Disney Animated Films
Topic: First Clip from Disney's A Christmas Carol

#	Author	Message
11	markymouse Thu 5/28/2009 9:05p	And not GOOD freaky, just not quite right freaky. It doesn't expand your senses as much as irritate them. But my particular beef - since only a small percentage of movies are motion capture - who decided every movie has to be loud? Come on, this is Charles Dickens. "Packs a wallop" "non-stop roller coaster" and "edge of your seat action and in your face special effects" are not phrases you want in reviews of A Christmas Carol. But judging from this clip, that's what they're going for.
12	Jim in Merced CA Fri 5/29/2009 12:06p	Here's my analogy for this motion capture technique. When you're in the boat sailing through the 'Pirates of the Caribbean' attraction at Disneyland -- you see the various AA figures, and they look really cool -- almost real. The lighting is just so, and you're several feet away from them, so, like in theater, they look really cool and very realistic. However, if you got out of the boat, and stood right next to those same AA figures, they would look sort of strange and waxy with the overdone make-up and wigs -- and the eyes would look sort of dead and peculiar. Overall, not nearly as realistic as when you were sitting back in the boat. That's what watching that Motion Capture process is like for me. The characters SORT of look cool, but overall, it misses the mark. In this day of digital photography, and the amazing special effects available to you -- why not just use live action?
13	basil fan Sat 5/30/2009 12:26p	Why not just use live action? Very good point. As computer renderings come closer and closer to looking like live-action, there doesn't seem to be any real reason to make CGI films, let alone motion capture. I can't understand the 'praise' heaped upon CGI films for backgrounds that are inditinguishable from real life. If that's what you're aiming for, just film the real thing. Disney Glitches http://www.whatsitsgalore.com/...tch.html
14	markymouse Sun 5/31/2009 11:59a	I do like the potential for CGI to create photo realistic movies that can't be done through live actors. Space travel and dinosaurs are the two examples that come immediately to mind. But that works best, apparently in a lot of people's minds, when the characters who populate those environments are either real or clearly cartoons. Nearly realistic animation and motion capture in particular just never seem to work. The best I can say for it is that it is a step in a process. Now, how you feel about the end result is a matter for debate. That British actor who wanted to do every Sherlock Holmes story but died too young. In ten or fifteen years, some director could resurrect him digitally and finish the opus. But should that happen? Should someone buy the rights to use the "real" Charlie Chaplin in a new movie? Even if someone had the legal right, would anyone have the ethical right to create Casablanca 2? Slightly easier to stomach - historical movies where the actors finally look exactly like Nixon, or Kennedy, or the Beatles, or whoever. But I digress.
15	DlandJB Sun 5/31/2009 7:54p	I'm neither a fan of motion capture or of Jim Carey. So I'll hold on to my money until I hear back from friends and or critics I trust. I do love the Christmas Carol story, but it certainly has been remade a million times.
16	markymouse Tue 6/2/2009 8:22p	There are a few actors - Jim Carey, Adam Sandler, Will Ferrel - that I am going to avoid like the plague 90% of the time and really, really like 10% of the time. The combination of Jim Carey and motion capture are two strikes against this for me too.
17	Mickeymouseclub Tue 6/2/2009 8:30p	I would add Tom Cruise to that list. Julia Roberts tops my actress list of people that do not need my money.
18	SBSBelle22 Thu 6/4/2009 5:40p	Wasn't Gollum in LOTR mocap? I thought he was feakishly real looking, especially for a creature that does not exist. I kept expecting him to show up at the oscars with the rest of the cast ;) lol On the other hand, Polar express, while and enjoyable movie I thought, was stiff and awkward... hhmm... :/
19	basil fan Sat 6/6/2009 1:30p	Yes, Gollum is flawless, the epitome of CGI special effects. Donald Duck's Family Tree http://www.whatsitsgalore.com/...ald.html
20	Jim in Merced CA Sat 6/6/2009 3:43p	^^^"King Kong" is another great example of outstanding special effects. The giant ape was done using motion capture, and it's darn near flawless. And Gollum, although human-like, is off just enough that you buy it. It's when they start to replace real humans with the motion-capture characters is when it starts to look slightly 'off.'

All times are Pacific Time (US)

Note: Information on the discussion boards is sometimes based on rumors or incorrect information and should not be assumed true. Messages do not necessarily reflect the opinion of LaughingPlace.com or its editors.

More messages:

1-10

11-20

21-22

< Previous Topic

Next Topic >

You must be a registered user to post messages.
Click here to register.
After registration you will automatically be brought back to this topic

Antenna Toppers and Accessories
Antenna Toppers of all styles including sports, holiday, animals, occupations and more. Hundreds to choose f rom.

What's on
The Latest
Miley Cyrus tour bus in fatal crash, Miley not aboard
Captain EO on the way back?
Mobile Magic Application Transforms Verizon Wireless Phones Into Electronic Tour Guides to Navigate Disney Parks
Disney Executives Swap Jobs
2009 Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade Sailor Mickey Mouse Plush Available Online
Disney Digital Books Expands Its Vast Library with Princess and the Frog Books
Disney Interactive Studios Starts a New Holiday Tradition with Disney's A Chrsitmas Carol Video Game
Jonas and Sonny With a Chance Video Games Invite Fans Onstage, Backstage and Beyond
Disney Cruise Line in Macy's Parade for the first time
Space Mountain preview

Click here for The Latest