San Francisco, 7:34 AM
Thu Dec 10
24 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
Editor-in-Chief:
Annalee Newitz |
News Editor:
Charlie Jane Anders |
Associate Editor:
Meredith Woerner |
Assistant Editor:
Lauren Davis |
Weekend Editor:
Graeme McMillan |
Contributors:
Joshua Glenn
Stephen Goldmeier |
Ed Grabianowski |
Austin Grossman
Paul Hogan |
Lauren Davis |
Chris Hsiang |
Lynn Peril |
Ann VanderMeer
Alasdair Wilkins |
Graphic Designer:
Stephanie Fox |
Interns:
Tim Barribeau |
Julia Carusillo |
Alex Eichler |
Cyriaque Lamar |
Caitlin Petrakovitz |
Mary Ratliff |
Josh Snyder |
I just broke a Lord Krug Star Trek 3 glass the other day when my hand slipped and I hit it with a knife. Way to rub it in.
There really is nothing like a good collectible glass and puny or not I've got the whole collection from the last film because A: they're glass not crummy plastic and B: it's the closest I'll come to licking Zoe Saldana.
@Dr Emilio Lizardo: I'm thinking perhaps I can open up a temporal wormhole to the past before she's famous. Get to know her, befriend her before she's all popular, then lick her...
yes, CGI is way over done. It's the bedazzler of cinema. just tacky, cheap little plastic jewels all over everything.
i found the special edition 'updated' star wars to be horrific, and i felt strongly that ep 1-3 should have been filmed using only technology that was available in the late 70s, to preserve the look and feel. and that means models. they just look better.
@nutbastard: I partially agree with you. I agree that Lucas should have kept his dirty, CGI paws off of the original trilogy. Basterdizing it with CGI should have been, at the most, a special features option on the DVD, maybe a theatrical release.
As far as the new trilogy goes, I was fine with them using modern technology. As a huge Star Wars nerd, I was pretty estatic to see lightsaber fights that actually looked like they were being fought by Jedi.
The CGI was way overused in those films, too, though. An even balance (CGI lightsabers and forcelightning, puppet Yoda and Gungans, etc) would have been much better.
@Demonbird: Agreed. I recently bought the original movies on DVD, just because I found them really cheap on Amazon (I think maybe $15 for the package). I really wish they had put the original films, unedited, as at least an option in the special features.
One of my favorite, nostalgic scenes of the original trilogy is the very end of Return of the Jedi, where the Ewoks and Rebels are partying on Endor. The song the Ewoks play and sing is awesome. In the new version, however, that scene has been done over with a montage of scenes from around the Empire - which is actually a really awesome montage, don't get me wrong. The problem is, they took out the freaking song! They put in some other song over it, so now when I watch Return of the Jedi, I don't get my "aww, I remember this from when I was 10" moment, and that makes me a sad Star Wars nerd.
@whiteflea:
One of the dvd sets touts having the "Original unaltered exactly as in theaters" regular editions of the films in special features.
Which is a lie, because they are skewed low quality laser disc rips.
I would pay quite a bit for blu ray unaltered editions of the original trilogy. And DVD versions.
My favorite cups are a set of Great Muppet Caper collector glasses, with those hilariously awful Batman Forever cups in a close second-place. I will never throw those away.
@dicksson: I refuse to drink chocolate milk out of any other glass. mmmmm, chris o'donnel you are an unforgivably bad actor in this movie but you make my chocolate milk taste oh so delicious yessss.
@korybing: Why didn't they make a glass out of Drew Barrymore's character from that movie? Or was she on the back of Two-Face's glass? I lost mine so long ago... which is upsetting. Chocolate milk sounds nice...
@ManchuCandidate: The farther back you go, the thicker the glass was. My bride still has her Looney Toon set intact, despite the best efforts of our now grown daughters.
CGI doesn't do anything. it's a tool. that's like saying trowels ruin gardens. sure, in the wrong hands or with careless strokes they can but in the right hands they are an indespensable tool without which gardens would not be the same.
if the tiny innacuracies or inconsistancies are what you like about films and pop-music then i suggest you catch some live theater or a concert.
@tetracycloide: This right here. CGI today is like Photoshop in the hands of an early 90s comic book artist or synthesizers in the hands of 80s musicians. There's nothing wrong with the tools themselves, it's the people using them who get too obsessed with WHAT they can make instead of why they're making it.
But I think all that is necessary to fully understand the new technology and find a proper place for it amongst all the other tools that artists have available to them. If you don't go kinda overboard with it then you can't really find where the limits are or what works and what doesn't.
People will get tired of style-over-substance CGI extravaganzas eventually, and when filmmakers realize they can't rest an entire movie's success on CGI special effects alone it will become just another filmmaking tool.
@tetracycloide: Very true and I agree, with one caveat.
A new shiny tool can often put the user in a mode of "look at all the neat things I can do" rather than what they SHOULD do (I'd even point to the "special editions" of E.T. and Star Wars as examples of that). A lot of directors have been guilty of that with CG, which is probably, in part, what Graeme's push back is about.
That said, Cameron has generally used his shiny new toys to good effect so I'm betting that's the case with Avatar as well.
12/09/09
Put me off Burger King for a while, let me tell you. Even in college, there's only so many of those babies you can stomach.
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
Also I got an awesome, large 7-11 R2 cup with a big straw that I always wanted to turn into a bong. But I sold it on eBay instead.
12/09/09
12/09/09
There really is nothing like a good collectible glass and puny or not I've got the whole collection from the last film because A: they're glass not crummy plastic and B: it's the closest I'll come to licking Zoe Saldana.
12/09/09
12/09/09
and destroy her PLANET!!!
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
i found the special edition 'updated' star wars to be horrific, and i felt strongly that ep 1-3 should have been filmed using only technology that was available in the late 70s, to preserve the look and feel. and that means models. they just look better.
12/09/09
As far as the new trilogy goes, I was fine with them using modern technology. As a huge Star Wars nerd, I was pretty estatic to see lightsaber fights that actually looked like they were being fought by Jedi.
The CGI was way overused in those films, too, though. An even balance (CGI lightsabers and forcelightning, puppet Yoda and Gungans, etc) would have been much better.
12/09/09
we can't even get non-vhs/laserdisk editions of the unaltered trilogy. It's a crime.
12/09/09
One of my favorite, nostalgic scenes of the original trilogy is the very end of Return of the Jedi, where the Ewoks and Rebels are partying on Endor. The song the Ewoks play and sing is awesome. In the new version, however, that scene has been done over with a montage of scenes from around the Empire - which is actually a really awesome montage, don't get me wrong. The problem is, they took out the freaking song! They put in some other song over it, so now when I watch Return of the Jedi, I don't get my "aww, I remember this from when I was 10" moment, and that makes me a sad Star Wars nerd.
12/09/09
One of the dvd sets touts having the "Original unaltered exactly as in theaters" regular editions of the films in special features.
Which is a lie, because they are skewed low quality laser disc rips.
I would pay quite a bit for blu ray unaltered editions of the original trilogy. And DVD versions.
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
I still have a Simon Bar Sinister glass too.
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
if the tiny innacuracies or inconsistancies are what you like about films and pop-music then i suggest you catch some live theater or a concert.
12/09/09
But I think all that is necessary to fully understand the new technology and find a proper place for it amongst all the other tools that artists have available to them. If you don't go kinda overboard with it then you can't really find where the limits are or what works and what doesn't.
People will get tired of style-over-substance CGI extravaganzas eventually, and when filmmakers realize they can't rest an entire movie's success on CGI special effects alone it will become just another filmmaking tool.
12/09/09
A new shiny tool can often put the user in a mode of "look at all the neat things I can do" rather than what they SHOULD do (I'd even point to the "special editions" of E.T. and Star Wars as examples of that). A lot of directors have been guilty of that with CG, which is probably, in part, what Graeme's push back is about.
That said, Cameron has generally used his shiny new toys to good effect so I'm betting that's the case with Avatar as well.