Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
| AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci | Twitter
Sean Fallon | Twitter
Jack Loftus | Twitter
John Herrman | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Chris Mascari
Kat Hannaford | Twitter
Rosa Golijan | Twitter
Chris Jacob
@stryker1800: My dad and I were just talking about that the other day.
Mythbusters showed anything high velocity falling apart as soon as it hit the water right?
How'd they do that effect in the past then (before CGI)? I mean obviously they were never really "shooting" at the person underwater to begin with but were they shooting something harmless at a low velocity or rigging up some kind of pulley system to pull something threw the water to create it? Interesting.
@devianaut: Of you're watching, keep an eye out for the mystery drop. The T-rex knocks out the fence, and comes over the wall. He east the lawyers and messes up all the cars. He then pushes a truck over the wall, and it nearly falls 100 feet. Where did that drop come from?
haha. i Seriouly think that movies today look worse then in the past because its almost all computer and blue screens. Back then, Star Wars rocked the world with its realism of epic space battles and such. It was mostly popular for its eye blowing images. Today looking back at it its what you expect in a movie. But back then it was a whole new level of movie production.
In lopok@tande04: Agreed. That was such a important step in FX. It's what gave us the t-1000. Hell, that movie on a whole was very innovative. The way they filmed underwater in a cooling tank for a nuclear plant, using mics in the hard hats, and moving walls to show Bud descending.
Disclosure: I own a replica Titanium ring like Bud has, so I like the movie "a little".
Mine are only 10mm, as opposed to Bud's, which was 15mm. The first ring I had to stop wearing when I lost ~80lbs, and I shrunk over a ring size, which led to the ring slipping off my hand. So I ordered another one in my new size, which I am wearing right now. The old ring is on a necklace neck to my Ti cross.
I also own the movie novelization, written by Orson Scott Card, which fills in all the info/back story they couldn't fit into the movie. In fact, the three main leads had to read the first three chapters before filming, as it gives their entire life story up to the beginning of the movie. But I'm not an uber fan like the people who go to the old Nuclear plant where Deep Core is still sitting, as they couldn't move it after filming ended.
Not to mention sad. Before CGI was all the rage they used to put actual plots in films. Now it's like you get one or the other...a good film, or good effects in a BAD film.
Case in point, 'The Dark Night'. Great film, but noteably conservative for an action flick when it came to the use of CGI. Notice it didn't suffer at all for not using a whole lot of CGI. Contrast that with Spiderman 3. Lots of CGI, terrible film...
It's true, even today you occasionally get a good film with good use of CGI, but it's pretty rare IMHO...
CGI would not affect the quality of a movie's story. If computer graphics aren't available, then practical effects for gratuitous action will simply take its place.
Good job, science, because we all know that whenever man tries to play God or override nature, it works out GREAT! We can do great things, but we don't know jack about how to use the power.
12/31/08
12/31/08
12/31/08
12/31/08
12/31/08
12/31/08
Mythbusters showed anything high velocity falling apart as soon as it hit the water right?
How'd they do that effect in the past then (before CGI)? I mean obviously they were never really "shooting" at the person underwater to begin with but were they shooting something harmless at a low velocity or rigging up some kind of pulley system to pull something threw the water to create it? Interesting.
12/31/08
12/31/08
12/31/08
12/31/08
12/31/08
12/31/08
12/31/08
12/31/08
12/31/08
12/31/08
12/31/08
12/31/08
Disclosure: I own a replica Titanium ring like Bud has, so I like the movie "a little".
12/31/08
Considering the time frames, the water tentacle was a lot more impressive.
01/01/09
01/01/09
Mine are only 10mm, as opposed to Bud's, which was 15mm. The first ring I had to stop wearing when I lost ~80lbs, and I shrunk over a ring size, which led to the ring slipping off my hand. So I ordered another one in my new size, which I am wearing right now. The old ring is on a necklace neck to my Ti cross.
I also own the movie novelization, written by Orson Scott Card, which fills in all the info/back story they couldn't fit into the movie. In fact, the three main leads had to read the first three chapters before filming, as it gives their entire life story up to the beginning of the movie. But I'm not an uber fan like the people who go to the old Nuclear plant where Deep Core is still sitting, as they couldn't move it after filming ended.
12/31/08
12/31/08
Not to mention sad. Before CGI was all the rage they used to put actual plots in films. Now it's like you get one or the other...a good film, or good effects in a BAD film.
Case in point, 'The Dark Night'. Great film, but noteably conservative for an action flick when it came to the use of CGI. Notice it didn't suffer at all for not using a whole lot of CGI. Contrast that with Spiderman 3. Lots of CGI, terrible film...
It's true, even today you occasionally get a good film with good use of CGI, but it's pretty rare IMHO...
12/31/08
CGI would not affect the quality of a movie's story. If computer graphics aren't available, then practical effects for gratuitous action will simply take its place.
11/06/08
11/04/08
11/04/08
11/04/08
11/04/08