Jump to content

General movie thread!!!!


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, ArtistFormerlyKnownasKP said:

Oh ****, I haven't watched that in years. How bad does the animated blood look now?

Like this

Except unintentional

  • Thanks 1
  • Gasp! 1

Free games updated 3/4/21

Link to post
Share on other sites

were a personal choice by tom. can't even blame on bad cgi.

HA! Good Fun!

  • Haha 5

"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

"Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Sarex said:

Just rewatched that scene, what bothers you about it?

Skin texture, lighting/reflection issues, wrong or absent shadows, facial animation seems stiff (not anywhere like the worst or anything but). Just didn't look "real" to me at all.  When I was in the theater I was just ... "ugh."   Also, not specific to that movie, I'm just sick of the generic cgi monster roar-face, which includes brief moments in The Mummy which came before LotR. Not every monster has to roar like a lion or grizzly, darnit.

monstercgiface1.jpg

 

Shadows and CGI use in movies were often a problem back then.  Probably still is, but often a little less noticeable now.
Like in Return of the King, ever notice the wide shots of the Rohan army near the end have massive shadows projecting directly in front of the horsemen all lined up on the hill, but they disappear whenever they show closer shots of the human actors/the king making his speech/hitting all the spears with his own sword etc?  

Not that it doesn't still make it an exciting/awesome movie moment when you're caught up into the film, mind. I love that whole ride of the rohan sequence. But I notice stuff like that all the time.

Edited by LadyCrimson
  • Thanks 1
“Things are as they are. Looking out into the universe at night, we make no comparisons between right and wrong stars, nor between well and badly arranged constellations.” – Alan Watts
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Keyrock said:

James Cameron utilized the budget he had for The Terminator extremely well. 

Not really surprising, since he got his start working for Roger Corman.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Amentep said:

Not really surprising, since he got his start working for Roger Corman.

Roger Corman is the grand master of utilizing every last penny of a limited budget to maximum effect.

  • Like 2

rowsdower_sig.jpg.0f13980282a9229af0f1609eb6dee060.jpg
I wonder if there is beer on the sun

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, LadyCrimson said:

Skin texture, lighting/reflection issues, wrong or absent shadows, facial animation seems stiff (not anywhere like the worst or anything but). Just didn't look "real" to me at all.  When I was in the theater I was just ... "ugh."   Also, not specific to that movie, I'm just sick of the generic cgi monster roar-face, which includes brief moments in The Mummy which came before LotR. Not every monster has to roar like a lion or grizzly, darnit.

monstercgiface1.jpg

Interesting, they either redid that scene (tomb of Balin) for the extended cut, or used a different cut as I couldn't find that particular shot, or it's a different scene.

sDsXYRB.png

Edited by Sarex
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Sarex said:

Interesting, they either redid that scene (tomb of Balin) for the extended cut, or used a different cut as I couldn't find that particular shot, or it's a different scene.

It's where it and Frodo are playing peek-a-boo around a pillar, not long before Aragon tries to help then Frodo is stabbed.  I'm pretty sure (so my memory says) that it was in the original theater cut, although the theater was so long ago I could be mistaken (edit: or maybe it was in theater but they changed it a bit still on dvd?). It's in my version of extended, which I think was the first released version of such (if there are other special extended versions that came after I do not know of/have any of those).

I took the screencap from a YouTube video tho, since I was lazy. 

Edit: this youtube video:  (checked my extended dvd, it matches)

 

Edited by LadyCrimson
“Things are as they are. Looking out into the universe at night, we make no comparisons between right and wrong stars, nor between well and badly arranged constellations.” – Alan Watts
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Yep it was there, but the colors were so off I missed it. Either way that part wasn't really that jarring for me, comparing it to some other thing.

YKRLNze.png

Edited by Sarex
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The screencap was just to show the overused roar animation expression that I dislike.  It's reached the point where I don't even like it on real animals, eg a rabid (real bear actor) grizzly in some horror movie. :lol:

In terms of CGI: think of the first two Alien movies and close ups of the Alien's face/opening jaw or when its face is close to an actors face.  It feels present and there and 3 dimensional, because it was filmed that way (or at least mostly).
Things like the cave troll do not feel "present" within the scene, to me. when paired with live-action actors or other things - they do not give me the illusion of actual 3D on a 2D flat surface - eg, a video game effect. Maybe in another 20-25 years they'll finally have perfected such creature CGI.

Edited by LadyCrimson
  • Thanks 1
“Things are as they are. Looking out into the universe at night, we make no comparisons between right and wrong stars, nor between well and badly arranged constellations.” – Alan Watts
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Star Wars prequels CGI has held up amazingly, though:

:shifty:

  • Like 1

rowsdower_sig.jpg.0f13980282a9229af0f1609eb6dee060.jpg
I wonder if there is beer on the sun

Link to post
Share on other sites

For that side-step away...

 

"Cuius testiculos habeas, habeas cardia et cerebellum."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mads Mikkelsen on the Indiana Jones 5 Script and His Love of the Franchise (collider.com)

“I’m very, very excited about it… I rewatched Raiders of the Lost Ark the other day, it is so well-done and so charming, and it’s such great storytelling. So yes it’s a great honor to be part of that franchise that I grew up with… I’m in a lucky position where they let me read the script before. And yes, it was everything I wished it to be, so that was just great.”

"Cuius testiculos habeas, habeas cardia et cerebellum."

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/3/2021 at 8:42 AM, LadyCrimson said:

Skin texture, lighting/reflection issues, wrong or absent shadows, facial animation seems stiff (not anywhere like the worst or anything but). Just didn't look "real" to me at all.  When I was in the theater I was just ... "ugh."   Also, not specific to that movie, I'm just sick of the generic cgi monster roar-face, which includes brief moments in The Mummy which came before LotR. Not every monster has to roar like a lion or grizzly, darnit.

monstercgiface1.jpg

 

Shadows and CGI use in movies were often a problem back then.  Probably still is, but often a little less noticeable now.
Like in Return of the King, ever notice the wide shots of the Rohan army near the end have massive shadows projecting directly in front of the horsemen all lined up on the hill, but they disappear whenever they show closer shots of the human actors/the king making his speech/hitting all the spears with his own sword etc?  

Not that it doesn't still make it an exciting/awesome movie moment when you're caught up into the film, mind. I love that whole ride of the rohan sequence. But I notice stuff like that all the time.

For some "CGI free" epicness (using 10000 soldiers as extras at a time where CGI didn't exist)... The movie was split into four parts because of it's length (7+ hours)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_and_Peace_(film_series)

It was supposedly remade in 2019, but I have no idea if it ended up as a good or bad remake. I could imagine all the extras being replaced by CGI. The original is still worth watching for people with the time to spare (the same kind of people that has the LoTR extended version movies in their library) ;)

 

“He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.” - Albert Einstein

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah. I still have fond memories of John Carter.

"Cuius testiculos habeas, habeas cardia et cerebellum."

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Hurlsnot said:

Are there Twister haters? That movie is on cable pretty regularly, and is always a fun watch.

That was my reaction too. I was like "wait, is liking Twister a controversial stance?" That movie got mildly positive reviews from critics and a lot of people liked it and still do. Gizmodo sure is brave to proclaim their love of a popular and generally well received movie.

I don't doubt Twister haterz exist, but haterz exist for everything. If I looked hard enough I bet I could find someone hating on Rashomon.:p

Now, if the article was "Suck It Haters: Why We're Proud To Love Attack of the Clones," then I'd be curious to find out if this was someone trolling or if they had suffered catastrophic brain trauma. 

Edited by Keyrock
  • Hmmm 1

rowsdower_sig.jpg.0f13980282a9229af0f1609eb6dee060.jpg
I wonder if there is beer on the sun

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sarex said:

 

Is this meant to be a comedy?

  • Hmmm 1

rowsdower_sig.jpg.0f13980282a9229af0f1609eb6dee060.jpg
I wonder if there is beer on the sun

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...