In Reply to: How long are you willing to take this... posted by patrickU on January 1, 2003 at 04:58:36:
BTW, for someone suffering from CGI withdrawal you seem awfully animated. :o)So, you're tryin' to tell me it wasn't the REAL Titanic that James Cameron sank? ...! Well, 'whadaya' know; I'll never be able to look at that film the same way again! And 'whaddabout' those " Star Wars " puppets " blue screen " thingies? You mean Yoda actually had strings attached and that cornball JarJar character was actually performed by the Blue Man Group? Tell me it ain't so, Pat!!! ;^)
Seriously, the more imaginative and fanciful the story being told the more expensive and realistic the visuals should be to involve the audience. The suspension of disbelief is crucial to modern cinematic storytelling. How would you go about recreating the Titanic (i.e., which is a good movie, IMHO) or visually establishing distant worlds, alien races and advanced civilizations as were created in Star Wars (i.e., the first three of which were generally quite good; the others, far, far away)?
Next New Year's Eve, I suggest cutting back a little on the "sauce" feller!
Cheers,
AuPh
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Huh? Good FX can't improve a bad story, but a great story with cheesy FX still looks cheesy! - Audiophilander 06:09:58 01/01/03 (3)
- If you only did stick to your title / response ! - patrickU 06:43:07 01/01/03 (2)
- Passe? Yes, but so do the effects from 80 year old classic silent films. - Audiophilander 07:44:12 01/01/03 (1)
- Re: Passe? Yes, but so do the effects from 80 year old classic silent films. - patrickU 09:56:52 01/01/03 (0)