PDA

View Full Version : Alvin and the Chipmunks teaser trailer


RobertoOrtiz
07-27-2007, 05:17 PM
Here you go:

link1 (http://movies.aol.com/movie/alvin-and-the-chipmunks/28897/video/trailer-no-1/1946920)
-R

elvis75k
07-27-2007, 06:32 PM
Can't view the trailer, not in my area.. wtf!!
Any other source will be welcomed :)

FloydBishop
07-27-2007, 06:34 PM
Did I see that wrong, or did they have one of the chipmunks eat another one's poop?

WTF?!?

Apoclypse
07-27-2007, 06:39 PM
The chipmunks look awful. That was a bad decision on their part.

xen_ninja
07-27-2007, 06:43 PM
I thought they looked pretty good.

ingramworks
07-27-2007, 06:57 PM
Looks cute, probably be terribly chessy, but that could be half the fun :)

Per-Anders
07-27-2007, 07:08 PM
Did I see that wrong, or did they have one of the chipmunks eat another one's poop?

WTF?!?

Well now, it's got furries covered, scat covered, all it needs now is some anime...

ingramworks
07-27-2007, 07:21 PM
Well now, it's got furries covered, scat covered, all it needs now is some anime...

ewww, I hadn't thought of that...

Boone
07-27-2007, 07:21 PM
They should feed them to the hounds - The Chimpmunks are evil! :scream:

Breinmeester
07-27-2007, 11:48 PM
Oh my God! That's absolutely the nastiest joke in a trailer ever! This is 'for all audiences' and they fuzz over a nipple??

I don't know... These cartoon animals in live action films don't do it for me. I didn't like Stuart Little and ran from Garfield. I guess they have their place, but it's not for me. Animation looks all right...

Laa-Yosh
07-27-2007, 11:52 PM
You know, Stuart Little was so weird and absurd at times that it was actually quite entertaining... And it had Hugh Lauire too :)

About the trailer, well, I can only add another WTF?!?...

ndat
07-28-2007, 02:07 AM
To keep with the runing theme of this thread I have to add my WTF?

They pretty much alienate their core audience with that trailer, what parent would want to take their children to a movie where the main characters eat each others poop?

Kentaro
07-28-2007, 02:15 AM
I agree, it's geared for children and u have someone eatin someone else's poop. WTF !?


poor waste of 3D software

Per-Anders
07-28-2007, 02:30 AM
ewww, I hadn't thought of that...

Perhaps I should rephrase that, theyr'e related right? So it's incest scat covered... throw in a little bsdm and this things getting an X rating.

Mechis
07-28-2007, 03:20 AM
uh.... I laughed. hahaha....
~Mechis

RobW720
07-28-2007, 03:25 AM
yeah... when that happened.... the audience went kinda quiet followed by one really loud "WTF" (not in happy internet short)

classic.

pencil-head
07-28-2007, 03:38 AM
Can't view the trailer, not in my area.. wtf!!
Any other source will be welcomed :)

Yeah me too. I found another one over here.
http://www.worstpreviews.com/trailer.php?id=834&item=0 (http://www.worstpreviews.com/trailer.php?id=834&item=0)

I thought they were cute. I don't know if i could stand watching it for two hours though. And yeah, eww he ate his turd.

lildragon
07-28-2007, 02:09 PM
Why!?!? my god WHY!?!??! :banghead: What's next Tailspin!?!? Rescue Rangers??!

~t

Steve Green
07-28-2007, 02:50 PM
If only.

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2007/07/04

mech7
07-28-2007, 03:11 PM
If only.

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2007/07/04

Teddy Ruxpin i hope so :thumbsup: http://youtube.com/watch?v=MGrhQXtn92g

ivanisavich
07-28-2007, 03:33 PM
Excuse me while I was my eyes out with bleach.

If they EVER make a live action version of The Smoggies...well.....I'm not even gonna go there.

SheepFactory
07-28-2007, 03:39 PM
This was terrible in everyway. wow and wtf?

RobW720
07-28-2007, 05:02 PM
well now, lets take it easy.... tailspin or rescue rangers would be jawsome.

TheMadArtist
07-28-2007, 05:25 PM
Geeeez, lighten up guys. :) Thats no worse than some of the stuff on Nick or any other cartoons kids see these days. Itll probally be a fun movie.

goatrape
07-28-2007, 09:12 PM
Definetly agree, Tailspin or Rangers would be nice...i would prefer Ducktales myself:)
Think i will pass on this one

FloydBishop
07-28-2007, 09:28 PM
Geeeez, lighten up guys. :) Thats no worse than some of the stuff on Nick or any other cartoons kids see these days. Itll probally be a fun movie.

I'll go out on a limb and guess that no character has ever eaten a turd on a Nickelodeon show.

Geta-Ve
07-28-2007, 10:41 PM
So we are all of a sudden above dick and fart jokes? I personally didn't see a problem with it (considering he spit it out) and I think kids will get a great laugh out of it. I really don't see the big deal. People will watch movies like Jackass where they do a lot worse than eat computer generated shit, but suddenly when a cg character does it we must get up in arms about it?

Maybe I was raised differently or something but I thought it was funny, and I can see my little brother getting a good laugh out of it as well.

But hey, whatever.

TheBladeRoden
07-28-2007, 11:03 PM
I give it two CG Garfields
http://www.animationmagazine.net/images/articles/garfield_cg_150.gif http://www.animationmagazine.net/images/articles/garfield_cg_150.gif
Take that as you will

Tripple-I
07-28-2007, 11:07 PM
-jackass wasnt really marketed at kids though, and this clearly isnt marketed at intell-uh-gent adults.
I'm sure the animation is going to be fluid, the cg artists who worked on it probly did a fine job at executing someone else's terrible idea. Just another arguement that cg should stay in 3d and live action should stay live action.
and im sorry but jason lee. . . brodie. . . nose dive my friend, career nose dive

Phrenzy84
07-29-2007, 11:21 AM
i like the style of them, would be cool to see rescue rangers in cg. Doubt it would be any good, funny how movies and tv shows you liked as a kid, are rubbish when your a bit more grown up.

Doesnt look like a great moive, but i liked the animation and character design, not to mention the fur.

Intervain
07-29-2007, 11:40 AM
:banghead::banghead: not another one... this looked beyond stupid!

phobos78
07-29-2007, 07:25 PM
:banghead::banghead: not another one... this looked beyond stupid!

Yes! enough of these movies that are employing 100's of VFX artists and animators, we should really stop making this crap, we have unemployment for a reason!


Perhaps you should think about the target audience, its kids. Kids will enjoy it. Not every movie has to be lord of the rings. I agree that its a silly film, but I loved silly films when i was a kid...so let it be a silly film, it seems pretty benign to me.

fuss
07-29-2007, 08:36 PM
:banghead::banghead: not another one... this looked beyond stupid!

Yes! enough of these movies that are employing 100's of VFX artists and animators, we should really stop making this crap, we have unemployment for a reason!

(...)



Oh, come on, that's not what she meant and you know it, so no need to be snappish.

It's like saying "Hey, let's cut down the Amazon rain forest. Sure, it's bad for the environment, but we have thousands of unemployed lumberjacks who need jobs!" (yeah, I exaggerate). If everybody in Hollywood followed your logic, justyfing the making of crappy movies by saying "yeah, but we give people jobs!!", there would be tons of bad movies out there. Hmm, wait a second...

ReBootedOne
07-29-2007, 08:59 PM
My poor eyes.. What have they done to deserve this?

ragdoll
07-29-2007, 09:10 PM
hahaha. raisin... :argh:

leftyfallat
07-29-2007, 09:40 PM
I'll go out on a limb and guess that no character has ever eaten a turd on a Nickelodeon show.

Have you ever seen Ren and Stimpy?

cookepuss
07-29-2007, 09:59 PM
This looks absolutely, mind numbingly absurd.

For one thing, while I understand the technical reasoning, it's a little tragic to see these anatomical redesigns paired with the original voice actors.

More over, Jason Lee.... Why, Jebus? Why?!?! Such a great comedic actor reduced to forcing out such utter rubbish lines. A far cry from the likes of My Name is Earl, Dogma, or Mallrats.

Scatalogical jokes?!? Really? Is this what the public finds funny? Has the planet's collective IQ dropped down by that many IQ points? Eating poop is NOT funny. Not even to kids. Oh, sure, it looks hilarious. Feed your kids their sibling's poop. Let the laughs roll in..... :D

This is NOT good comedy writing. By pandering and appealing to the lowest common demoninator all they seek to do is effectively destroy the integrity of the source material. I'm not saying the the 80s Chipmunks cartoon was high art or anything, but I'm pretty sure that neither NBC nor the FCC sanctioned poop eating jokes. That humor is, pardon the phrasing, retarded. One would have to be removed from his senses to find that to be smart writing.

This movie falls right in line with the second Garfield, Rocky & Bullwinkle, & Looney Tunes movies. Hell, even the dorky 80s Dolph Lundren "Masters of the Universe" was better than that stuff.

What I'd kill to see.... A CG versions of Gargoyles or even The Littles.

Intervain
07-29-2007, 10:09 PM
Perhaps you should think about the target audience, its kids. Kids will enjoy it. Not every movie has to be lord of the rings. I agree that its a silly film, but I loved silly films when i was a kid...so let it be a silly film, it seems pretty benign to me.

hmm shame the film makers think that all kids enjoy nowadays is burping and poop eating ... why not consider for a second that kids do have brains as well... I like silly movies too but this one's beyond silly - it's utterly primitive IMO!

I'm sure there's potential for far better scripting ideas out there to keep the vfx artists employed for years and years!

cookepuss
07-29-2007, 10:28 PM
hmm shame the film makers think that all kids enjoy nowadays is burping and poop eating ... why not consider for a second that kids do have brains as well... I'm sorry but this one's beyond silly - it's utterly primitive!
Stop and think about that for a moment.

This generation of kids lay claim to as much or even more intelligence, social conscience, and global awareness than previous generations. However, when you search through You Tube or My Space all you find are videos of kids beating each other up, face planting from dumbass "extreme" stunts, acting out their fanboy fantasies, or otherwise proving that they're as dumb as their parents, grand parents, and great grand parents.

Sometimes, I wonder if our society isn't just getting dumber. Seriously. I look back on that movie "Idiocracy" and sometime feel that that is where our society is heading. We've got a society that deals in cheap thrills, lowered academic standards, lower social/moral standards, and utter foolishness. I know that my parents said that about my generation, as their parents did theirs, but I think that we're reaching a boiling point of sorts.

We live in a culture of "give the people what they want" and "the customer is always right." If we're seeing comedies produced with scenes of cutesy rodents eating poop it's only because WE ASKED FOR IT. Maybe not with our words, but with our dollars.

Jackass... Borat... Saw... Beavis & Butthead... Hostel... Garfield... ETC.

Funny and/or oddly obscenely entertaining? Sure. How long til this stuff doesn't give us the same "high" though? How long til we demand that they up the ante yet again?

Watch. 10-15 years time, these lowest common denominator movies will be the equivalent porn flicks, snuff films, & 90 minute long potty jokes. WHY? Because they're giving the people what they want?

I'm not a prude or anything, but I am not a fan of dumbing down entertainment. I like my horror movies scary, but smart. I like my comedies, side splitting, but not necessarily idiotic. I like my cartoons to speak to me and not AT me.

Just on principle, I'm not going to see this movie. With my dollars, I vote nay. For what THAT is worth. :p

Intervain
07-29-2007, 10:40 PM
we're in agreement then :)

FloydBishop
07-30-2007, 03:50 AM
Have you ever seen Ren and Stimpy?

You got me. I do now remember Stimpy eating kitty litter. It could be implied that there was poop in there. Good call.

Artistically, this is looking great. You art guys and gals who worked on it shouldn't get bummed by the negative critiques. You guys didn't write the gags or come up with the premise.

phobos78
07-30-2007, 04:59 AM
well, say what you will... I have always found it interesting how people spout their mouths without ever seeing the movie....but, hey thats what these discussion forums are all about!

oh well, I don't care one way or another about chipmunks...but telling me kids don't like poop jokes...well, then you need to spend more time with kids...

I'm not going to see this movie, but I bet there are alot of kids that will enjoy it.

ghoest
07-30-2007, 05:49 AM
it seems to me that this movie is following the vein of the chipmunks. It's really interesting to see how this is evolving. Thank god it's 3d and not another 2d iteration of the franchise. I hardly think you can really judge the quality of the entire movie (let alone the entire story) from this trailer...

I'll go out on a limb here and even say that this reincarnation of the chipmunks will probly be better than the television show who's theme song is engrained inside of my brain from my childhood. Certainly the size of the chipmunks have totally changed. I doubt this movie's quality will be diminished by one poop joke. Besides the chipmunks isn't exactly a huge canidate for "High Minded" satire, they're singing chipmunks for the love of god.

amannin
07-30-2007, 06:24 AM
The only thing that bothers me is that they are actually chipmunks, not half-human/chipmunk mutant creature people that no one is apparently bothered by. But then again, it might look even more bizarre if they were more accurately translated from the original series O.o

i wonder if they will still go to school in the movie? oh! and what about the chipettes?

And OMG, Teddy Ruxpin! I don't remember any of the stories he read me, but I remember being utterly fascinated with his moving mouth, until the bottom jaw part suddendly broke, and I could hear is the gears mixed in with the audio -- ahhh the memories

amannin
07-30-2007, 06:28 AM
http://www.impawards.com/1987/posters/chipmunk_adventure.jpg

may the legend continue ;)

switchblade327
07-30-2007, 09:27 AM
So we are all of a sudden above dick and fart jokes? I personally didn't see a problem with it (considering he spit it out) and I think kids will get a great laugh out of it. I really don't see the big deal. People will watch movies like Jackass where they do a lot worse than eat computer generated shit, but suddenly when a cg character does it we must get up in arms about it?

Maybe I was raised differently or something but I thought it was funny, and I can see my little brother getting a good laugh out of it as well.

But hey, whatever.

What's so sudden about it? It's a cheap way for adults to amuse children without actually having to be clever. There's nothing new about it, sure but the classic children's/family movies aren't (I hope) going to be the dick and fart joke ones. Cartoons have been funny for years without having to resport to poo-eating. Kids DO like poop jokes but that's not the bottom-of-the-barrel humor I'd want my child's growing mind to be developing around (and yes, I know I'm a prude).

Comparing Alvin and the Chipmunks to **Jackass**? Slightly different demographic, I think. Any kid whose parents lets them watch Jackass is probably from a doomed gene pool anyway.

well, say what you will... I have always found it interesting how people spout their mouths without ever seeing the movie....but, hey thats what these discussion forums are all about!


You nailed it! Studios that don't want people talking about their trailers probably should never show them to *ANYONE*. But that'd be bad marketing. But by now, you can't honestly complain about people spouting their mouths when you click on a movie trailer link on an *internet message board*. It's like walking into an AA meeting and complaining about the lack of booze; par for the course.

As for the movie...ahem TRAILER itself, I think the Chipmunks themselves actually look pretty cute. They're a a lot less reality-incompatible them Garfield was. I'd agree with the above "good execution by the effects house of a bad idea by the studio" statement.

But Jason Lee... man...

lildragon
07-30-2007, 12:32 PM
What really bothers me is not the poop joke (although disturbing to some extent :p) and not the type of film it is, remake all you want cause we grew up with some of the best television in our time, and I for one collect all the DVD's of old toons so my son and future lil ones can experience what we did. It's the fact that these suits are greenlighting things that shouldn't be. 3D Transformers yeah! Thundercats hell yeah!... Chipmunks, Ducktales, TMNT, Talespin, Rescue Rangers, Looney toons, gummi bears... no no no! "Especially" not mixed with live action. They don't beg to be in 3D, leave them as Toons, it's the perfect medium for them, OR if the suits desperately want 3D, do the entire film in 3D! It would generally "feel" better. I hate to be a pessimist, but this will fail miserably at the box office.

Bah, it's Monday morning and too early... neeed coffee.

Take care,
~t

BigPixolin
07-30-2007, 03:37 PM
CGtalk would be a great place if during movie threads we actually talked about the CG.


I don't get all this "movie sucks" type stuff.
I wish the moderators would enforce a rule that movie discusions had to revolve around the cg.
Not all these personal opinions on things they have no idea about becuase they have not seen it.

xen_ninja
07-30-2007, 03:45 PM
CGtalk would be a great place if during movie threads we actually talked about the CG.


I don't get all this "movie sucks" type stuff.
I wish the moderators would enforce a rule that movie discusions had to revolve around the cg.
Not all these personal opinions on things they have no idea about becuase they have not seen it.

QFT!!
People talk more about the justification of a movie more than anything else.It's to make money!! Then some of you talk about the script. Where is all the cg stuff?

Per-Anders
07-30-2007, 03:55 PM
To be honest I think that the trailer looks OK, it'll appeal to the same demographic as Garfield did and that did well enough after all, the CG is decent too.

I'm not sure how true to the source material it is though, it seems like they're trying a little too hard to give a a bit of edge that I'm pretty sure wasn't there originally, which sits a little uneasily both in terms of the known characters and the lines in the trailer just feeling a bit forced (I'm not saying that I'd expect spontaneity and ad-libbing with interaction between non-existent cg characters and actors on set, but the trailer kinda lacked spark, I'm sure the kids will probably love it though).

Per-Anders
07-30-2007, 04:07 PM
QFT!!
People talk more about the justification of a movie more than anything else.It's to make money!! Then some of you talk about the script. Where is all the cg stuff?

You don't think that critical facility is a somewhat important part of being an artist? The people here are movie goers as well as movie makers, it's in both our interests and in the interest of "making money" that CG Movies are good, not merely that CG Movies exist. People aren't sheep and the time when they had to be for a film just because it contained CG is long gone.

BigPixolin
07-30-2007, 04:24 PM
You don't think that critical facility is a somewhat important part of being an artist? The people here are movie goers as well as movie makers, it's in both our interests and in the interest of "making money" that CG Movies are good, not merely that CG Movies exist. People aren't sheep and the time when they had to be for a film just because it contained CG is long gone.

But crying about them on the internet or feeling like your owed a explaination isn't going to change or help anything.

This is a cg site bottom line. Those type of conversations can be taken to the other forums out there that cater to this type of stuff. I'm here to talk about CG not what a terrible of a choice they made in deciding to make a movie. Hence the CGtalk name not www.terriblechoiceforacgmovie.com (http://www.terriblechoiceforacgmovie.com/) or my personal favorite www.whymakeacgmoviewhenyoucanfilmit.com (http://www.whymakeacgmoviewhenyoucanfilmit.com).

Edit:
After I posted this I realized I'm trying to justify talking about cg on a cg website.

switchblade327
07-30-2007, 04:33 PM
CGtalk would be a great place if during movie threads we actually talked about the CG.

I don't get all this "movie sucks" type stuff.


Lots of us were jumped on just the same months ago for saying we didn't like the designs of the Transformers (for the record, I still don't), which was entirely relevant to the CG and we were looking at the final designs and in the trailer, final or near final work. Negative comments can still be pertinent but it's like they're nails on chalkboard to some people's ears(figuratively speaking).

And I believe YOU personally jumped on peoples' cases for discussing the Uncanny Valley and the motivations for photoreal art direction in a CG film in the Beowulf thread, which is also entirely relevant to CG.

It seems like you just don't like people saying anything negative about trailers, which is totally your perogative. But you probably shouldn't be reading all of these movie threads if it is.

BigPixolin
07-30-2007, 05:12 PM
Lots of us were jumped on just the same months ago for saying we didn't like the designs of the Transformers (for the record, I still don't), which was entirely relevant to the CG and we were looking at the final designs and in the trailer, final or near final work. Negative comments can still be pertinent but it's like they're nails on chalkboard to some people's ears(figuratively speaking).

And I believe YOU personally jumped on peoples' cases for discussing the Uncanny Valley and the motivations for photoreal art direction in a CG film in the Beowulf thread, which is also entirely relevant to CG.

It seems like you just don't like people saying anything negative about trailers, which is totally your perogative. But you probably shouldn't be reading all of these movie threads if it is.

I'm pretty sure I stated that my problem was with the comments like "this movie sucks" or "is a terrible idea" type comments. The ones that have nothing to do with cg.
As for the transformers thread. I would say not liking the designs have nothing to do with the cg, thats a concept art problem. Whether or not you like the designs the CG was great.
If there is a photoreal rendering of a VW bug. I hate VW bugs but that has nothing to do with the cg in a rendering of a VW. I'm not going to argue the artist should of done a 1964 Chevy Imapala becuase I like it better. Then complain and feel like he owes me an explaination as to why he didn't do it exactly as I want.

My main concern was that these threads spiral out of control, fill up so fast with pointless opinions that it crowds the pages, and the actual talk about cg(if any at all) gets spread out and skipped by most people not willing read the diluted forums filled with irrelevant and unnecessary fluff.(The last line should sound familar)
There are reveiw threads for those comments but they don't appear until people actually see the movie.

FloydBishop
07-30-2007, 07:53 PM
Life isn't rainbows and puppies all the time. A few people didn't like the trailer for various reasons and posted why. Now we've got people calling out other people because they don't like the trailer and you want those posts weeded out of the forum all together?

The day we can't critique a movie trailer is when I quit CGTalkin' all together.

BigPixolin
07-30-2007, 08:26 PM
Life isn't rainbows and puppies all the time. A few people didn't like the trailer for various reasons and posted why. Now we've got people calling out other people because they don't like the trailer and you want those posts weeded out of the forum all together?

The day we can't critique a movie trailer is when I quit CGTalkin' all together.


I'm not saying weed out the post becuase they don't like the trailer.
Go to aint it cool and critique the trailer.
At CGtalk critique the CG in the trailer. I know it sounds crazy.

Well since we can't talk about the cg in movie trailers here in a sensable fashion or even not get attacked for wanting to focus on the cg.
Can somebody point me to a forum where the cg is discussed properly?

leftyfallat
07-30-2007, 09:07 PM
I actually just saw the movie "Problem Child 2" the other day, which was one of my favorite movies as a kid. It was filled with poop, fart, and kick in the nuts jokes...in retrospect, probably one of the dumbest movies I've ever seen. I never had to see a shrink because I watched some foul lame-brain movies as a child. Kids love that stuff. It's not exactly my cup of tea at this point in my life, and it's absurd that people bash the content of a movie like this...unless you're 10 years old. Some think it's a problem with society as a whole, but coddling kids to a perfect world that doesn't exist only delays the inevitable...that some would rather eat sh#$ than face confrontation. ;)

Venkman
07-30-2007, 09:36 PM
I used to watch the cartoon in the 80's. Weren't they (originally) roughly the height of small children?

I have to admit, I laughed at the poop joke.

The comments on the AOL site are mostly positive.

switchblade327
07-31-2007, 10:08 AM
I'm pretty sure I stated that my problem was with the comments like "this movie sucks" or "is a terrible idea" type comments. The ones that have nothing to do with cg.
As for the transformers thread. I would say not liking the designs have nothing to do with the cg, thats a concept art problem. Whether or not you like the designs the CG was great.
If there is a photoreal rendering of a VW bug. I hate VW bugs but that has nothing to do with the cg in a rendering of a VW. I'm not going to argue the artist should of done a 1964 Chevy Imapala becuase I like it better. Then complain and feel like he owes me an explaination as to why he didn't do it exactly as I want.

My main concern was that these threads spiral out of control, fill up so fast with pointless opinions that it crowds the pages, and the actual talk about cg(if any at all) gets spread out and skipped by most people not willing read the diluted forums filled with irrelevant and unnecessary fluff.(The last line should sound familar)
There are reveiw threads for those comments but they don't appear until people actually see the movie.

Concept art isn't CG related? There are features on concept art of the from page of cgsociety all the time! It's all part of the process.

Look, I see where you're coming from but I think your opinion of what CG incorporates is different (and extremely linear and unnecessarily strict) then what the standards of this forum have shown to be.

Remember, each of these screen names has a human behind it and message boards are essentially a conversation between humans. So who the hell wants to participate voluntarily in a railroaded conversation? Who would sit at the pub to watch a game with mates and say "you can't sit at this table if the conversation deviates one iota from the topic of football?" How interesting would any of these threads be if every post was limited to "this rendering looks cool" or "that animation was neato"?

Civily discussing a CG movie has proven over time to be on topic I'm afraid, even if we're not talking about the parameters of the shaders or the polycounts of the models at that particular moment.

Marlonnowe
07-31-2007, 05:59 PM
Life isn't rainbows and puppies all the time. A few people didn't like the trailer for various reasons and posted why. Now we've got people calling out other people because they don't like the trailer and you want those posts weeded out of the forum all together?

The day we can't critique a movie trailer is when I quit CGTalkin' all together.


We can only hope ;)

ReBootedOne
07-31-2007, 06:41 PM
Well since we can't talk about the cg in movie trailers here in a sensable fashion or even not get attacked for wanting to focus on the cg.
Can somebody point me to a forum where the cg is discussed properly?

Pixolin, if you don't like it then leave. No one likes a martyr.

CGTalk was created for the discussion and critiquing of peoples' work, the news and general discussion boards are largely a grab bag most days.

What we're doing here is talking about an impending film that uses a large amount of CG, and how we feel about the use of said CG.

The most beautiful of art cannot make up for a bad idea, and what we're ultimately discussing is the idea of this film, (which I would still like to say I believe to be not a great idea).

Ideas, whether you've realized this yet, are a part of art, and even something gorgeous and well done can be TERRIBLE if it's got zero creativity behind it.

What you're ultimately saying through your posts is that you don't care about ideas, creativity, or any of the people behind a given movie other than the CG.

So, just take a deep breath and either leave to find a place full of people like yourself, or grit your teeth and avoid threads that annoy you.

Have a nice day.

Now, I'm going to get back on topic to discuss the idea behind this movie.

One thing I am glad of is that they ditched the "white boy gangster" look of the trio that we first saw on the poster.. that freaked me out a bit, to be honest.

Still not sure how I feel about Jason Lee in this movie.. Anyone know if they've gotten the original voice cast back for Alvin, Simon, and Theodore?

-eric

BigPixolin
07-31-2007, 07:47 PM
Pixolin, if you don't like it then leave. No one likes a martyr.

CGTalk was created for the discussion and critiquing of peoples' work, the news and general discussion boards are largely a grab bag most days.

What we're doing here is talking about an impending film that uses a large amount of CG, and how we feel about the use of said CG.

The most beautiful of art cannot make up for a bad idea, and what we're ultimately discussing is the idea of this film, (which I would still like to say I believe to be not a great idea).

Ideas, whether you've realized this yet, are a part of art, and even something gorgeous and well done can be TERRIBLE if it's got zero creativity behind it.


So, just take a deep breath and either leave to find a place full of people like yourself, or grit your teeth and avoid threads that annoy you.

Have a nice day.
-eric

Thanks for the enlighting post. I don't know why I didn't think of going somewhere where the focus is on the CG. You've really opened my eyes. I now know what art is! 10 years of getting paid for it doesn't amount to the 20 seconds of experience your post has given me.



What you're ultimately saying through your posts is that you don't care about ideas, creativity, or any of the people behind a given movie other than the CG.


Thats exactly what I'm saying. If I did care about the other stuff I would go to a general movie site. I was mistaken by thinking this site catered only to CG, and not any given persons mind state when they decided to make a movie.
You have people here bashing a movie that wasn't intended for them in the first place.
If you think it's a stupid idea for a movie then guess what you pass the test, your an adult.

circusboy
07-31-2007, 08:18 PM
I wouldn't get so worked up about it.
The gag behind the trailer is more distracting in its stupidity than the CG is interesting enough on its own merit to talk about...

So thats what folks are compelled to discuss in this thread.
When the CG itself is compelling than thats what folks talk about. Like so:

http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=2&t=379460&highlight=davey+jones

Garibaldi
07-31-2007, 08:28 PM
I for one , think I will go see it. I happen to like stories about small fuzzy rodent-like creatures with obnoxious attitudes.

CGTalk Moderation
07-31-2007, 08:28 PM
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.