The Official Movie Thread

[PanzerKunt]

Borat fucking ruled but I expected more :\ Because of the UBER hype.

 

[unknown]

Booooll crap. I also read the cg artist interviews and all that, but saying the movie don't have lots of effects through a stupid percentage is just... stupid. In lack of other words to describe it. Maybe 2% of the budget was cg, but a lot more than 2% of the frames in the finished cut included cg.

Take the shots of the dying nebula. You know what those are? Pictures of expanding yeast cells. I read an interview somewhere that Aronofsky said at least 90% (I believe it was 98%) of the movie was done without cgi

Also, when was use of interesting cg bad anyway?

It's not bad, but working without cgi forces the director to take more innovative and interesting steps towards creating his film. IMO of course

 

[Killbot]

Hot Fuzz was ok, as was Shaun of the Dead, but those guys can do better. The first series of Big Train was absolute comedy gold.

Simon Pegg must be one of the most overrated comedians ever to have existed. The best Simon Pegg stuff is Spaced imo, but even that isn't as good as people make it out to be.

 

[PanzerKunt]

Take the shots of the dying nebula. You know what those are? Pictures of expanding yeast cells. I read an interview somewhere that Aronofsky said at least 90% (I believe it was 98%) of the movie was done without cgi

And that makes it more real? It doesn't matter what approach you use when the result is the same, bragging about not using 3d models (often refered to by idiots as CGI) isn't the same as bragging about not post producing it on a computer (often ignored by idiots).
Read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer-generated_imagery

 

[unknown]

I'm not saying it's not real, I'm just saying, "Wow! Aronofsky's cool for taking a different approach to something"

 

[PanzerKunt]

And would you know that or care about that if they didn't tell anyone about it? No. It's cool and all that they did it but doesn't in any way help the movie as a whole from the "omg everything is so fake nowadays with their digitals" whinery.

 

[A8]

I just finished watching Wuthering Heights. Absolutely beautiful film. I love movies that can actually evoke emotions out of me, not comedy's and such, but one's where i get intertwined in the characters emotions and take them as my own. its just amazing

 

[The Ozzman]

The book was alright. The film fucking sucked.

 

[A8]

did they make a newer sucky version that i'm not aware of? because the old one is awesome

 

[The Ozzman]

The only one I know if is the Roman Polanski version

 

[The Ozzman]

Nevermind, it's this one that I've seen:

Emily Bronte's Wuthering Heights. Director: Peter Kosminsky. Actors: Ralph Fiennes and Juliette Binoche. British, 1992. Binoche plays the roles of Catherine and Cathy. Movie.

No idea why I thought Polanski was the director

 

[A8]

Nevermind, it's this one that I've seen:

Emily Bronte's Wuthering Heights. Director: Peter Kosminsky. Actors: Ralph Fiennes and Juliette Binoche. British, 1992. Binoche plays the roles of Catherine and Cathy. Movie.

No idea why I thought Polanski was the director

yea not the good version, its made too recent. Movies just aren't beautiful like they used to be. The good version was made in 1939 and directed by William Wyler. Click

 

[Valerie]

And that makes it more real? It doesn't matter what approach you use when the result is the same, bragging about not using 3d models (often refered to by idiots as CGI) isn't the same as bragging about not post producing it on a computer (often ignored by idiots).
Read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer-generated_imagery

Uh, Knut, the only reason so little of the film was CGI is because their budget didn't allow for extensive use of it. That's the only reason. Seriously. They weren't trying to prove that one method was better than the other.

 

[Pessimism]

And would you know that or care about that if they didn't tell anyone about it? No. It's cool and all that they did it but doesn't in any way help the movie as a whole from the "omg everything is so fake nowadays with their digitals" whinery.

Actually, I would care - If there was a person that created & detailed Xibalba on a computer, then they must have some serious technical precision - the texture, dispersion, and all around spatial dimensions are magnificent to behold. The very fact that it wasn't done with cgi actually gives credibility to the notion that to make a visually stunning movie (according to the standard shoot 'em up american) you don't need the loads of uber-special comp generated graphics that take millions and millions of dollars to do.


Lady Valeria also hit it head on - the budget was exceedingly small, not to mention after the huge delays Aronofsky and the crew had to go through. In the end they found a method that was cost efficient and exceedingly beautiful - even if they had money for cgi it probably would have looked like crap.


Frankly though, I liked the fact that the film could be interpreted in many way; it adds an abstract depth to the film that you just can't get with a one-dimensional film.
But whatev (just my opinion)

 

[PanzerKunt]

Yet it was not angled that it was the budget that made them do it without CG, at least not in the interviews I read where the "ONLY 2% CG!" crap was highlighted. And I didn't say that either method was better, I'm just annoyed that they basically say "we made a visually oresome beautiful film without CGI come watch it asap!"

Observe and shut up:

Peter Parks is a specialist in macrophotography. Working out of a refashioned farm-house outside of London, Parks cooked up soups of bacteria and different fluids to depict the deep space effects in ‘The Fountain’. Taking a leaf out of the Stanley Kubrick book for convincing in-camera visual effects, Parks’ contribution is a tremendous achievement.

“We used his elements as the basis for much larger canvasses that we would design and execute,” Gieringer continues. “In simple terms, the elements we used were from the real world (macro-photography), but the ways in which they were combined were CGI based. After the macro-elements were created, Peter left it to us to take them to another level.” In the end cut of “The Fountain,” the Intelligent Creatures VFX crew created about 234 shots for Hugh’s overall voyage.

http://features.cgsociety.org/story_custom.php?story_id=3866

Of course they mention the 98% thing again, wow how impressive

 

[The Heartbreak Kid]

Simon Pegg must be one of the most overrated comedians ever to have existed. The best Simon Pegg stuff is Spaced imo, but even that isn't as good as people make it out to be.

Well I do love Spaced to be honest.

 

[supseudonymous]

RE3 is absolutely horrible. Never pay money to see this.

 

[Wolves83]

Agreed. Looks like a cash cow to me.

Anybody here into older Japanese action movies like DoubleTap, Killers or Brother?

 

[hibernal_dream]

I liked Seven Samurai, does that count?

 

[Wolves83]

I liked Seven Samurai, does that count?

why not.