Secondly, the second half of the movie is just a re-telling of the first half of the movie but with different characters playing the same roles. I ain't read beowulf in a while but I don't remember it being a constant loop of people making the same bad decision over and over and over again.
Secondly, the second half of the movie is just a re-telling of the first half of the movie but with different characters playing the same roles. I ain't read beowulf in a while but I don't remember it being a constant loop of people making the same bad decision over and over and over again.
Thirdly, the action wasn't that great
I think the third part of the EPIC POEM had the whole decisions from the past replaying itself as a dragon that would ultimately kill him.
But in the movie the dragon was actually his bastard son he had from fucking Grendel's mother rather than killing her. Also Grendel, himself, was the bastard son of Angelina Jolie and the King. Which was just the wackiest plot change in anything ever.
Secondly, the second half of the movie is just a re-telling of the first half of the movie but with different characters playing the same roles. I ain't read beowulf in a while but I don't remember it being a constant loop of people making the same bad decision over and over and over again.
Thirdly, the action wasn't that great
I think the third part of the EPIC POEM had the whole decisions from the past replaying itself as a dragon that would ultimately kill him.
But in the movie the dragon was actually his bastard son he had from fucking Grendel's mother rather than killing her. Also Grendel, himself, was the bastard son of Angelina Jolie and the King. Which was just the wackiest plot change in anything ever.
I thought it was a good plot change. Otherwise Grendel fighting the dragon would have been a pretty unrelated plot point, but what they changed it to meant that the first and second half of the movie were actually relevant to each other.
Well it's worth pointing out that people around the time Beowulf was written wouldn't have thought twice about taking the plot and twisting it into whatever they wanted. As long as it makes for a better story, I have no problem with the changes, to be honest.
Yeah I don't give a fuck. I had a teacher that flipped out every chance she got around the time the movie was coming out. It was British Lit too and we were reading Beowulf. So she had many chances.
i need at least a dozen broken whiskeybottles, 5 shattered monocles and a musical interlude featuring Bianca Castafore lasting no shorter than 15 minutes.
Lost Salientblink twiceif you'd like me to mercy kill youRegistered Userregular
edited May 2011
There was this bizarre coffee shop in the central part of my area of Seoul (it's a very small area because it's stuck between mountains) and at this coffee shop they had a vinyl record of The Blue Lotus inexplicably for sale.
And I wanted it so badly and saved and saved and then I went to buy it and
the shop was closing and all their merchandise was gone.
This thread is just rubbing salt in that wound every time I see it.
Lost Salient on
"Sandra has a good solid anti-murderer vibe. My skin felt very secure and sufficiently attached to my body when I met her. Also my organs." HAIL SATAN
I've never been bothered by the so-called "uncanny valley".
That's because so few things so far have actually been in the valley. All the Zemeckis nonsense wasn't right down there, it was on the left slope. It looked wrong not because it was uncanny, but because it was just shit, with rubbery skin and cold, dead eyes, lifeless mouths and flat, uninteresting backdrops. Uncanny Valley has more to do with movement and gestures than physically appearance anyway, and those movies were all mocapped quite well so it wasn't that.
I think when people talk about uncanny valley it is more as a warning, as a generalized threat. Most digital animation so far in cinema has been absolutely on the left slope of the valley, improving animation and texturing to the highest possible point before the extremely quick decline to unsettling automatons. Essentially, just hyper realistic animation rather than wholly digital actors.
So for every new movie that comes out, with the increasing power of computers and rapidly advancing technologies, we fear that the next movie will just tip over that edge and tumble all the way down into the valley. Things in the valley don't just look 'wrong', or unbelievable. They are genuinely unsettling, creepy and unnerving. And in a family friendly movie like TinTin, would actually frighten children and provide a huge amount of discomfort.
From the TinTin trailer, it's hard to say. They actually disguised the faces a lot, sometimes quite brazenly by having the newspaper with eyeholes, for example. Now, this could be because, like all movies, you want to tantalize the audience. Provide brief snippets of these long-loved characters to get people excited about the new look. But it could also be one of two things that are equally worrying:
1) That the faces and digital animation in this movie are genuinely within the uncanny valley, and not just bad. As I said, with every advance in photo-realism we get closer to that nadir in animation. That said, we might bypass it entirely, especially with such a stylized world as that of TinTin. Of course, the worry is there.
2) That it is simply unfinished. Animation like this doesn't come together until the very end. Except for in stills, it can look really bad until the last few months of post production. If you look at some of the Lord of the Rings CGI even days before print, it was in some cases still wireframes. Digital animation isn't like traditional animation in the sense that you progress through the movie frame by frame. You add layers of texturing, lighting, animation to models at all parts throughout production, so it slowly comes together as a whole. That could be the case here, as that trailer looked significantly nicer than the stills we got about a year ago, but still unfinished but close to it.
So really, there is a lot to be worried about with this movie, though I still maintain utter faith in the project. What I mean to say is, that if you want to temper hype for this thing, which is already through the roof considering the cast, crew and source material, then you need to look at the broader concept of digital motion captured animation like this.
Either way, it was peculiar for the trailer and the poster to obscure the faces so much, with dubbed dialogue and a lot of shadows. From the locations we've seen in the released stills and landscapes, I'm guessing this was just a choice for tone and style than an active attempt to deceive.
The_Scarab on
0
Options
RobchamThe Rabbit Kingof your pantsRegistered Userregular
edited May 2011
I will now stop saying that it's in Uncanny Valley
SwissLionWe are beside ourselves!Registered Userregular
edited May 2011
I have six TinTin comics beside my bed right this second. I really wish I still had the second half of the Moon story. Actually, looking at the backs of these I have probably read all but one or two of the Comics
Remembering way back I am now remembering how much the Moon Arc, the Prisoners of the Sun and the fucking Cigars of the Pharaoh scared the shit out of me.
The cartoon certainly didn't help with the last one...
Posts
Secondly, the second half of the movie is just a re-telling of the first half of the movie but with different characters playing the same roles. I ain't read beowulf in a while but I don't remember it being a constant loop of people making the same bad decision over and over and over again.
Thirdly, the action wasn't that great
hahahah
I think the third part of the EPIC POEM had the whole decisions from the past replaying itself as a dragon that would ultimately kill him.
But in the movie the dragon was actually his bastard son he had from fucking Grendel's mother rather than killing her. Also Grendel, himself, was the bastard son of Angelina Jolie and the King. Which was just the wackiest plot change in anything ever.
I thought it was a good plot change. Otherwise Grendel fighting the dragon would have been a pretty unrelated plot point, but what they changed it to meant that the first and second half of the movie were actually relevant to each other.
I think Neil Gaiman was the one responsible for this too. I don't know if he is the sort of guy to make a mockery of the oldest English narrative.
it also looks ridiculous.
and it's completely unnecessary.
in short, go read the comicbooks and forget this ever happened, trust me.
Though if Tintin doesn't diguise himself with blackface/get chloroformed by someone/chloroform someone himself, I will be disillusioned.
The shuttle only included enough oxygen for four people!
Now we have six!
And I wanted it so badly and saved and saved and then I went to buy it and
the shop was closing and all their merchandise was gone.
This thread is just rubbing salt in that wound every time I see it.
"Sandra has a good solid anti-murderer vibe. My skin felt very secure and sufficiently attached to my body when I met her. Also my organs." HAIL SATAN
That's because so few things so far have actually been in the valley. All the Zemeckis nonsense wasn't right down there, it was on the left slope. It looked wrong not because it was uncanny, but because it was just shit, with rubbery skin and cold, dead eyes, lifeless mouths and flat, uninteresting backdrops. Uncanny Valley has more to do with movement and gestures than physically appearance anyway, and those movies were all mocapped quite well so it wasn't that.
I think when people talk about uncanny valley it is more as a warning, as a generalized threat. Most digital animation so far in cinema has been absolutely on the left slope of the valley, improving animation and texturing to the highest possible point before the extremely quick decline to unsettling automatons. Essentially, just hyper realistic animation rather than wholly digital actors.
So for every new movie that comes out, with the increasing power of computers and rapidly advancing technologies, we fear that the next movie will just tip over that edge and tumble all the way down into the valley. Things in the valley don't just look 'wrong', or unbelievable. They are genuinely unsettling, creepy and unnerving. And in a family friendly movie like TinTin, would actually frighten children and provide a huge amount of discomfort.
From the TinTin trailer, it's hard to say. They actually disguised the faces a lot, sometimes quite brazenly by having the newspaper with eyeholes, for example. Now, this could be because, like all movies, you want to tantalize the audience. Provide brief snippets of these long-loved characters to get people excited about the new look. But it could also be one of two things that are equally worrying:
1) That the faces and digital animation in this movie are genuinely within the uncanny valley, and not just bad. As I said, with every advance in photo-realism we get closer to that nadir in animation. That said, we might bypass it entirely, especially with such a stylized world as that of TinTin. Of course, the worry is there.
2) That it is simply unfinished. Animation like this doesn't come together until the very end. Except for in stills, it can look really bad until the last few months of post production. If you look at some of the Lord of the Rings CGI even days before print, it was in some cases still wireframes. Digital animation isn't like traditional animation in the sense that you progress through the movie frame by frame. You add layers of texturing, lighting, animation to models at all parts throughout production, so it slowly comes together as a whole. That could be the case here, as that trailer looked significantly nicer than the stills we got about a year ago, but still unfinished but close to it.
So really, there is a lot to be worried about with this movie, though I still maintain utter faith in the project. What I mean to say is, that if you want to temper hype for this thing, which is already through the roof considering the cast, crew and source material, then you need to look at the broader concept of digital motion captured animation like this.
Either way, it was peculiar for the trailer and the poster to obscure the faces so much, with dubbed dialogue and a lot of shadows. From the locations we've seen in the released stills and landscapes, I'm guessing this was just a choice for tone and style than an active attempt to deceive.
I will just say it looks odd and unnerving
at the moment
Tumblr blargh
Remembering way back I am now remembering how much the Moon Arc, the Prisoners of the Sun and the fucking Cigars of the Pharaoh scared the shit out of me.
The cartoon certainly didn't help with the last one...
The Nightmares begin at around 5:35
Tumblr blargh
This is the closest you're going to get
But I still must have watched it 50 times over the course of my childhood.
He's not blind, he can see quite well. He's hard of hearing, however.
And that's why he puts a trumpet in his ear.
(That sounds really funny to me, despite them really being called ear trumpets. Really I just wanted to say trumpet in the ear.)
for real
He kind of looks like Eric Idol.
Who's Eric Idol?
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Amazon Wishlist: http://www.amazon.com/BusterK/wishlist/3JPEKJGX9G54I/ref=cm_wl_search_bin_1
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTnCE_SaU38&hd=1
i liked him
The models look fantastic
hey satan...: thinkgeek amazon My post |
War Horse, Spielberg's next movie, gets released two days after this
That is ridiculous
That could easily go wrong.
Charlie has a bitchin' mustache.