CGTalk > Main > News
Login register
Thread Closed share thread « Previous Thread | Next Thread »
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 08-02-2013, 07:00 PM   #16
hypercube
frontier psychiatrist
 
hypercube's Avatar
portfolio
Daryl Bartley
vfx goon / gfx ho
hypercube
Los Angeles, USA
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 4,050
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lagavulin16
That was a pretty interesting, and accurate, article.

The other night I heard on NPR, they developed software that will scan movie scripts and then predict box office profits, based on the script. Has anyone else heard of this?


Yeah was tripping out on that, and I absolutely would not doubt it's being used more and more.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/06/b...wanted=all&_r=0

I would be curious to see how Lone Ranger or RIPD fares when compared with either method.
 
Old 08-02-2013, 07:10 PM   #17
circusboy
Expert
Raonull Conover
Montreal, Canada
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,994
"Burn the cat!"
 
Old 08-02-2013, 07:31 PM   #18
AegisPrime
Veteran
 
AegisPrime's Avatar
Andrew Morgan
CG Gunslinger
United Kingdom
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 77
That (second) article is terrible - I've read 'Save the Cat!' and it certainly doesn't advocate writing to a formula (other than a variant on the 3-act structure which in itself doesn't make movies 'formulaic').

Save the Cat! is a career bible for wannabe screenwriters. Not writer/directors - not writer/producers but writers that want to build a career screenwriting. As a creative, I find a it a deeply depressing indictment on the film industry but absolutely nowhere in the book does it suggest dumbing down or writing formulaic scripts - Synder encourages writers to write and is realistic about their chances of getting paid work and whilst I'm not a fan of the book, I can at least respect its insight into the film industry.

Blaming Synder for formulaic Hollywood movies is like blaming David Koepp for Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull...
__________________
Andrew G. Morgan
Writer/Director
Survivor Films Ltd.
www.survivorfilms.co.uk
 
Old 08-02-2013, 07:47 PM   #19
Stankluv
Lord of the posts
Martin S
USA
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 723
I think the idea of a kickstarter devoted to a film which pledges to use a particular style of whatever is really cool and exciting, from an artistic sense. I wish them all the luck and rock the box office...I can live with statistical out-liers.

I am one of those pray-for-Dark-Crystal-2 folks and one of my fears is that there is so much cg, over puppets, that it begs the disappointing question, why isn't it all CG. As I think about it, an all-cg set, all else puppet approach....lotsa green screen puppets...that sounds amazing...is that too much CG? idk.
 
Old 08-02-2013, 09:24 PM   #20
ThE_JacO
MOBerator-X
 
ThE_JacO's Avatar
CGSociety Member
portfolio
Raffaele Fragapane
That Creature Dude
Animal Logic
Sydney, Australia
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 10,954
The article is so dumb, and hosted on such prominent site, that this unprecedented combination will peel the paint off your walls through the sheer radiation of megatons of retardation if you so much as open it in your browser.
Consider yourself lucky if you're on British soil and couldn't open it.
I'm off to re-paint the walls of my studio now, damnit.
__________________
"As an online CG discussion grows longer, the probability of the topic being shifted to subsidies approaches 1"

Free Maya Nodes
 
Old 08-02-2013, 09:25 PM   #21
Michael32766
Frequenter
mash
hey can you fix this?
Digital Migrant Worker, Mongolia
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 250
Some practical effects work well. Big explosions always look better real than CG.
But miniature water has never really worked.
As a rule of thumb I figure shoot real when you can and augment with CG to polish the image.
Only go full CG when time, money, safety or practical reasons won't allow it.
 
Old 08-03-2013, 04:03 AM   #22
Rickmeister
Lord of the posts
 
Rickmeister's Avatar
portfolio
Rick vd S
Compositor
Method Studios
Australia
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,075
Quote:
Originally Posted by hypercube
This article is actually much more insightful into the current movie problem.

http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/...cat.single.html


I am not so sure this is the current problem. Having read Syd Fields books, and also books similar to 'Save the Cat' I believe this has been around for a very long time. Even though Syd Field isn't as specific as Save the Cat, most of the points, twists and beats are in Fields' books as well. And I am pretty sure professional screenwriters have been well aware of this for a long time. I also don't think that this 'formula' in screenwriting necessarily means generic movies. Blockbusters have always been on the save side, and then there are still good movies out there that do things a bit differently.

At the same time I don't want to defend the Hollywood system. I do feel they produce a lot of weak generic movies and I'd like to see more gutsy experimental/different movies. But I just don't think its because this so called formula as described in 'Save the Cat'.
__________________
Check out a collection of my work.
Penguins of Madagascar | Monsters vs Aliens | Kung Fu Panda: Legends of Awesomeness | Robot & Monster
 
Old 08-03-2013, 02:31 PM   #23
Zarathustra
Some old guy
 
Zarathustra's Avatar
portfolio
Dave Mauriello
Artist, Educator
Wilmington, USA
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,954
Quote:
Originally Posted by AegisPrime
That (second) article is terrible - I've read 'Save the Cat!' and it certainly doesn't advocate writing to a formula (other than a variant on the 3-act structure which in itself doesn't make movies 'formulaic').


From the article:
"Snyder, who died in 2009, would almost certainly dispute this characterization. In Save the Cat!, he stresses that his beat sheet is a structure, not a formula...Maybe thatís what Snyder intended. But thatís not how it turned out. In practice, Snyderís beat sheet has taken over Hollywood screenwriting. Movies big and small stick closely to his beats and page counts. Intentionally or not, itís become a formulaóa formula that threatens the world of original screenwriting as we know it."

The blame isn't on Snyder per se, but on those mindlessly following his beat sheet. Regardless of the subject, if someone provides a framework or guidelines then most will follow it mindlessly whereas only a few will use it as a springboard for something different. It takes creativity and balls to do something different.....and unfortunately, money.

As was already said, the first article is nonsense. A shit story, regardless of whether the effects are practical or cg, still equals shit.
 
Old 08-03-2013, 04:40 PM   #24
Dillster
Always Learning
 
Dillster's Avatar
portfolio
Dylan Saunders
Dublin, Ireland
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,644
Quote:
Originally Posted by malcolmvexxed
.....I would love to see a move away from CG, especially since CG is so often used where it absolutely doesn't need to be.....


Yes and also a bad movie can't be saved by special effects no matter how well they are done. A turd with a nice ribbon on top is still a turd with a nice ribbon on top, nothing more.
__________________
I like to learn.
 
Old 08-03-2013, 04:41 PM   #25
AegisPrime
Veteran
 
AegisPrime's Avatar
Andrew Morgan
CG Gunslinger
United Kingdom
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zarathustra
The blame isn't on Snyder per se, but on those mindlessly following his beat sheet. Regardless of the subject, if someone provides a framework or guidelines then most will follow it mindlessly whereas only a few will use it as a springboard for something different. It takes creativity and balls to do something different.....and unfortunately, money.


To which I'd respond that 'following the beat sheet' isn't and never will be a recipe for creating mediocre movies - that's like saying because a film has a beginning, a middle and an end it's going to be formulaic crap.

Synder certainly advocated that aspiring writers go where the money is (romantic comedies in his opinion, holding 'Legally Blonde' as a benchmark for the genre) but the reason studios love these films is because they're cheap, appeal to both genders and a lucrative age-group of movie-goers - low risk, high return.

If studios wanted to make stimulating, thought-provoking, intelligent films with fresh ideas, they'd make them - shifting the blame to the writers is ridiculous (unless we're talking about Damon Lindelof...)

Oh, and talking of formulas - for those who aren't familiar with it, check out the 'monomyth ' - it's the foundation behind some of our most-loved stories and has spawned as many bad films and novels as it has good - but when it works, it really works.
__________________
Andrew G. Morgan
Writer/Director
Survivor Films Ltd.
www.survivorfilms.co.uk

Last edited by AegisPrime : 08-03-2013 at 04:51 PM.
 
Old 08-03-2013, 07:28 PM   #26
doghat
Expert
portfolio
Dan Ritchie
Animator
USA
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 380

Got back to what? Shooting 3d printed models on computer controlled digital cameras? It's hard to put that cat back in the bag. These are the tools of the trade, made by the people who do that work.
__________________
Project Dogwaffle is the (Un) natural Paint Program! http://www.squirreldome.com/
 
Old 08-03-2013, 10:23 PM   #27
Stankluv
Lord of the posts
Martin S
USA
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 723
Quote:
Shooting 3d printed models on computer controlled digital cameras


that is the funniest logical extrapolation from this idiotic notion about CG in movies. Hipsters would say something like, "I don't know, maybe just seeing the air between the creature and the camera is what makes it better."
 
Old 08-04-2013, 07:08 AM   #28
fablefox
Lord of the posts
portfolio
Azhar Mat Zin
Fable Fox
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stankluv
that is the funniest logical extrapolation from this idiotic notion about CG in movies. Hipsters would say something like, "I don't know, maybe just seeing the air between the creature and the camera is what makes it better."


I don't know why, however, watching a lot of 3d animation since Toy Story 1 and earlier (game cutscenes have been 3d way before then) till now, there is an air of strangeness when it come to both Coraline and Para-Norman. I know there are parts of that Were-Rabbit was using 3D, and I think so was Coraline and Para-Norman.

But there was something interesting about it. And when it come to Coraline garden scene, that makes it beautiful. Not even glow-in-the-dark plants and fiber-optic tree of Avatar can take it away.

I think there is an article in a book that I forgot the title, but it talks about people that look at historical forgery and all. Hunch is something that you brain (which we yet to fully understand) play a role in everyday life.

And sub-consciously, also affect how we watch movies.

I know you are being joking, but the answer is not in the 'air'. But i think it was related to how we set-up real life scene and 3d scene. For example in the early days, dead eye was quite a problem (non-blinking cg character).

But I think if there is a problem with cg that makes me feel strange, I think that would be "over compensation" and "short cut due to budget". It's like that joking clip of watching in 3d by blinking VERY fast. Just because you can (do all kind of stuff in 3d), doesn't mean you should.

 
Old 08-05-2013, 03:55 PM   #29
circusboy
Expert
Raonull Conover
Montreal, Canada
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,994
Quote:
Originally Posted by fablefox
I don't know why, however, watching a lot of 3d animation since Toy Story 1 and earlier (game cutscenes have been 3d way before then) till now, there is an air of strangeness when it come to both Coraline and Para-Norman. I know there are parts of that Were-Rabbit was using 3D, and I think so was Coraline and Para-Norman.

But there was something interesting about it. And when it come to Coraline garden scene, that makes it beautiful. Not even glow-in-the-dark plants and fiber-optic tree of Avatar can take it away.

I think there is an article in a book that I forgot the title, but it talks about people that look at historical forgery and all. Hunch is something that you brain (which we yet to fully understand) play a role in everyday life.

And sub-consciously, also affect how we watch movies.

I know you are being joking, but the answer is not in the 'air'. But i think it was related to how we set-up real life scene and 3d scene. For example in the early days, dead eye was quite a problem (non-blinking cg character).

But I think if there is a problem with cg that makes me feel strange, I think that would be "over compensation" and "short cut due to budget". It's like that joking clip of watching in 3d by blinking VERY fast. Just because you can (do all kind of stuff in 3d), doesn't mean you should.


So do you think there is 'air' in this example or not?!
 
Old 08-06-2013, 01:31 AM   #30
Stankluv
Lord of the posts
Martin S
USA
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 723
Wow, last two posts totally Deja Vu me to a recent conversation about Laika.

I love Coraline, it brings me to tears.

My friend is a really promising animator, with a fair bit of CG animation training. He is also excited about stop motion. He is working on getting hired as a CG animator, and he also would like to develop some stop motion footage to catch Laika's eye, even though we all know that Laika does a pretty darn finished cg facial animation, then 3d prints the faces. I think the armatures are still old school?

I love their work, but from an economic standpoint, if it is mundane to make cg animation look like stop motion (a supervisor made me laugh in a dailies session when someone forgot to turn on motion blur in a shot and he shouted out, "It's Harryhausen time!"), are they doing twice the work?

And as we all know, the movie industry is insanely competitive, at every level and in every way; and if they are doing twice the work and this Lego movie is a hit...it won't affect Laika negatively until the eventual "soft" performing Laika film's performance is underscored by a pricy production approach which is indistinguishable (I want to say "indistinguishable to the masses, but not us CG-savvy folks", but that is BS barring some horrible CBB shots sneaking through) from that other claymation Lego movie, that I predict is going to print money.

I don't know if they independently finance their films or what, but it really doesn't matter because sooner or later I imagine they will have to reach out to some kind of bean-counter for financing and I have to wonder if the Lego movie's imminent success could really push the stop motion production approach for theatrical releases out.

extra expensive steps for stop motion vs. tweaking (turn off motion blur=$$$, add some pops to curve editor=free) the normal dominant technique of animation on the planet; both delivering an equivalent, indistinguishable product is not going to be a hard choice for a lot of people.
 
Thread Closed share thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.