Open discussion about ILM and the magic they create. Also VFX and movies in general. Anyone can post topics here.

Moderator: malducin

#33823
Yeah The Island wasn't that bad. I always forget that one for some reason. Must be because it didn't do too well at the box office and was scrunched between Bad Boys 2 and the first Transformers movie.

I would have liked the first Transformers film a lot better had the Autobot and Decepticon designs been simpler and not bug nuts over the top complicated. I couldn't even see their eyes and read their faces half of the time due to the way the they were over designed. I wanted more of their faces coming through or more expressions. But the vfx were top notch. Well deserved ILM fx Oscar nomination.
#33825
Plus, Bay is in talks to direct a Lobo film for DC.

I've been saying this for years - there's a small handful of comic book characters that Bay's style would fit, and Lobo is at the top of the list. A muscle-bound, sweat-glistening, cussing, cigar-smoking, testosterone-riddled motorcycle thug racing through a dusty post-apocalyptic environment, shooting bounties and banging alien chicks? Yes.

ShaneP wrote:
PaulILMFan wrote:http://deadline.com/2018/03/michael-bay-robopocalypse-6-underground-directing-movies-1202315936/
Robopocalypse is bound to be an ILM show with Bay directing & Spielberg producing!


God, Spielberg tried to get that made years ago. I don't know if ILM did some development on it back then but he shelved it years ago and turned to....I think it was War Horse and Lincoln. That's how long ago it was.

Interesting Bay picks up ANOTHER robot film.


I'm really interested in how Bay's career goes post-Transformers, but I'd be surprised if he actually winds up directing Robopocalypse. He's kind of getting into that del Toro territory (del Toro-tory?) of being attached to a dozen projects and only actually having a fraction of them come to fruition.

I mean, don't get me wrong. A Bay-directed, Spielberg-produced, ILM created Robopocalypse movie? I'm there opening day. Plus, it'd be cool if there were shades of Transformers satire thrown into it. :D
#33828
vfx fan wrote:A WRINKLE IN TIME had Rich McBride as overall fx supe, but MPC was the first fx studio listed, with ILM second (and Mark Curtis as the ILM supe). Is Rich McBride with MPC or something?


No, he is ILM. He was the production supe for the show. Curtis was at ILM Vancouver. Remember how Jimmy Mitchell used to be the production supe for that Harry Potter film he did(Chamber of Secrets)? He was overall production supervisor but still worked at ILM yet they did fewer shots than a few other facilities. Same thing with Rob Legato on the first Potter film. Worked at Imageworks but studio hired him as overall vfx supervisor for the show and Jim Berney was SPI's vfx supervisor.

Vfx supervisors are brought on for shows as overall production supervisors all the time even though they still can work for one of the facilities. It's a very common thing to see.
#33840
Very cool. Did it just say "ILM Art Dept" or did it list names?
I added them to ILM's imdb list months ago once it was apparent the Art Dept was working on it. They did concept design and development on Pac2 like they did with The Hunger Games and a few other films even if the facility didnt do actual vfx shots.

It is also telling that ILM's official site shows concept art for The Jungle Book even though, as far as I know, they were not officially credited on it. Strange as those are both Disney productions.

They really should do more of this as the art department is uniquely situated to do "self-contained" work like this that can be handed off to the production instead of being just an interconnected part of the vfx pipeline.

They're even doing more of that pipeline work too with asset builds(like cg models) that are then handed off to other fx facilities to take to final. Some of that is possible now thanks to growing cross facility standardization and ability to modify those assets to fit different facilities' pipelines.
#33841
Yeah there were a few names but I don't remember who they were offhand.

As for the actual movie, it wasn't bad, but it was mostly forgettable, nothing I would care to rewatch. The movie did have higher levels of destruction than the first, yet it still somehow felt smaller and cheaper in comparison with the first one. It seemed more like a direct-to-video sequel than a theatrical release.
#33850
I saw READY PLAYER ONE last night. It was...fun. Not Spielberg's best, but it was a pure, unadulterated popcorn movie, and the pop culture references made me giggle.

PS: I will say this, though, Spielberg should've referenced his own movies more. He built the childhood of so many millennials, and I think an educated millennial would agree that he earned the right to be boastful about himself...if that is indeed the reason he took out many of the references that were in the book, which I have not read, but know about.
#33852
vfx fan wrote:I saw READY PLAYER ONE last night. It was...fun. Not Spielberg's best, but it was a pure, unadulterated popcorn movie, and the pop culture references made me giggle.

PS: I will say this, though, Spielberg should've referenced his own movies more. He built the childhood of so many millennials, and I think an educated millennial would agree that he earned the right to be boastful about himself...if that is indeed the reason he took out many of the references that were in the book, which I have not read, but know about.


He has stated in interviews avoiding self-indulgence was exactly why he took them out. I wonder if that is also the reason he never does dvd/blu commentaries?
#33863
ShaneP wrote:
The Cynic wrote:According to Cinefex, Digital Domain and Weta Digital are doing Thanos for 700 shots...


If I'm not mistaken, DD did the first MCU Thanos at the very end of the first The Avengers.


They might've worked on the environment (vastness of space, digital rocks, his space LAZ-E Boy chair), but Thanos himself was an actor in make-up in The Avengers. No digital work with him that I'm aware of.
  • 1
  • 78
  • 79
  • 80
  • 81
  • 82
  • 85