but that plane crash really sucks. Are you going for realism, or are you going for cartoon? Good choice of story though - Secret of the Unicorn was one of the very best.
(, Tue 17 May 2011, 9:07, Reply)
I doubt if it was done realistically whoever was in that plane would survive the crash. Plus that boat sailing across the desert may be awkward ;)
(, Tue 17 May 2011, 9:16, Reply)
Personally, I'd rather have beautiful animation (like early Disney or the recent Japanese stuff) than 'realistic' animation. Why spend £200mill on animation that looks 'real'?
Mind you, most Hollywood films are about 50% animation now so the boundaries are getting a bit blurry.
I'd mush rather have seen this as a hyper-styled live action film.
(, Tue 17 May 2011, 9:20, Reply)
but not cartoon with traced live action? like Snow White was with the introduction of rotoscoping?
(, Tue 17 May 2011, 9:21, Reply)
Snow White didn't look in any way "realistic". You can accept what's going on in that film because the characters and situations don't jar with the world they inhabit.
(, Tue 17 May 2011, 9:30, Reply)
Snow White was a staggering piece of work that did look very real and many people complained about the juxtaposition of her movements with those of the dwarfs and the animals.
History repeating, very interesting.
(, Tue 17 May 2011, 9:33, Reply)
I think its because they're aiming for something that's so close to looking real that it just didn't work for me. Anyway, regardless of that I loved the books as a kid and I'll certainly end up seeing it. Its got enough people working on it who's work I admire to make me think it'll be good.
(, Tue 17 May 2011, 10:11, Reply)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny_valley
(, Tue 17 May 2011, 12:23, Reply)
It's just that with the tech that filmamkers have there's an obsession with making everything look 'real'.
I suppose maybe I'm just old fashioned and can't help feeling it's the sense of wonder has gone from most animation now, Pixar being the exception that proves the rule.
(, Tue 17 May 2011, 9:34, Reply)
"When you're now taking what should be films full of people, living thinking, breathing, flawed creatures and you're controlling every moment of that, it's just death to me. It's death to cinema, I can't watch those Star Wars films, they`re dead things"
Perhaps Mocap is more organic, but I still find it takes my eyes a while to adjust to any film I've seen done that way - it still looks rather odd to see something lifeless prance round as a bewitched doll.
(, Tue 17 May 2011, 9:40, Reply)
and that in itself is real people putting their input in (be it mocap or hand animated).
Quite odd coming from a man of his background :D
(, Tue 17 May 2011, 9:47, Reply)
www.empireonline.com/images/image_index/hw800/51373.jpg
That excites me more than the trailer
(, Tue 17 May 2011, 9:55, Reply)
s3.amazonaws.com/coolproduction/ckeditor_assets/pictures/1692/original/Tintin_US_Poster1_1000px.jpg?1305565608
(, Tue 17 May 2011, 10:00, Reply)
If you're going to spend all that time and effort making the characters look alive and move and behave in a realistic way, you've got to apply that to the environment around them and the things they interact with. Otherwise it undermines the whole illusion. Plane crashes - especially light planes - are very survivable unless you've got absolutely no control over the thing. If you're writing the script you can decide whether its a survivable crash or not.
As for the ship in the desert - looks like a dream sequence to me.
(, Tue 17 May 2011, 9:27, Reply)
juxtaposition of does work, snow white to the dwarfs/animals of the forest. The cel drawing of the characters to the lush paint work of the environments.
It's just not what you're used to right now. It's trying something new. It might fail, but at least they're giving it a go.
(, Tue 17 May 2011, 9:34, Reply)