also dulling the intent behind actions. Like, when Rafiki opens the fruit in the original, he holds it between the camera and the sun so there's a flash of sunlight between his hands as he cracks it open, almost as if he's releasing some kind of magic. In comparison, the remake has him crack some twigs instead and they kinda pop a bit with powder, but they've moved the camera to the side of his hands instead of in front so there's no sunlight flashing the screen, making the poof of powder look far less impressive. They literally took the magic away. And they did it by choice, too. I remember not liking Jungle Book, either, because it seemed like Jon Favreau made it with the express intent of reversing everything single plot point and theme of the original movie solely for the sake of reversing them. He seems like the kinda guy who would change Mufasa's death from "Long live the king" into something that actually is Simba's fault.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 06:30
|
|
|
It's a genuine case of the Batman 'everything has to be broody dark and serious and not have colour' meme, jeez. Your silly cartoons for children need to be replaced with desatured sad bad adult cartoons. In conclusion, Pick posted:9/11 destroyed western art
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 07:24
|
|
|
ThisIsACoolGuy posted:I saw Ralph 1 and thought it was merely okay, but Sugar Rush as a setting was pretty boring and I walked out pretty mellow about it. I just saw WR2, and it feels like the plot is more interesting, but just by a hair. In the first one, I was very interested on the whole world behind the arcade videogames and the characters. In this one, I don't feel as interested since the internet is so familiar already, so seeing representations of how websites work is not as magical. I still laughed and would see it again to catch all the references, but the plot seems more of an extension of the first one than a whole new story.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 07:25
|
|
|
The Lion King was my favorite movie as a kid. Then as I grew up I started to be less interested in some aspects of the film...and I realized there was nothing there to replace them. As great as I still think it is, it isn’t one of those movies where Timon and Pumbaa become too childish but Simba’s story is suddenly more interesting. Beauty and the Beast could have been a good remake had they made...any good choices with it. But Lion King wears so much on its sleeve already I don’t think there’s anywhere to go with it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 07:55
|
|
|
The new Lion King is going to end with everyone realising that divine right of kings is a dumb concept and toppling the lion aristocracy to institute a more democratic form of government.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 15:17
|
|
|
Lion King is actually a stealth Zootopia prequel.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 15:32
|
|
|
Between this and dumbo, I’m so sick of Disney’s poo poo can’t wait for “Mulan, but Bad” PenguinKnight fucked around with this message at 19:14 on Nov 24, 2018 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 19:11
|
|
|
PenguinKnight posted:Between this and dumbo, I’m so sick of Disney’s poo poo I'm horrified just thinking about what they're going to do to Lilo and Stitch
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 19:17
|
|
|
Macaluso posted:I'm horrified just thinking about what they're going to do to Lilo and Stitch I'm kind of torn on this, because while I don't want this to exist, one of the benefits of the live action films is that it actually forces them to cast people of color in roles that aren't CGI. Considering the easy success of the films I honestly actually do want to see Mulan/Lilo and Stitch/Aladdin existing because it means actors who normally wouldn't have the chance DO have the chance to headline a film that will probably gross a billion dollars. Even if on a personal level I'm like "poo poo, I don't want this."
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 19:28
|
|
|
It's gonna be interesting to see how people react to Lion King cause Jungle Book at least had one human character to relate to. This time it's gonna be all anthropomorphic Nature-documentary style creature animation without any of of the exaggeration towards humans that Disney 2d could get away with. I dunno if I'll connect to that kind of character.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 19:52
|
|
|
PenguinKnight posted:can’t wait for “Mulan, but Bad” Mulan at least is a way better candidate for a live-action remake than at least most of Disney's major animated films. The only meaningful non-human character is Mushu, and the fantasy elements in general are given relatively little emphasis. Meanwhile, the sequel to the Jungle Book remake - the upcoming live-action remake most likely to not suck - still hasn't received an official release date, nor any real news since January.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 19:54
|
|
|
Cockmaster posted:Mulan at least is a way better candidate for a live-action remake than at least most of Disney's major animated films. The only meaningful non-human character is Mushu, and the fantasy elements in general are given relatively little emphasis. I want the huns to win.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 20:07
|
|
|
Ccs posted:It's gonna be interesting to see how people react to Lion King cause Jungle Book at least had one human character to relate to. This time it's gonna be all anthropomorphic Nature-documentary style creature animation without any of of the exaggeration towards humans that Disney 2d could get away with. What makes you think people wouldn't empathise with a bunch of cute animals? We go nuts for them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 20:16
|
|
|
If anything we tend to care more for critters.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 20:47
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:I'm kind of torn on this, because while I don't want this to exist, one of the benefits of the live action films is that it actually forces them to cast people of color in roles that aren't CGI. Considering the easy success of the films I honestly actually do want to see Mulan/Lilo and Stitch/Aladdin existing because it means actors who normally wouldn't have the chance DO have the chance to headline a film that will probably gross a billion dollars. Even if on a personal level I'm like "poo poo, I don't want this." I have some bad news for you, friend. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/disney-aladdin-skin-darkening_us_5a54e36fe4b003133eccb275 Racism runs so deep Disney would rather hire white people with brownface than brown people.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 20:53
|
|
|
Jesus christ hollywood. Wasn't it bad enough they attempted to Yellowface Scajo (then abandoned because 'it didn't look good')
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 21:14
|
|
|
Robindaybird posted:Jesus christ hollywood. Wasn't it bad enough they attempted to Yellowface Scajo (then abandoned because 'it didn't look good') They also tried transwoman Scarjo but abandoned that as well because holy poo poo Hollywood stop trying to stuff Scarjo into minority roles.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 22:03
|
|
|
paradoxGentleman posted:I have some bad news for you, friend. WELP.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2018 23:36
|
|
|
paradoxGentleman posted:I have some bad news for you, friend. I'm getting flashbacks to that dreadful Prince of Persia movie.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 00:59
|
|
|
Cockmaster posted:Mulan at least is a way better candidate for a live-action remake than at least most of Disney's major animated films. The only meaningful non-human character is Mushu, and the fantasy elements in general are given relatively little emphasis. Despite the fact that Mulan seemingly is a simple movie to adapt to live action, it's projected to cost 300 million dollars, far more than any other live action remake (and only topped by 2 PoTC movies and Avengers 2 and 3, in terms of all-time highest budgets). The cost seems to largely be on constructing massive sets, which gives me a Cleopatra vibe. https://movieweb.com/disney-mulan-remake-live-action-budget-300-million-dollars/
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 01:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 15:36 |
|
|
I liked that Prince of Persia movie  So I suppose take my liking of Wreck-It Ralph 2 with a grain of salt, but yeah, I thought it was solid, if not particularly necessary. I was mostly annoyed by the fact that eBay auctions do not work like that - they'd just be listing maximum bids, not literal bids) than anything else. I might like it more than the original film, though that's mostly because I find the Internet (and, by extension, Slaughter Race) a more interesting location to spend a large chunk of your film's runtime in than Sugar Rush was. Also the sole song was very good. Alan Menken, huh.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2018 01:36
|
|
