|
Nikumatic posted:It was also very clearly being put together at a time when Game of Thrones was a whole lot more beloved than it is now. Tails Gets Trolled this is not. At least that was interesting because all of those characters were important to the story and were completely over-the-top outsider-art versions of themselves.
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2021 18:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 05:29 |
|
|
JazzFlight posted:are we about to get hyped for Popeye next? I mean, I was... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-naCwCQdKZg
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2021 19:14
|
|
|
Lola apparently has a new VA as well: https://ew.com/genre/movies/zendaya-space-jam-new-legacy-lola-bunny/
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2021 20:28
|
|
|
Why would Kansas be on the same tiny planet as Oz. Why wouldn't there be a kansas planet AND an Oz planet?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2021 21:08
|
|
|
Larryb posted:Lola apparently has a new VA as well: I like Zendaya so that's cool 
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2021 21:52
|
|
|
Zendaya is Lola.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2021 22:22
|
|
|
I could have sworn they mentioned Kath Soucie was coming back a while ago but I guess they changed their minds.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2021 22:29
|
|
|
Kart Barfunkel posted:Zendaya is Lola. Zendaya is Lolaaaaa. And LeBron James is himseeeelf Daaaanyyyy Deeeeevito is not here
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2021 22:33
|
|
|
Boxman posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMBylNJQEbg That movie is a masterpiece so I doubt it
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2021 22:42
|
|
|
pokeyman posted:They updated spacejam.com what the gently caress, that was a museum piece and a priceless cultural artifact. https://www.spacejam.com/1996/ They moved it here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2021 22:55
|
|
|
All the Ready Player One poo poo aside, I actually kinda like the CG Looney Tunes and think they look decent I can't wait to watch some cartoons play wacky basketball 
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2021 23:12
|
|
|
Im here for basketball movies that are not emotionally devestating and instead slam and jam
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 02:18
|
|
|
I think that Reel FX did a better job on cg looney tunes for their animated shorts but the very stylized lighting those shorts used might not gel with all these real people. I dunno, this movie looks like a mess that might be entertaining because it doesn’t take itself seriously. But I really don’t care much about it. As for an upcoming movie set in cyberspace I DO care about : https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hM8T-6OvWpo Ccs fucked around with this message at 02:29 on Apr 4, 2021 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 02:23
|
|
|
I don’t understand how nothing has looked better blending RL and animation than Roger Rabbit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 02:26
|
|
|
I'm going to pitch a movie where a dude travels to the internet and visits worlds inspired by Wreck-It-Ralph 2, Space Jam 2, Ready Player One, etc.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 02:28
|
|
|
Data Graham posted:I don’t understand how nothing has looked better blending RL and animation than Roger Rabbit. Richard Williams was a genius.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 02:30
|
|
|
Data Graham posted:I don’t understand how nothing has looked better blending RL and animation than Roger Rabbit. Film quality, money and commitment
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 04:24
|
|
|
Ccs posted:Richard Williams was a genius. and the actors - especially Bob Hoskins actually did their damnest to act as if the characters actually exist in the same plane as them, including jiggling props to give the impression that toons are leaning or otherwise using them
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 04:28
|
|
|
FunkyAl posted:Why would Kansas be on the same tiny planet as Oz. Why wouldn't there be a kansas planet AND an Oz planet? Isn't Oz only like the size of a country, and is also apparently rectangular and surrounded by impassable desert?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 05:21
|
|
|
ThermoPhysical posted:https://www.spacejam.com/1996/ Phew!
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 05:44
|
|
|
Data Graham posted:I don’t understand how nothing has looked better blending RL and animation than Roger Rabbit. So you had animators that were at the height of their craft and film crew that worked with them/loved animation enough to know how to blend it together. Things like practical effects mimicking what the toons do, like the light fixture and Roger interacting with it when he's in the walls of the bar, iirc. Now it's just "act in front of this screen and we'll do everything in post"
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 05:50
|
|
|
Absolutely, I’m as big a Richard Williams fanboy as the next guy. But I’m also saying that for all the 30 years’ worth of CGI tech since then, no movie using it has been more convincing or less jarring than Roger Rabbit’s style of ink-n-painted cels on top of film. They just got the coloring and shading and overall integration spot-on somehow.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 12:51
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:That movie is a masterpiece so I doubt it I don't hate it but honestly at no point does the computer in that movie read as "computer world" the way it did in Tron 1 or especiallyTron 2.0. Absent a familiarity with the franchise, you could be forgiven for thinking its an alternate reality entirely rather than specifically "the world inside your computer"
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 13:11
|
|
|
Even watching Roger Rabbit nowadays and knowing how it's all done it still looks like magic to me. That cartoon is interacting with that real life human!!!
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 13:11
|
|
|
Roger Rabbit is a goddamn masterpiece and a lot of the reason is thanks to how much of it was bleeding edge practical effects at the time to connect the animation to the real world https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_Cx4h2ieyA It's fun to see behind the scenes of modern CGI heavy movies too as long as they don't try to go 100% uncanny computer animation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLVTl9nTOBU
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 13:40
|
|
|
In general for convincing special effects you need to put in a fuckload of effort and use every tool available to you. Not a lot of movies are willing to.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 14:03
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Isn't Oz only like the size of a country, and is also apparently rectangular and surrounded by impassable desert? In the original book oz is just literally a place. It’s not even magically separated. There was a time period you could just place a mystical land in the Great Plains because they were seen as vast and far away and unknowable. It was only later books that really decided it had a more mystical separation. Originally it was just.... kinda.... just a place we didn’t notice. (Which seems so dumb now, but it’s only been a few years since current media pretended you could have a hidden country in Africa because we just think of Africa like that now)
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 14:08
|
|
|
I feel like you could write a cultural history of how far away people imagine a lost fantastical city could be over time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 14:11
|
|
|
That's kind of a thing in Sandman where one character (who is a mystical place, of course) talks about how explorers and mappers meant there's fewer and fewer places for fantastical otherworlds to be located.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 14:25
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:That's kind of a thing in Sandman where one character (who is a mystical place, of course) talks about how explorers and mappers meant there's fewer and fewer places for fantastical otherworlds to be located. it was maybe the only good theme in the first two Pirates of the Caribbean sequels. The world's getting mapped and all the weird and magical creatures keeps being pushed farther towards oblivion.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 14:32
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:In general for convincing special effects you need to put in a fuckload of effort and use every tool available to you. Not a lot of movies are willing to. Now you just have Chadwick Boseman stand in front of a green ramp and jump into a ball-pit offscreen. I'll also add that the drat Infinity camera in modern CGI is usually what gives your brain the cue that this poo poo is fake. Roger Rabbit's physical cameras and deliberate framing/blocking help sell the idea that you're grounded. Now, that Benny scene would be a mess of shots speeding through and around the traffic and doing 360 moves.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 17:57
|
|
|
FilthyImp posted:Now, that Benny scene would be a mess of shots speeding through and around the traffic and doing 360 moves. Even in fully animated stuff the "throw as much poo poo on the screen as possible until the audience is completely overwhelmed" approach is just getting so, so tiresome. Like the How to Train Your Dragon movies (the latter ones especially), I found watching them to be a legitimate chore just because of how insanely much stuff they kept just dumping on the screen in the middle of these careening flying chase scenes. I'm like yeah I get it's an action sequence but calm down for gently caress's sake, what kind of websites are you guys reading about how kids these days all have zero attention spans
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 18:24
|
|
|
There's a method in how it's done - even live action movies are guilty of wall of spectacles. I keep being reminded of Fury Road where there is a lot going on, but you don't really feel like you're getting hammered due to the cinematography
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 18:40
|
|
|
Come to think of it, is there any other live action/animated hybrid movie that had as much care put into it as Roger Rabbit did?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 19:36
|
|
|
Larryb posted:Come to think of it, is there any other live action/animated hybrid movie that had as much care put into it as Roger Rabbit did? Looney Toons back in action?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 20:19
|
|
|
Larryb posted:Come to think of it, is there any other live action/animated hybrid movie that had as much care put into it as Roger Rabbit did? Cool World, obviously.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 20:20
|
|
|
Back in Action is good, and probably the closest to doing what Roger Rabbit did, but still isn't really there. There's too many parts of the movie where the humans interacting with the cartoon characters look extremely not believable (the Las Vegas fight with Yosemite Sam's goons looks especially bad), and the way the characters look doesn't really have the same effect as Roger Rabbit in terms of the lighting and shadows looking realistic. They don't do a good enough job of making it look like the characters are truely there. I think Back in Action is still a fun time, and the art museum scene is really fun, but it doesn't quite get to Roger Rabbit levels of magic. Honestly the closest I can think of that really does it is the like 5 minutes that Bugs and Daffy are in Michael Jordan's real life house in Space Jam. It looks like they went out of there way to show Bugs and Daffy properly interacting with the real life objects.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 20:34
|
|
|
The real answer is the Drew carrey show https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbYbc2IVqVg
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 20:40
|
|
|
Yes! That is really good. Especially the way the papers fly when he runs away, and the part where he grabs the nameplate to look at it. The Drew Carey Show always had really fun creative cold opens
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 20:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 05:29 |
|
|
Probably not. Who Framed Roger Rabbit was an insane gamble, it only happened because Disney Animation in the 80's was desperate and kinda crazy. Don Bluth quit halfway through The Fox and The Hound and took half of the animators with him, The Black Cauldron tanked so hard it almost brought Disney down with it, and The Great Mouse Detective made a modest profit but got its rear end kicked by An American Tail. Eisner and Katzenberg basically decided to go all in on the most expensive animated movie of all time, and either revive Disney Animation or sink it for good. I think from there they get Steven Spielberg as executive producer, he brings in Robert Zameckis who just did Back to the Future and won't be scared off by poo poo like "we have to film the live actions parts first and then animate everything later and it'll take a year and we haven't invented digital compositing yet because it's the 80s", and Zameckis says "I know a guy" and that guy is Richard Williams, animation warlock. And they set him up with a 50 million animation budget and temporary custody of Disney Animation UK. And then there's the poo poo where Disney is like "hey to save money you should use these very simple camera angles and don't do anything crazy with the lighting" and Zameckis goes "anyway for this scene we hit the ceiling lamp so all of the light and shadows go back and forth, and then we hit it again so they rotate" And anyway, I don't think Disney will every try something as insane as Roger Rabbit ever again, and also Richard Williams is no longer around so I don't even know who else would carry the legacy of a perfectionist animation warlock. I don't know if any of this is, like, relevant to the discussion but I listened to a podcast about Who Framed Roger Rabbit like two days ago so that's where all that came from.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2021 21:16
|
|
