TROY: SupreBowl Trailer!

[midknight3]

Looks absolutely amazing! Who's doing the CG for it?

[malducin]

Pretty stunning, perhaps the best of the SB trailers.

VFX by Framestore/CFC, Thye Moving Picture Company and Cinesite Europe.

[Cararan]

What a trailer, this is going to be a great movie.

[Stimpy]

orlando bloom looks like a girl

(well even more so than usually)

[Q_B]

Great. Can't wait till its out!

Is it me or epic films are comin hard again, this time solidly built upon massive CG (crowds mostly)?

[SimonReeves]

Originally posted by Stimpy
orlando bloom looks like a girl

(well even more so than usually)

swish

well It looks epic tastic, I wouldnt be surprised if the story is a bit cheesey, but at least theres a new trailer, I was tired of seeing the old one and last samurai for the last 8 months at the cinema

that sounded quite bitter eh

[vfx]

Wow A full London CG job - excellent - first Gladiator now this.

At first in the first trailer, I thought hmmm a little too many boats, then when they land on the shore in this trailer, I thought WOW, much better, and somehow more believable.

P.S. Was Massive used for the crowd stuff.

[paintbox]

If they stick to the spirit of Homers' Iliad just as Peter Jackson stuck to the story of LOTR, it should be a winner.

[Stimpy]

Originally posted by Simon.Reeves
swish

well It looks epic tastic

but those swooping down camera motions over two huge clashing armies are KIND of getting boring.

cause its exactly the same style. oh well.

[JB]

Meh :shrug:

Effects look ok, story looks headache inducing :hmm:

[vfx fan]

The movie looks good, let's hope it's not "The Lord of the Rings" meets "Gladiator," because the trailer certainly suggests that.

But Wolfgang Petersen is one of my favorite directors. I loved "The Neverending Story," "Outbreak," "Air Force One," and "The Perfect Storm." And most, if not all, of those movies were very mistreated by critics.

By the way, is he still on "Batman vs. Superman?"

[DirtySkillet]

even if the story sucks, it's got great actors. Brad Pitt is obviosly one of the best actors of this generation. Eric Bana, he was good in the Hulk, even if u didn't like that story. Orlando Bloom, the next Michel Jackson, hehe. But he's a fine actor. Looks slightly overdone, epically. But what the heck, I'm seeing it!

[SovereignKnight]

Originally posted by paintbox
If they stick to the spirit of Homers' Iliad just as Peter Jackson stuck to the story of LOTR, it should be a winner.

You are kidding about that whole Peter Jackson sticking to the story thing right?


SK

[KolbyJukes]

Looks like a winner, I'm highly anticipating this film's release.

Framestore is doing some amazing stuff these days (as always):bowdown:

-Kolby.

[macqdor]

MASSIVE WAS NOT USED IN MAKING THIS MOVIE


just wanted to add that. People are now thinking Massive is being used for everything dealing with battle sequences.:bounce:

[playmesumch00ns]

or that massive is somehow the answer to every problem involving more than 100 characters...

framestore are doing the armarda and landing shots, MPC are doing all the battle stuff.

[Zoorado]

Amazing. Doesn't matter if Massive is used. The CGI in that trailer looks better and more realistic (IMO) than what I saw in the LOTR movies.

[talos72]

Some really neat shots...but why does half the cast look so Nordic/Germanic instead of Greek? Brad Pitt and the actress playing Helen resemble a nice Viking couple! :cool:

[Supervlieg]

Nice horsey.

(cant wait for a movie without a huge battlescene btw)

[Virum]

Originally posted by Zoorado
Amazing. Doesn't matter if Massive is used. The CGI in that trailer looks better and more realistic (IMO) than what I saw in the LOTR movies.

Oooo...I wouldn't say that. If you are talking about the way they fought, you have to remember we have two different kinds of fighters here. In LOTR we have heavily armed fighters who wouldn't be jumping on each other like that. For greek fighting, the trailor shows exactly what I would expect. Completely different fighting styles!

Anyway, many of the closeup shots of the Uruks marching were ONLY MASSIVE shots. Shots viewers thought were real actors in front and CGI behind them were actually completely CGI shots.

[Dennik]

Originally posted by talos72
Some really neat shots...but why does half the cast look so Nordic/Germanic instead of Greek? Brad Pitt and the actress playing Helen resemble a nice Viking couple! :cool:

Well, Brad Pitt married a Greek girl (in real life) if that makes him any relevant... :D

[nobrain]

looks gay. another overhyped made for everyone tasteless and long epic about nothing containing rehashed ideas from every gladiator movie ever made. cmon the trailer says it right away "need the greatest warrior ever seen, then pitt comes on...bah!
my 2 cents.

[E_Moelzer]

Actually the greek were blonde once, the romans too...
I am interested in what this movie could turn out like...
CU
Elmar

[RobertoOrtiz]

Originally posted by nobrain
looks gay. another ....

I understand that the expression "looks gay" is slang among some people for lame, but please lets keep it off the forum.

Some people of that sexual persuasion might be offended.

-R

[playmesumch00ns]

Originally posted by nobrain
looks gay

Actually the ancient greeks are thought to have been predominantly gay. Ever heard the expression, "women for children, boys for pleasure"?

Oh, you weren't getting into a cultural discussion were you?

[Zoorado]

Originally posted by Virum
Oooo...I wouldn't say that. If you are talking about the way they fought, you have to remember we have two different kinds of fighters here. In LOTR we have heavily armed fighters who wouldn't be jumping on each other like that. For greek fighting, the trailor shows exactly what I would expect. Completely different fighting styles!

Anyway, many of the closeup shots of the Uruks marching were ONLY MASSIVE shots. Shots viewers thought were real actors in front and CGI behind them were actually completely CGI shots.

Well, I wasn't talking about the fighting style. It's more of a critique of the CGI quality in both films. Firstly, the CG armies in LOTR (esp. ROTK), though huge, look like they are made up of colonies of ants in many scenes. Somehow, they just lack the grittiness of the armies in Troy.

Secondly, in ROTK, the camera is usually stationary when showing a panoramic view of the movement of the Uruk and human warriors. This is unlike what I've seen of Troy, in which the camera sweeps across and zooms right into the battlefront without any cuts in the middle, showing a progressively increasing level of detail and clarity of the rendered soldiers. The latter is more powerful, IMO.

Thirdly, there isn't really much of a fight between armies of similar strengths in ROTK. Rohan's troops just trampled over the onfoot uruk-hais; they are in turn crushed by the massive oilphants. In Troy, however, it's humans against humans, and the way the Greek and Trojan warriors leap onto one another in a wrestle to death is extremely convincing. The scene really shows off the power of the Endorphin engine, which regrettably, ROTK has not been able to utilise to its full potential.

Seriously, comparing the trailers for both films, I think this shot (http://grace.elidan.net/troy/troy12.jpg) and this shot (http://grace.elidan.net/troy/troy19.jpg) look better than this (http://www.elflady.com/legolasgreenleaf/rotk/trailer/images/138.jpg) by quite a margin. But that's just me :)

[malducin]

another overhyped made for everyone tasteless and long epic about nothing containing rehashed ideas from every gladiator movie ever made.

It's funny since the Illiad and the Odysey are the prototypical epic stories. If anything it's much later stories that use (or maybe rip-off, depending on your view) the basic ideas from this stories.

There have been several movies and miniseries about these stories, and movie wise there have been a lot more epic stories that predate the current batch by a long shot. Things like Lawrence of Arabia, Spartacus, Ben Huy, Cleopatra, etc.

[nobrain]

Originally posted by malducin
It's funny since the Illiad and the Odysey are the prototypical epic stories. If anything it's much later stories that use (or maybe rip-off, depending on your view) the basic ideas from this stories.

There have been several movies and miniseries about these stories, and movie wise there have been a lot more epic stories that predate the current batch by a long shot. Things like Lawrence of Arabia, Spartacus, Ben Huy, Cleopatra, etc.

what can I tell u about this movie without seeing it. here goes.

1. Its too damn long.
2. Way too many guys, and probably only one pretty girl which is probably a prude.
3. Dialogue too irritating because they try to sound like theyre actually from that time period and then someone throws a wsup dude in the middle of a sentence. e.g. "the battle has foregone its earliest shadow, for when the sun sets, blood of brethren will be lost in da yizow fo shizzle biaatch."
4.even peon soldiers have brand spankin new uniforms in the 5 day of battle.
5.Battle sequence account for 4.5% of the total movie lenghth.


that is not to put it down all together, I'm sure brad pitt will do some fine acting and its probably breakin some sort of new ground in cg technology (what its really about). as for everything else I wouldn't lean to far into it. nothing new.

[talos72]

Actually the greek were blonde once,...

That's not the story the Greek vases tell! I am not an expert in Greek history, but I know that a few different ethnicities have at one point or another occupied ancient Greece: some may have resembled nothern Europeans more while others may have had typical Medditteranean darker features. Still, I think, from a historical angle, it would have been more interesting to have the cast look more like what ancient Greeks may have looked while adding more authenticity and depth to everything.

Imagine a scene with a ton of Trojan warriors with piercing dark eyes and black beards woven in locks (as many did) marching towards the camera ready to kick some butt. :beer:

[malducin]

what can I tell u about this movie without seeing it. here goes...

Talk about judging a book by it cover!!!

1. I guess it deoends on the person and the movie. I don't mind seating for 120, 150, 180+ min for a good movie. If you ask me many are too short but they tend to be the fluff popcorn type of films, especially the ones geared towards teenagers. I'll take better contructed films.

2. Well it's a story about war and the sorce material had lots of male characters. And the girl starts a war because she was no prude ;-). And what's wrong with too many guys, does Saving Private Ryan suffer because of that for example. It's like the PC crowd complaing that Lord of the Rings barely has any female characters and they should have even pput more of that on the films.

3. As what as opposed to have hip hop dialogue from the hood. I guess you expect a different version. That would take me out iof the film. I guess some people don't like historical pieces, which is too bad since there are lots of good one out there. Or maybe awaiting the Baz Luhrman musical vesion of it?

4. Don't know until we see it so why complain about it now? Wolfgang Petersen might go for a gritty look.

5. As opposed to what, movies where the action accounts for 1/3 of the running time shotchanging the character moments and story? I rather have a captivating story as opposed to empty action but that's just me.

You mioght as well have very different tastes in movies, why complain about somethingg you won't remotely give a chance?

[nobrain]

Originally posted by malducin
Talk about judging a book by it cover!!!

1. I guess it deoends on the person and the movie. I don't mind seating for 120, 150, 180+ min for a good movie. If you ask me many are too short but they tend to be the fluff popcorn type of films, especially the ones geared towards teenagers. I'll take better contructed films.

2. Well it's a story about war and the sorce material had lots of male characters. And the girl starts a war because she was no prude ;-). And what's wrong with too many guys, does Saving Private Ryan suffer because of that for example. It's like the PC crowd complaing that Lord of the Rings barely has any female characters and they should have even pput more of that on the films.

3. As what as opposed to have hip hop dialogue from the hood. I guess you expect a different version. That would take me out iof the film. I guess some people don't like historical pieces, which is too bad since there are lots of good one out there. Or maybe awaiting the Baz Luhrman musical vesion of it?

4. Don't know until we see it so why complain about it now? Wolfgang Petersen might go for a gritty look.

5. As opposed to what, movies where the action accounts for 1/3 of the running time shotchanging the character moments and story? I rather have a captivating story as opposed to empty action but that's just me.

You mioght as well have very different tastes in movies, why complain about somethingg you won't remotely give a chance?

well thats actually the point, i want more action because so many stories are just bull to begin with. go see the movie then come back here and read my post again, you'll relate to it 100%

[Virum]

I see what you are saying. A lot of that could just be the way the story is written though, and filming style. They are both excellent. I never really noticed the colony of ants thing...The way they moved seemed typical of crowd movement to me.

I really like the way Troy has done their CGI fighting, the jumping onto each other is SO cool; its not that I'm jsut a LOTR fanboy. However, you can't deny that the closeup shots of the army were very well done, such as the shots of the huge trolls just slaughtering groups of Gondorian soldiers.

I would say that I like the image of LOTR better. The shadows look more convincing and the image itself seems more evocative to me, the level of realism from both shots looks very convincing (about the same, but the LOTR image is hard to see because this monitor is really dark.)

All in all, I think what you like better is the cinemagraphic elements of Troy better, which are excellent, but they bothhave there own, unigue style. And Troy probably had a lot longer to work on the visual effects. To me, the level of CGI looks the same.

Sure, it would have been cool for close hand to hand grapples in LOTR, but with the way Tolkien wrote the story, that wasn't really too possible. IMHO.

Cheers! :beer:

Originally posted by Zoorado
Well, I wasn't talking about the fighting style. It's more of a critique of the CGI quality in both films. Firstly, the CG armies in LOTR (esp. ROTK), though huge, look like they are made up of colonies of ants in many scenes. Somehow, they just lack the grittiness of the armies in Troy.

Secondly, in ROTK, the camera is usually stationary when showing a panoramic view of the movement of the Uruk and human warriors. This is unlike what I've seen of Troy, in which the camera sweeps across and zooms right into the battlefront without any cuts in the middle, showing a progressively increasing level of detail and clarity of the rendered soldiers. The latter is more powerful, IMO.

Thirdly, there isn't really much of a fight between armies of similar strengths in ROTK. Rohan's troops just trampled over the onfoot uruk-hais; they are in turn crushed by the massive oilphants. In Troy, however, it's humans against humans, and the way the Greek and Trojan warriors leap onto one another in a wrestle to death is extremely convincing. The scene really shows off the power of the Endorphin engine, which regrettably, ROTK has not been able to utilise to its full potential.

Seriously, comparing the trailers for both films, I think this shot (http://grace.elidan.net/troy/troy12.jpg) and this shot (http://grace.elidan.net/troy/troy19.jpg) look better than this (http://www.elflady.com/legolasgreenleaf/rotk/trailer/images/138.jpg) by quite a margin. But that's just me :)

[Zoorado]

Originally posted by Virum
I see what you are saying. A lot of that could just be the way the story is written though, and filming style. They are both excellent. I never really noticed the colony of ants thing...The way they moved seemed typical of crowd movement to me.

I really like the way Troy has done their CGI fighting, the jumping onto each other is SO cool; its not that I'm jsut a LOTR fanboy. However, you can't deny that the closeup shots of the army were very well done, such as the shots of the huge trolls just slaughtering groups of Gondorian soldiers.

I would say that I like the image of LOTR better. The shadows look more convincing and the image itself seems more evocative to me, the level of realism from both shots looks very convincing (about the same, but the LOTR image is hard to see because this monitor is really dark.)

All in all, I think what you like better is the cinemagraphic elements of Troy better, which are excellent, but they bothhave there own, unigue style. And Troy probably had a lot longer to work on the visual effects. To me, the level of CGI looks the same.

Sure, it would have been cool for close hand to hand grapples in LOTR, but with the way Tolkien wrote the story, that wasn't really too possible. IMHO.

Cheers! :beer:

Well, it's all in the eye of the beholder. To me, the key to realistic battle scenes is to have as few cuts as possible. This is probably the aspect that Troy is superior over LOTR IMHO. When doing closeup shots, I would like to see the camera zooming in gradually from a panoramic view of a huge crowd down to just one person within it, showing his facial and anatomical features clearly. This is still considered an enormous feat in film CGI, but Troy seems to have gotten a bit nearer to what I've hoped.

The backgrounds in Troy do seem more realistic and complements the crowds better. But maybe that's because PJ wanted to make the environment in LOTR more fantastical and bears less resemblance to reality.

I can agree that both films have equally pleasing aesthetics quality though. :)

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.