Re: It was better'n OK

208.59.199.232

Posted by Troy on May 26, 2001 at 20:59:12

In Reply to: It was OK posted by Mart on May 26, 2001 at 18:26:46:

Well you obviously saw a different movie than I did.

I'm glad we agree on the story which was rich and amusing. Murphy as the Donkey was that offensive to your friend, eh? Well he wasn't 1/2 as shrill as Tucker in 5thE and you could understand every word Donkey said which was the main problem most people had with the garbled ultimately stupid floppy eared step'nfetchit guy in SW. Donkey was comparable to Robin Williams in "Aladdin" in tone and "grate" factor, I'd say.

As far as your CGI comments though . . . I do a lot of low end 3D work too and what I was seeing in Shrek was outstanding. The character animation was more refined than the character animation in Pixar's short "Geralds Game", which was the high water mark for me before "Shrek".

Besides, I was more moved by the backgrounds and environments. This rivals the great painterly anime films like "Totoro" or "Laputa" when it comes to depicting an idylic and beautifully pastoral scene. Regardless of the technology of how the film was created, it was a visually artistic gem.

Here's the thing about CG in general people forget; just like regular cell animation, CG is supposed to be stylized, not a replacement for filmed reality. It's not about how close to looking like real it is. It's about the sum of the technical parts working together and the artistry of the people making the film to create a world that is seamless in the context of that film. It's not about sitting there noodling apart whether the fire looked like your fireplace or not. The world created here is lavish, delicate and overwhelmingly "alive" feeling, again, much more so than any I've ever seen before.

I will deconstruct this movie later and figure out how they did everything because it's what I do, but I'm glad the the movie totally absorbed me and suspended my disbelief. I enjoyed it as a movie rather than as a technology demo reel.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Follow Ups Full Thread

Topic - Shrek - Troy 16:14:40 05/26/01 (20)

I beg your pardon? - Victor Khomenko 18:30:51 05/26/01 (6)

Re: I beg your pardon? - TAFKA Steve 09:39:21 05/27/01 (1)

go for the originals, i am fond of the Hope/Crosby road movies...-nt- - late 20:44:58 05/27/01 (0)

Re: I beg your pardon? - Rich S. 01:08:02 05/27/01 (0)

Re: I beg your pardon? - Rich S. 01:05:50 05/27/01 (0)

Well excuuuuuse me! - Troy 20:17:37 05/26/01 (1)

No problem. Enjoy. (nt) - Victor Khomenko 20:45:58 05/26/01 (0)

It was OK - Mart 18:26:46 05/26/01 (12)

Pretty soon... - clarkjohnsen 13:14:58 05/27/01 (1)

vast difference - Mart 14:09:51 05/27/01 (0)

Re: It was OK - TAFKA Steve 09:31:07 05/27/01 (2)

I was trying to avoid technical terms - Mart 10:12:30 05/27/01 (1)

"technical" terms - Tom Â§. 14:31:37 05/28/01 (0)

Re: It was better'n OK - Troy 20:59:12 05/26/01 (6)

Re: It was better'n OK - CH Chang 02:50:20 05/27/01 (0)

I OTOH - Mart 21:39:58 05/26/01 (4)

I OTOH - Troy 02:35:17 05/27/01 (3)

I'm impressed. - john dem 02:48:18 05/27/01 (2)

Re: I'm impressed. - Victor Khomenko 08:41:08 05/27/01 (1)

Re: I'm impressed. - TAFKA Steve 09:24:57 05/27/01 (0)

Follow Ups

Re: It was better'n OK - Troy 20:59:12 05/26/01 (6)

Re: It was better'n OK - CH Chang 02:50:20 05/27/01 (0)

I OTOH - Mart 21:39:58 05/26/01 (4)

I OTOH - Troy 02:35:17 05/27/01 (3)

I'm impressed. - john dem 02:48:18 05/27/01 (2)

Re: I'm impressed. - Victor Khomenko 08:41:08 05/27/01 (1)

Re: I'm impressed. - TAFKA Steve 09:24:57 05/27/01 (0)

You can not post to an archived thread.