Cinema

The Adventures of Tintin

POSTED BY: HAKEN
UPDATED: Saturday, June 4, 2011 23:41
VIEWED: 6058
PAGE 2 of 3

Sunday, May 29, 2011 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by HAKEN:
Quote:

Originally posted by whozit:
"AI" and "Eyes Wide Shut" were both finished after Kubrick was dead, this is all CGI.



I'm pretty sure "Eyes Wide Shut" was Kubrick's last film before he died, not after. "AI" was made from material Kubrick had and was told and shot in Kubrick's style by Spielberg as a tribute to Kubrick.

As for Tintin, it's probably CGI because Tintin was a comic book character from a classic comic strip, which was my point. I'm only speculating, but Spielberg probably didn't want to make a 'Dennis the Menace.'



http://about.me/haken

.....oh yea well......you're another one!

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Monday, May 30, 2011 12:31 PM

How is this any different that any other animated film being produced today?

CGI is just like any other tool in the filmmaker's world. It can be used well or poorly, depending on the director and the SFX house used. I defy you to tell me that the CGI in Firefly and Serenity was poorly used. Plus, most of the SF/F films being made today would be next to impossible to achieve if it was not for CGI, not only in execution but also because of expense.


NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Monday, May 30, 2011 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ecgordon:
How is this any different that any other animated film being produced today?

CGI is just like any other tool in the filmmaker's world. It can be used well or poorly, depending on the director and the SFX house used. I defy you to tell me that the CGI in Firefly and Serenity was poorly used. Plus, most of the SF/F films being made today would be next to impossible to achieve if it was not for CGI, not only in execution but also because of expense.



In this case the whole thing is CGI, when they can reproduce the voices, actors and stuntmen will no longer be needed. Would you get excited about a CGI car chase? It isn't real.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Monday, May 30, 2011 1:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by whozit:
It isn't real.


You do realize that nothing in any movie is actually real, right? Do you get exited about a car chase in a movie even though you know it is all done with stunt drivers, is well choreographed ahead of time, and probably contains some CGI as well?


NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Monday, May 30, 2011 7:03 PM



Zit, did you get excited watching our BDH being chased by Reavers?


That was all CGI, you realize...

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Monday, May 30, 2011 8:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kwicko:


Zit, did you get excited watching our BDH being chased by Reavers?


That was all CGI, you realize...

My point is (brilliant) that soon CGI will replace real humans and places, soon all we'll have are these glorified cartoons. This will make the studios and TV networks happy because CGI actors and actress's can't ask for a raise, or go insane like Chucky Sheen.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Tuesday, May 31, 2011 12:59 AM

They need to start CGI-ing all those rom-coms Jen Aniston and Kate Hudson subject us to. It could only improve them.


NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Tuesday, May 31, 2011 1:46 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ecgordon:
They need to start CGI-ing all those rom-coms Jen Aniston and Kate Hudson subject us to. It could only improve them.



Dang, I thought they had already done that when "The Sims: Superstar" came out.

http://about.me/haken

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Tuesday, May 31, 2011 4:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ecgordon:
They need to start CGI-ing all those rom-coms Jen Aniston and Kate Hudson subject us to. It could only improve them.






No kidding!

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Saturday, June 4, 2011 2:01 PM

Unusual choice by Speilberg to go with this realistic-looking CGI version of the classic, but I could understand his motivation. He's taking a big chance that this well appeal to a wide audience, but I think he's banking on his name and rep as one of our best directors in recent times. Good for him - so many have said that Hollywood is scared shitless to try anything new, well Speilberg is taking a shot (a longshot).

But I bet he's thinking that those of us who read and followed Tin Tin's adventures back in the day will drag our kids to the theatre to see what we did (count me among those Tin Tin fans). He's rolling the dice, you gotta give him credit for that if nothing else. Of course, I'm hating on the 3D bandwagon that everyone is jumping on, it's just not done well on a consistent basis for my taste. I'm sticking with good old 2D for now (Avatar was the exception, that was well done IMHO).


SGG

"Snakes, why did it have to be snakes"

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME