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

Moderator: malducin

User avatar
By The Cynic
#7101
AHEM-I am glad you don't back down and stick to your opinions. I respect that. Bashing TOD to bits is not going to make you any friends, but your opinion is your opinion.

I personally think TOD was daring in its use of stop motion humans. TOD used effects in an imaginative way. Most of ILMs projects at that time were sci/fi and fantasy based, and TOD was a chance to do things that just might happen in reality. Not every shot works, as with every film, but most of them do. I don't think it deserved the bashing you gave it, but then you don't have to watch it ever again. Kind of like how I will never watch that landmark SUPERGIRL flick again...Just kidding. :smile:

To answer your question, I think if Boss or Apogee worked on TOD, we would discuss its high and low points, but not cremate it like LIFEFORCE or GLADIATOR or anything Derek Meddings or John Stears or Brian Johnson or Kent Houston has ever worked on :smile:

Hugs & Kisses,
User avatar
By Ahem
#7102
.
Last edited by Ahem on Mon Oct 11, 2010 4:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By Shane
#7107
Umm....how many times did you post on the batteries thread? Did you ask any questions to keep it alive?

You came in, carved your opinion in stone, and left, never to return. :wink:

There are ways to keep a thread alive you know. :smile:
By Kmart
#7113
On 2002-09-04 09:21, Ahem wrote:


If Apogee or Boss had made TOD, you guys would've cremated it like Lifeforce.


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Ahem on 2002-09-04 09:38 ]</font>


I don't know about that, they've been very fair to Boss regarding DIE HARD in past posts.

Then you've got Boss shows that turn into other people's shows (PREDATOR, HUNT FOR RED) so you can't say much there.

AIR FORCE ONE has fx that are so distracting they unravel the whole movie, so I'd say they deserved a new one ripped on that.
User avatar
By EwanMagic
#7114
On 2002-09-04 10:42, Ahem wrote:
LOL!!!!!!!

I personally find it disgusting that my thread on Batteries Not Included, a shot by shot flawless piece of cinema trickery, got about 3 posts, while the raw sewage of TOD gets like 4 pages :sad:

[splinebender] Each to their own I guess, but anyone who disagrees with me is a moron [/splinebender] :wink:

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Ahem on 2002-09-04 10:43 ]</font>


I'm very smart ,and I disagree with you.
User avatar
By Ahem
#7115
.
Last edited by Ahem on Mon Oct 11, 2010 4:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By vfx fan
#7116
Now Boss has done some good stuff, including the asteroid grazing sequence in "Starship Troopers," "Outbreak," and "Multiplicity." I did think Boss could've done a better job on "Air Force One," especially since the genius who is Richard Edlund was the vfx supervisor.

As for "Temple of Doom," I didn't think ILM did all that great of a job. The mine car sequence was pretty much a mixed bag - some shots were good, some weren't. The problem I had with the movie was that the fx broke the laws of physics; that's probably what made much of the fx below par. (I'm with you on this, Ahem.)
_________________
vfx fan

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: vfx fan on 2002-09-04 12:56 ]</font>
User avatar
By malducin
#7117
That's right, if you are gonna disagree with someone at least state your reason or exemplify. That reminds I still have to comment on that other thread.

As far as Air Force One, actually the worst part was done by Cinesite with the plane crashing. Some of the comps might not have been top notch from what we expected from Boss, though some were quite marvelous like the Moscow airport shots.
User avatar
By boneheadfx
#7119
Here's my 2 cents on TOD-the mine car scene in particular:
It sold the story and the audience enjoyed it. So, IMO, the FX people did their job.
And in a way I believe that GL has always preferred that the FX in the Indiana Jones films not be TOO perfect-his goal of course was always to recreate the old movie serials from the 30's and 40's, and of course a lot of the FX in those films were a bit rough around the edges.
I always enjoyed the story about the Nazi car plummeting off the cliff in Raiders: They had the shot completed in rough form-it still needed some cleanup and color balancing-GL saw it and said "it's perfect! don't touch a thing!". Of course the FX crew tried to convince him that it wasn't completed, but he knew instinctively that the shot would be a crowd pleaser just as it was-and he was right! Everytime I saw that shot in a theatre the crowd went nuts!
Of course we're all a bit different than the average moviegoer being that we're all a bunch of die-hard FX geeks, so we scrutinize a lot more-which is good-it helps us learn.
:smile:



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: boneheadfx on 2002-09-04 13:20 ]</font>
By splinebender
#7122
Ok Ahem, stick to your guns, I just thought your comments were extreme to the point of being ridiculous, hence not taken seriously.

If you didn't like the work, that's certainly cool, and I respect that opinion, it's just that you really seemed to be going out of your way to be harsh about it.

If Boss or Apogee had done the fx? Well I loved Boss's work on Ghostbusters and 2010 (and Brainstorm and Bladerunner, by extension), so I don't think I'd be tearing it down on their account.

As for Apogee, since I'm staunchly defending their work on Never Say Never in another thread, I don't expect I'd be hammering them either.

I don't want to be embroiled in a fight here. Have your opinion, express it, but if you're going to write something that is *really* strongly stated, then expect a reaction.
User avatar
By Shane
#7123
I just think Ahem missed his mid-morning tea.
User avatar
By vfx fan
#7126
Oh, a nice spot of tea, deary! 'Twould be simply scrumptious! :razz:
_________________
vfx fan

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: vfx fan on 2002-09-04 18:39 ]</font>
User avatar
By EwanMagic
#7144
On 2002-09-04 13:00, malducin wrote:
That's right, if you are gonna disagree with someone at least state your reason or exemplify. That reminds I still have to comment on that other thread.

As far as Air Force One, actually the worst part was done by Cinesite with the plane crashing. Some of the comps might not have been top notch from what we expected from Boss, though some were quite marvelous like the Moscow airport shots.



I'm afraid you won't be smart enough to read chinese reply.

I discussed about movie about 8000 posts here in a discussion board in Taiwan.

I can't argue by using English well ,that's why.

And "I'm Very Smart" is ONLY used to reply
"disgree with me , is a moron".

Used To porve "even if a guy is not a moron ,still disgree with you".

Is that clear? (I can explain it 100 times better in chinese words)

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: EwanMagic on 2002-09-05 03:57 ]</font>
User avatar
By EwanMagic
#7145
On 2002-09-05 03:52, EwanMagic wrote:
On 2002-09-04 13:00, malducin wrote:
That's right, if you are gonna disagree with someone at least state your reason or exemplify. That reminds I still have to comment on that other thread.

As far as Air Force One, actually the worst part was done by Cinesite with the plane crashing. Some of the comps might not have been top notch from what we expected from Boss, though some were quite marvelous like the Moscow airport shots.



I'm afraid you won't be smart enough to read chinese reply.

I discussed about movie about 8000 posts here in a discussion boar in Taiwan.

I can't argue by using English well ,that's why.

And "I'm Very Smart" is ONLY used to reply
"disgree with me , is a moron".

Used To porve "even if a guy is not a moron ,still disgree with you".

Is that clear? (I can explain it 100 times better in chinese words)


By The way.

Someone disagree with somone is notthing to do with people's "intelligence" ,is only about "opinions".

If people brought up "Somone agree or disagree with something ,then someone must be moron or smart". That kind of WRONG logic ,this people (who said that) is the true moron.

Got it?
User avatar
By EwanMagic
#7146
On 2002-09-04 13:00, malducin wrote:
That's right, if you are gonna disagree with someone at least state your reason or exemplify.


That's right ,if you are gonna disagree with someone ,at least state your reason ,but never to say "disagree with me ,is a moron".

I don't see they are rleated.
User avatar
By Ahem
#7150
.
Last edited by Ahem on Mon Oct 11, 2010 4:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By Shane
#7156
"...there were parts of the TOD mine where I expected Wallace, Gromit and the cast of Chicken Run to walk onto the model set"

:lol:

C'mon, like the Krypton destruction doesn't look like a hunk of styrofoam on a table with a guy jiggling it from below?

And the water surrounding the Fortress of Solitude, WAY out of scale. "If you don't agree with me, you MUST BE BLIND!" :razz:

This thing won an Oscar?! Bah! They should have given an Oscar to Apogee for Battlestar Galactica.

:grin:
User avatar
By Ahem
#7157
Yeah but you are only saying that stuff against Superman for wind-up effect - we all know you don't mean it. :razz:
Last edited by Ahem on Mon Oct 11, 2010 4:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By Shane
#7159
No, I do mean it Ahem. I'm serious. Superman's effects have always been uneven to me. I really like the first film....alot. But, some of the effects shots of Supes flying are not good. Period. And the water shots in some cases flat-out don't work.

But, you know what? They did a great job all things considered. Water is a pain in the rear to scale anway. Remember that next time you criticize work done on a project. ALL THINGS CONSIDERED: Time, Budget, Creativity.



EDIT: Ahem, you can't really compare the shots in Battlstar to the Hoth shots in Empire. For a very good reason: One takes place in space, which helps hide the matte lines, while one takes place on a white-nearly blown-out environment.
You want to go all the way and make the damn ships transparent against the snow? Strengthen the element to show dark matte lines? They achieved a nice balance.

BTW, BRUCE NICHOLSON, the one you have a topic about above, was the Optical Effects Sup on the show.
Yeah, he's underrated. :lol:

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Shane on 2002-09-05 12:30 ]</font>
User avatar
By Ahem
#7160
.
Last edited by Ahem on Mon Oct 11, 2010 4:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.