- Time
- Post link
- Time
- Post link
Re: Sam and Max, Purcell went to Tell Tale Games and took them with him. New episodes start next month, I think.
Scruffy's gonna die the way he lived.
Lucasfilm to sell Physical Effects Unit — Page 3
Re: Sam and Max, Purcell went to Tell Tale Games and took them with him. New episodes start next month, I think.
Scruffy's gonna die the way he lived.
- Time
- Post link
I wish they wouldn't have cancelled the sequel for that or Full Throttle, but if they canned it because it just didn't do the potential franchises justice, then I respect that.
- Time
- Post link
Yet it all looked absolutely real.
So may people act like Lucas would use CG first and consider other options later, but Lucas was all about doing it practically if he could help it. Take the Niemodians for example. They even made a costume for Jar-Jar with the idea that they could get some practical shots out of the deal. And the CG artists had to prove to George they could pull Yoda off before he would let them.
I think Lucas is the first person to tell you that doing it practically is ideal. But then again you just can't pull something off like Sebulba with a rod puppet.
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
I think Lucas is just getting the companies to be able to work on their own so he can go off into the pasture so to speak.
They used more models in any one of the prequel films than they used in the entire classic trilogy combined, and they will still be the top choice for ILM, so in that regards not a whole lot will change really.
So many act like CG is so easy to spot, but a lot of the times I see them pointing to these miniatures and models and real photographic elements.
I like how the original article made it out like LOTR used mostly models and Lucas uses mostly CG. As far as I can tell they are both running about neck and neck with their huge summer blockbusters in regards to their use of both models and CG.
I don't think that this can be all Lucas, I really don't. He owns ILM, but don't others run it?
Am *I* the ONLY person who had to read this post several times and STILL could only think... oh nevermind.
I think Lucas is just getting the companies to be able to work on their own so he can go off into the pasture so to speak.
They used more models in any one of the prequel films than they used in the entire classic trilogy combined, and they will still be the top choice for ILM, so in that regards not a whole lot will change really.
So many act like CG is so easy to spot, but a lot of the times I see them pointing to these miniatures and models and real photographic elements.
I like how the original article made it out like LOTR used mostly models and Lucas uses mostly CG. As far as I can tell they are both running about neck and neck with their huge summer blockbusters in regards to their use of both models and CG.
I don't think that this can be all Lucas, I really don't. He owns ILM, but don't others run it?
Am *I* the ONLY person who had to read this post several times and STILL could only think... oh nevermind.
I don't wanna know, I don't wanna know, I don't wanna know....
“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”
Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
They used more models in any one of the prequel films than they used in the entire classic trilogy combined, and they will still be the top choice for ILM, so in that regards not a whole lot will change really.
Is that true?!
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Yet it all looked absolutely real.
They used more models in any one of the prequel films than they used in the entire classic trilogy combined, and they will still be the top choice for ILM, so in that regards not a whole lot will change really.
Is that true?!
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Yet it all looked absolutely real.
I think it looked like it was: a bunch of actors in costumes in front of a green wall.
If what you're saying is true, then Luca$h used models, costumes and sets, just like in the OOT, with the added ingredient of CG effects, that he didn't have when making the OOT, and spent just as long over each film as he did with the OOT.
Yet it all looked absolutely...
fake!!
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: auraloffalwaffle
If what you're saying is true, then Luca$h used models, costumes and sets, just like in the OOT, with the added ingredient of CG effects, that he didn't have when making the OOT, and spent just as long over each film as he did with the OOT.
Yet it all looked absolutely...
fake!!
Again I thought it looked real enough. I didn't see any greenscreen in the movies I saw. They had painted it all out in the final shots. Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
They used more models in any one of the prequel films than they used in the entire classic trilogy combined, and they will still be the top choice for ILM, so in that regards not a whole lot will change really.
Is that true?! About how many models they used in the prequels? Absolutley. I'm not sure how closely all of you have looked into it, but half the time I see people complaining about CG in these movies, they are talking about digital composites done with practical models. There was only 1 fiery explosion in The Phantom Menace that was rendered by a computer (the shot of the explosion chasing the droids through the hall when the control ship is blowing up) every other explosion and fire effect in that movie (not counting the pod race crashes) was done by either blowing up a real model, or by digitally compositing real photographic elements of fire onto shots of practical model elements.
As far as the model unit being ILM's top pick for practical elements, it says so in the article.Originally posted by: auraloffalwaffle
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Yet it all looked absolutely real.
I think it looked like it was: a bunch of actors in costumes in front of a green wall.They used more models in any one of the prequel films than they used in the entire classic trilogy combined, and they will still be the top choice for ILM, so in that regards not a whole lot will change really.
Is that true?! About how many models they used in the prequels? Absolutley. I'm not sure how closely all of you have looked into it, but half the time I see people complaining about CG in these movies, they are talking about digital composites done with practical models. There was only 1 fiery explosion in The Phantom Menace that was rendered by a computer (the shot of the explosion chasing the droids through the hall when the control ship is blowing up) every other explosion and fire effect in that movie (not counting the pod race crashes) was done by either blowing up a real model, or by digitally compositing real photographic elements of fire onto shots of practical model elements.
As far as the model unit being ILM's top pick for practical elements, it says so in the article.Originally posted by: auraloffalwaffle
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Yet it all looked absolutely real.
If what you're saying is true, then Luca$h used models, costumes and sets, just like in the OOT, with the added ingredient of CG effects, that he didn't have when making the OOT, and spent just as long over each film as he did with the OOT.
Yet it all looked absolutely...
fake!!
- Time
- Post link
And yeah, a typical prequel film has more model work than the entire OT combined. Problem is though that they are photographed with digital cameras (except TPM), digitally composited and usually digitally tweaked as well, and then placed in a digital environment; the final image, even though it is model based or uses models, still has that artificial sheen to it.
- Time
- Post link
- Time
- Post link
- Time
- Post link
“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”
Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death
- Time
- Post link
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: Mike O
Not be nitpciky, but Lucas was also probably not going for a SPR feel. He needs his PG rating, remember.
Not be nitpciky, but Lucas was also probably not going for a SPR feel. He needs his PG rating, remember.
I know he was going for that feel, and considernig that there was no practical unit photography involved his results are quite impressive. But had he brought a small crew to a beach in the Phillippines or whatever, he could have had SPR results. You don't need to have gore--as the final ROTS shows.
Some people can't tell the difference between Battle of Kashyyk and SPR but then people spent millions of dollars at the box office to see Gigli so what do they know.
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: zombie84
Some people can't tell the difference between Battle of Kashyyk and SPR but then people spent millions of dollars at the box office to see Gigli so what do they know.
Some people can't tell the difference between Battle of Kashyyk and SPR but then people spent millions of dollars at the box office to see Gigli so what do they know.
That is so true.
- Time
- Post link
And for the record, I never saw Gigli.
- Time
- Post link
I'm pleased that you can enjoy the PT so much. I don't. I guess that's all that can be said. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder...
- Time
- Post link
If anything, I wish I could share my joy for this saga with all of you.
If I call you guys into question about how you guys feel about it, it's just to better understand or to perhaps try to get you to see some of these things from a different perspective. Maybe it makes a difference for some of you, or maybe it doesn't. When it comes to matters of taste, there is no right or wrong.
I just think a lot of times people can get so hung up on the things Lucas didn't "get right", they can end up missing out on a lot of the things he did get right.
To me it's much more difficult to believe a bunch of puppets, than it is to accept a digitally shot image. It's not like ANH ESB or ROTJ looked like Saving Private Ryan either, but I still rolled along with the story and suspended my disbelief.
It's like ever since CG and digital film making in general have come about, suddenly it has to look 100% real or we fold. What happened to our ability to roll along with a monkey woman Emperor? Or a Salacious crumb jumping up to the rafters through the magic of reversing footage of them dropping him from the ceiling? Why are we suddenly kicked out of the moment by a CG character who has a mis aligned shadow?
- Time
- Post link
The other side of it is the actors' interaction with said creatures. Stop-motion animations and CG creatures very often do not inspire convincing interactions from their living co-stars, because they're not actually there. Or there is some kind of stand-in.
The great strength of something like Yoda in ESB and Jabba The Hutt in ROTJ is that they were there on-set and the actors and puppeteers could really work off each other. The performances were much more involving as a result.
- Time
- Post link
I think it's a testament to Frank Oz that he was able to elevate Yoda's performance to what it ended up being, but at the same time, I definately had to meet him half way on the whole deal.
It just seems like a lot of us aren't willing to do that anymore.
- Time
- Post link
- Time
- Post link
I agree somewhat about what you said about Gollum. In terms of acting, yes. It's an amazing achievement. But, my problem with Gollum, and most of it happens within the Two Towers, is how doesn't blend in naturally to the environment around him. WETA doesn't sell it as well as ILM does.
-Yoda; Episode III Revenge of the Sith.
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: zombie84
I think its ultimately the way the character is concieved and directed. I mean Gollum looks utterly realistic and his performance is one of the best in the entire LOTR trilogy, which itself is brimming with fine performances. Ultimately it comes down to how you use it. Watto was very well done. I wouldnt want any of those two characters done by puppets or stop motion or suites or anything. Ultimately the bottom line is that most of the CGI characters weren't used properly by Lucas.
I think its ultimately the way the character is concieved and directed. I mean Gollum looks utterly realistic and his performance is one of the best in the entire LOTR trilogy, which itself is brimming with fine performances. Ultimately it comes down to how you use it. Watto was very well done. I wouldnt want any of those two characters done by puppets or stop motion or suites or anything. Ultimately the bottom line is that most of the CGI characters weren't used properly by Lucas.
It all depends on the character and what they do with it. Watto is indeed very well done and often overlooked. The thing that I think is also overlooked is the robotic characters. Aside from R2 and 3PO's digital doubles, all of the battle droids and destroyer droids were totally convincing. The R2 and 3PO models were just off.
I guess it depends on whether you find the fake puppet more or the fake cgi character to be more pleasing. It is seems to be a matter of aesthetics. I don't see one to be better or worse than the other.
- Time
- Post link
What didn't come across as convincing, especially in Sith, was the blue or green screen environments. The actors just never seemed to be a part of it ever. And it just stood out like a sore thumb. I really wish they had put much more effort into set building. In my opinion, TPM has the best effects of the prequel movies, having a nice enough balance of "old" and "new" technology, and it comes across as very believable for the most part. But to say that Lucas would prefer to do effects practically rather than with CG is just silly. Any number of recent interviews with him will prove otherwise.
I enjoy the prequels, I actually do. We're not all hating them for the sake of hating them. I just seriously don't think they're nearly as good as the original films. They have some good stuff in there, but it usually doesn't outweigh the bad, especially on Sith.
There is no lingerie in space…
C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.
- Time
- Post link
- Time
- Post link
Originally posted by: zombie84
I think its ultimately the way the character is concieved and directed. I mean Gollum looks utterly realistic and his performance is one of the best in the entire LOTR trilogy, which itself is brimming with fine performances. Ultimately it comes down to how you use it. Watto was very well done. I wouldnt want any of those two characters done by puppets or stop motion or suites or anything. Ultimately the bottom line is that most of the CGI characters weren't used properly by Lucas.
I think its ultimately the way the character is concieved and directed. I mean Gollum looks utterly realistic and his performance is one of the best in the entire LOTR trilogy, which itself is brimming with fine performances. Ultimately it comes down to how you use it. Watto was very well done. I wouldnt want any of those two characters done by puppets or stop motion or suites or anything. Ultimately the bottom line is that most of the CGI characters weren't used properly by Lucas.
This all comes because Andy himself was on the set and played his performance to the actors. The CGI artists matched his performance, facial expressions to the CGI model.
While on Star Wars, there were just stand-ins used for the cgi characters, which explains the dry and stiff reaction from the real actors to them.