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

Moderator: malducin

By Kmart
#32111
ShaneP wrote:
Kmart wrote:
Kinda annoyed that the MI5 monicker was coopted for this, when the old SPOOKS/MI5 tv series had a feature film version release a couple months ago (not here yet though.)


:lol: I hadn't thought of that until you mentioned it. Well, they'll be sullying the name of Mi6 in the next one then.


Eon and Sony have already done a Herculean job of sullying the MI6 name this century, by making the movies ABOUT Bond (or rather their reconceptualization of Bond), instead of making Bond movies.
User avatar
By PaulILMFan
#32113
Kmart wrote:I've only seen a few minutes of the third one, but the fourth one was on some station or streaming at a point a few years back, and all I can tell you is Cruise winds up in what seems like a virtual carpark at the end fighting somebody who probably could stand up to Jonathan Pryce, but was not the stuff of big movie fights, to be sure.

Except for TAPS and COLOR OF MONEY (in which I assume he is playing something close to himself) and EYES WIDE SHUT and the first M:I, I don't think I've ever liked Cruise in anything, his very presence is enough to make me not want to watch. Even with EYEs, I watch it thinking how much better it would have been with Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson (or Ethan Hawke and Uma Thurman), since Kubrick wanted to use a real couple.
MI5 may make you change your mind as its more a team IMF effort even though Cruise is in almost every frame its the best IMF team effort to date in the movie franchise & Cruise does not act cocky more of an assured & confident performance.

I was actually surprised with MI5 overall how close it was to a From Russia with Love type of character driven spy romp the few set pieces are excellent but its more cerebral than anything I have seen for many years :thumbup:
#32115
At least one guy at the top of that food chain seems kind of shifty, the one who runs the propworx auctions. He's one of the main defenders (not apologist - any dissenting view is attacked, especially the well-reasoned ones) of that Cushman guy who 'wrote' those THESE ARE THE VOYAGES books, the ones with a lot of creative reinterpretation of fact and even more creative license when it comes to details in TREK history. Apparently 10% of the proceeds from his current trek prop auction is being 'donated' to AXANAR, so I guess this Alec Peters is gifting it to himself (sort of like how Cushman the author had a successful kickstarter last year to pay his publisher, reluctant to publish volume 3 till more money came in, but in truth Cushman is the publisher as well, so he was re-raising money for something I think people had already paid for.

I didn't realize the connection with Cushman when I looked at the AXANAR trailer, but even so I still wasn't impressed. Great that they get the real actors, and there's some nice VFX work, but it didn't have enough flavors to the images in the CG stuff, and the recollection element just seemed ... I dunno, forced or ill-considered. I don't really see TREK in a THE WORLD AT WAR vein, and if you were going to VICTORY AT SEA that universe, I think the scale and variety of imagery needs to be amped considerably.
#32116
Kmart wrote:At least one guy at the top of that food chain seems kind of shifty, the one who runs the propworx auctions. He's one of the main defenders (not apologist - any dissenting view is attacked, especially the well-reasoned ones) of that Cushman guy who 'wrote' those THESE ARE THE VOYAGES books, the ones with a lot of creative reinterpretation of fact and even more creative license when it comes to details in TREK history. Apparently 10% of the proceeds from his current trek prop auction is being 'donated' to AXANAR, so I guess this Alec Peters is gifting it to himself (sort of like how Cushman the author had a successful kickstarter last year to pay his publisher, reluctant to publish volume 3 till more money came in, but in truth Cushman is the publisher as well, so he was re-raising money for something I think people had already paid for.

I didn't realize the connection with Cushman when I looked at the AXANAR trailer, but even so I still wasn't impressed. Great that they get the real actors, and there's some nice VFX work, but it didn't have enough flavors to the images in the CG stuff, and the recollection element just seemed ... I dunno, forced or ill-considered. I don't really see TREK in a THE WORLD AT WAR vein, and if you were going to VICTORY AT SEA that universe, I think the scale and variety of imagery needs to be amped considerably.


Do you mean the original trailer where everyone sits back and recollects on the war? Yeah, that did seem a little too melodramatic. It didn't' seem like Trek but rather Battlestar Galactica. Everything was hyper militarized. It's funny you mention dissent is attacked in the forums there because I noticed in the comments section for nearly every critique of this specific Vulcan teaser, constructive or not, there was a pithy rebuttal by the homepage. :lol:
By Kmart
#32133
Haven't even heard anyone comment on VFX, which is probably a sign they're good. Haven't seen a movie in the theater this year, maybe will try with this, the reviews I read are so bad I feel I have to see for myself, plus want to find out if Cavill is really doing a Vaughan impersonation as some claim.

Was annoyed that after director picked him for CASINO ROYALE that the choice was overruled by ms producer and we got mr ugly instead, as the only way I'd accept a bratty immature Bond would be if he were young (and actually LOOKED like Bond), plus back then Cavill had shown some real acting chops, but it seems in recent years on his more high-profile projects, less talent seems to shine through.

If I do go this weekend, will weigh in by Monday night (also heard a bit of the score and that sounds fun, plus I'm all about mid-century architecture, so despite Ritchie having a lousy track record for me, I may just go anyway.)
User avatar
By TylerMirage
#32283
vfxblogisback wrote:Anyone see Man from UNCLE? Not an ILM show, but thought it had great vfx work.

Ian


I did. The movie itself was entertaining, and the VFX must've been pretty seamless (they were mostly supporting work anyway) because I can't recall any really dodgy shots that stuck out.

Kmart wrote:Haven't even heard anyone comment on VFX, which is probably a sign they're good. Haven't seen a movie in the theater this year, maybe will try with this, the reviews I read are so bad I feel I have to see for myself, plus want to find out if Cavill is really doing a Vaughan impersonation as some claim.

Was annoyed that after director picked him for CASINO ROYALE that the choice was overruled by ms producer and we got mr ugly instead, as the only way I'd accept a bratty immature Bond would be if he were young (and actually LOOKED like Bond), plus back then Cavill had shown some real acting chops, but it seems in recent years on his more high-profile projects, less talent seems to shine through.

If I do go this weekend, will weigh in by Monday night (also heard a bit of the score and that sounds fun, plus I'm all about mid-century architecture, so despite Ritchie having a lousy track record for me, I may just go anyway.)


Kmart, if you're disappointed in the Craig Bond films, I do recommend UNCLE. You might not like it, but given your displeasure with the GRIMDARKSERIOUSNOTBOND-NESS of the current films, UNCLE might just make you smile. It's a nice, light-hearted spy film that's pretty reminscent of the old Connery/Lazenby/Moore movies.
User avatar
By ShaneP
#32284
I'd like to get Kmart's take on Daniel Craig's recent remarks that Bond is basically a misogynist.

I'm sure that remark went down well in Kmartland.

Kmart: Daniel Craig, you can get the **** out!
By Kmart
#32285
I love 'serious' Bond movies (FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE and the two Daltons are my faves and I would happily forego the entire Roger Moore era so long as Ken Adam got to design those sets for some other film.)

I don't happen to consider craig to be even PLAYING Bond, however.

I think that particular Craig remark (without seeing the context) is probably one of the smarter things the guy has said. Doesn't make up for all the idiot comments, which could be excused if he were actually playing Bond (I think he is doing a riff on Edward Woodward's CALLAN character from british tv, just spiffied up in fine linen.)

Have read of his enormous clout over small issues (like getting the 'gunbarrel' originally shot for QUANTUM dropped because he didn' t like the way he looked in it), be happy when he is gone.
User avatar
By ShaneP
#32286
Here's the entire quote as well as a few additional Q&A before and after:

What is your favorite trait of Bond’s?

Bond can be a gentleman. Sometimes, anyway. He’s a considerate person, he takes care of business, and he looks out for other people and his family. He’s someone who opens doors for people— for everyone, that is, not just women.

Craig on his shelf life as Bond:

“It’s always the same question: what’s worse—leaving the party too early, or staying, getting totally drunk and then passing out on the floor?”

Speaking of women, many men admire Bond for his way with the ladies …

But let’s not forget that he’s actually a misogynist. A lot of women are drawn to him chiefly because he embodies
a certain kind of danger and never sticks around for too long.

What about you? Are you the kind of guy who sticks around?

Well, I’ve been married for four years.

Bond has actually become a bit more chivalrous in the most recent films, hasn’t he?

That’s because we’ve surrounded him with very strong women who have no problem putting him in his place.

Here's the entire piece:

http://www.redbulletin.com/us/us/cultur ... ks-of-bond
By Kaero_Shan
#32375
Hi guys!

I haven't seen Spectre so far but this looks nice:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdtSdVop6V0

Do you know where to find a high def image of the london matte painting from Hook?
https://ludoiochem.files.wordpress.com/ ... mark10.jpg

The only one I found was this:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-C-vAPUfafTE/U ... n%2529.png

It would be great to find a high quality version.

Thanks in advance

Kaero
User avatar
By ShaneP
#32376
Cool youtube video KaeroShan of the Corbould's blowing up stuff. They're working on the various Star Wars films, including the upcoming Rogue One, and I'm anxious to see what they come up with.
User avatar
By TylerMirage
#32453
PaulILMFan wrote:Independence Day Resurgence trailer. Looks a lot like Armageddon & Transformers 1 in several places :eek: the scale is vast I think this will be a decent popcorn movie :wink:
http://variety.com/2015/film/news/indep ... 201660093/


I'm a sucker for the original, and I'll probably end up seeing this one in theatres. Looks like a big, dumb, fun space-romp with some 'splosions. Right up my alley.
User avatar
By TylerMirage
#32490
So, I listened to the Super 8 commentary, and besides being hilarious (they constantly chirp Spielberg about not doing commentaries and bug JJ about lens flares), watching the movie reminded me of just how much I love JJ's collabs with ILM. :thumbup:

It had been a while since I'd seen the movie, but man, the VFX were amazing. So much invisible work, but the work that was visible was superb. The alien creature, the train crash... there's just something about the look of JJ's films combined with ILM that I had forgotten about. Makes me want to rewatch Star Trek and Into Darkness.
User avatar
By ShaneP
#32498
TylerMirage wrote:So, I listened to the Super 8 commentary, and besides being hilarious (they constantly chirp Spielberg about not doing commentaries and bug JJ about lens flares), watching the movie reminded me of just how much I love JJ's collabs with ILM. :thumbup:

It had been a while since I'd seen the movie, but man, the VFX were amazing. So much invisible work, but the work that was visible was superb. The alien creature, the train crash... there's just something about the look of JJ's films combined with ILM that I had forgotten about. Makes me want to rewatch Star Trek and Into Darkness.


Trek 09 is really the only film of JJ's I can rewatch. It's just fun and I thought the cast did a great job at rebooting those characters.

But, I wasn't aware ILM did a commentary for the Bluray Super 8. That's cool. I might give it a look if it's cheap enough to purchase. I'm an ILM geek like that.

By the way, one of my favorite commentary tracks of all-time is Milius' and Schwarzenegger's for Conan The Barbarian. Really great. Like two old friends getting together again and watching a show while drinking and smoking cigars. :cheers:
User avatar
By TylerMirage
#32502
ShaneP wrote:But, I wasn't aware ILM did a commentary for the Bluray Super 8. That's cool. I might give it a look if it's cheap enough to purchase. I'm an ILM geek like that.


Technically the commentary is only Abrams, Burke and the DOP. I was just saying that, while listening to the commentary/watching the movie, it reminded me of the great work that Abrams does with ILM. Sorry if I made it sound like ILM had a part in the commentary; they didn't. :oops:
User avatar
By ShaneP
#32606
Watched Sicario last night. Where did this film go in the awards season? Benecio is his usually fantastic best. Blunt and Brolin are also good.

This is a film that is filled with dread and cynicism, but in a artistically great way.

The music and Roger Deakin's photography work at times in really haunting ways. The music with Deakin's photography of Spec Ops walking down into a tunnel at night... :eek:

Fantastic film.

Score: A
  • 1
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 29