No spoken words
Blue Crack Supplier
Malick shot some scenes for The Tree of Life on digital video!!! *killself*
The 7th sign!
Malick shot some scenes for The Tree of Life on digital video!!! *killself*
As for "real environs", what does that even mean? Are you telling me that a sound stage without a green screen is a "real" environment? Perhaps you're just in favor of shooting everything on location? Even period pieces? Do you own a time machine? If so, do you ever use it? If so, do you look towards the past or the future? If it's the future, do I ever get banned for calling you an idiot?
Different things. Who are you to make the decision?
As a photographer, I think you need to realize that in today's industry, if you are a photographer with no digital post skills, you are irrelevant (there are a few exceptions, of course).
I didn't. It's for you to think about.
Cinema is actually about a few different things, not just one thing.
Maybe you'll one day remember, or perhaps learn for the first time, that what you seek out and enjoy most in a theater, or from a book, or from an album is not necessarily what others look for.
As for "real environs", what does that even mean? Are you telling me that a sound stage without a green screen is a "real" environment? Perhaps you're just in favor of shooting everything on location? Even period pieces? Do you own a time machine? If so, do you ever use it? If so, do you look towards the past or the future? If it's the future, do I ever get banned for calling you an idiot?
I'm a photographer, and I do use digital post-processing. What I'm referring to are people who manufacture whole images entirely using just photoshop and other images. I'm even saying that this is not artistic or unskilled. I'm posing the question for you to think about for yourself. What do you value more? I didn't say one way or the other which is better.
If Cameron had perfected this 3D animation, he could have rendered all of the characters, humans and Navi, in CG and just use vocal talent. But he didn't, and that's because he, like everyone else, hasn't really beaten the uncanny valley.
If I'm following this correctly, CG is the enemy of cinema.
Why would he want to mocap real people, render them in CG, and painstakingly rig and animate their faces and bodies, only to make them look the exact same way they already do?
Why would he want to mocap real people, render them in CG, and painstakingly rig and animate their faces and bodies, only to make them look the exact same way they already do?
If I'm following this correctly, CG is the enemy of cinema.
Speaking of the uncanny valley, GibsonExplorer, which valley do you think is bigger, that between a stop-motion filmed animatronic puppet and reality or that between a state of the art CG animation and reality?
Second, both Coraline and Fantastic Mr. Fox were far better films overall than Avatar. You don't need a $300 million budget to create an immersive world with talking animals. But I can't imagine someone who holds Avatar in such high esteem can even begin to appreciate the films I've mentioned.
Coraline's story is as well-worn and simplistic as Avatar's, yet incredibly gorgeous. Mr. Fox is the most fun movie I've seen all year, then again, I'm a big Wes Anderson fan. He's a guy that gets the "style over substance" label thrown at him often, too, which is bullshit.
I think Diemen was referring to Harryhausen style animation
Second, both Coraline and Fantastic Mr. Fox were far better films overall than Avatar. You don't need a $300 million budget to create an immersive world with talking animals. But I can't imagine someone who holds Avatar in such high esteem can even begin to appreciate the films I've mentioned.
Well, he could have stated as much.
He probably assumed it was implied in relation to the conversation. But I dunno. I'll let him speak for himself