Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Dr Snofeld
Apr 30, 2009

Pope Guilty posted:

$200M on a $30M budget and that wasn't enough for Dreamworks? That's why we didn't get more Wallace and Gromit movies, just that short awhile back? Man, gently caress Dreamworks forever.

That, and Peter Sallis is 93 now and has a visual impairment, so it's difficult for him to play Wallace now, and really there's no point doing it without him. That's why Wallace has a different voice actor in the Telltale Games series, since a script of that size is a lot to ask of a man pushing 90.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Dr Snofeld
Apr 30, 2009

SALT CURES HAM posted:

Why not just use CGI and make it look like stop-motion? Lego Movie was CGI and pulled it off pretty well.

They did that for Flushed Away, which was pretty decent but bombed commercially as I understand it, and suffered from having those slugs shoved into every point that could be considered a lull in the action. You could definitely tell it was CGI though. The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists! went with a stop-motion-CGI hybrid approach that worked well.

Dr Snofeld
Apr 30, 2009

wdarkk posted:

Was that a good film? I meant to watch that in a theater but then I forgot.

I wouldn't call it Aardman's best work but it was certainly a lot of fun, with gags aplenty and a good cast. You can tell that a lot of love went into it.

  • Locked thread