Da_bang80
A few sectors short of an Empire
Member # 528
posted
maybe they could do a sequel not with the original characters and actors. but with others. like from the rogue squadron books. or maybe make the next sequel with CG like Final Fantasy. that'd be cool
-------------------- Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change. The courage to change the things I cannot accept. And the wisdom to hide the bodies of all the people I had to kill today because they pissed me off.
posted
How come everyone is always talking about doing shit in CGI nowadays? You want to do it with TOS (Trek) and now you want to do it with Star Wars? Pull-eeese! I'm sorry to those who are fans of the game, but Final Fantasy the movie sucked majorly. I personally don't like computer-generated movies at all. It's good to use CGI for some effects, but not make everything in the entire film totally CGI. It doesn't look as realistic as some folks would have you believe. It looks fake. CGI images are essentially very very detailed MODELS. Just as if you made amovie with very very detailed claymation models. CGI is great to use for scenes of ships in space and explosions and dinosaurs (all of which are shown jointly with physical models/animatronic puppets, BTW) but not for PEOPLE. It's just ludicrous!
PS- I know it's one of George Lucas' own pet projects to create CGI that will replace live actors, and it may very well come to pass someday. But for right now, it's waaay too early and quite ridiculous to be talking about re-making Trek and SW in CGI.
-MMoM
[ August 15, 2001: Message edited by: The Mighty Monkey of Mim ]
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
Da_bang80
A few sectors short of an Empire
Member # 528
posted
Using CGI to make effects (explosions, vehicles, terrain) is cool. but they still need work on makeing people. specially small things like hair, eye color, wrinkles, and so on.they could always draw the next star wars movie. maybe anime style (God forbid)
-------------------- Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change. The courage to change the things I cannot accept. And the wisdom to hide the bodies of all the people I had to kill today because they pissed me off.
posted
My question is WHY they would even WANT to make CGI people. I for one would not at all be interested in going to see a movie with CGI actors, unless it was intended to be an animated film or some such. I would never go to see a movie with CGI that was trying to pass for actual people.
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
1. once a character is perfected, you can reuse it over and over again, using the same program. And it won't demand $20 million per film and a cut of the gross.
2. CGI people can do things real people can't do as well. Especially good for superheroes, who have to stretch the bounds of physical credibility.
3. You could use the technology to 'resurrect' dead actors, or 'de-age' older actors. So that, say, Data would stay young, and you could put Jeremy Brett in as his holographic Sherlock Holmes mentor. Or something.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
quote:3. You could use the technology to 'resurrect' dead actors, or 'de-age' older actors. So that, say, Data would stay young, and you could put Jeremy Brett in as his holographic Sherlock Holmes mentor. Or something.
Well ... but when you start using CGI likenesses of real people, you'll probably have to wind up paying money to their estate ... ("Damn! We've got to pay the Spiner Estate $300 million to use Brent's likeness in Star Trek Thirty-Seven: Planet of the Bird People!")
OnToMars
Now on to the making of films!
Member # 621
posted
CGI will never completely replace live actors. Just like movies never completely replaced theater and TV never completely replaced movies.
At a fundamental level, drama is about the human condition and sharing emotions/experiences/etc. between people. Nobody is going to watch a computer go through a human experience.
Maybe for no-think straight up action movies it might be I reality, but I seriously doubt even that.
-------------------- If God didn't want us to fly, he wouldn't have given us Bernoulli's Principle.
posted
"Wasn't there a story some time ago about her being hauled off to the looney bin or some-such? If I'm wrong then I'm wrong, but you don't really have to rip apart my statement like this."
She had drug problems. She got over them. She's quite funny now, but she's quite obviously out of her head at several points during Empire (and, if Dubya wants to convince children that drugs = bad, he can't do much worse than show them the final few minutes of the Star Wars Holiday Special. And, if they still takes drugs, he could show them the rest of it).
You thought me asking how she currently has mental problems was ripping into the answer Mim? Do must have the politest arguments ever.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Monkeyboy here gets the award forexcessive punctuation abuse.
Back to the thread- I see no reason why CGI characters cannot replace aging actors/actresses. The technology is certainly there. The software for Final Fantasy was started in 1998- one can come quite a long way in 3 years. AND- if one can create a photorealistic CGI character, how would you tell the difference? Many modellers make their characters to look like the actors who play their voices. If the models react and move just like actors, how could you tell the difference? Would it make a difference? Not likely.
posted
Well, again, (b/c I think I've said this before) it wouldn't "solve" the problem of not-having to pay, say, Harrison Ford $20 million (or whatever he gets) for being in a film. Instead, you'd be paying Harrison Ford or the Ford Estate for the rights to use his likeness in "Indiana Jones XIII: The Quest For Arthur's Sword"
Not to mention, you'd lose great improv. Anyone remember the great scene in Raiders when Indy shoots the dude with the sword? If not for Harrison being a bit under the weather, we'd lose that great scene. Computers can replace humans, yeah, okay, but they'll never surpass them.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
