Home Cool News Coaxial Reviews Zone Chat Contact Us Sign in

Talkbacks

Man in Suit
by matalo
Mar 27th, 2008
08:37:37 AM
Perhaps?
is that a joke
by thinboyslim.
Mar 27th, 2008
08:37:39 AM
or are there really 2 people working on this with the same name?
No pun intended
by matalo
Mar 27th, 2008
08:38:17 AM
On previous post, but as I read it again, most insightful I must say on my own behalf.
CALLING ALL CATS
by William Landis
Mar 27th, 2008
08:38:22 AM
Merrick thinks you're a virus!
Zemeckis is losing the rest of his credibility, except...
by DerLanghaarige
Mar 27th, 2008
08:40:28 AM
...he finally manages to convince us that Performance Capture IS the fucking quantum leap in filmmaking that he tells us all the time it is.
And he should finally make a movie in performance capture that is impossible to realise as live action!
P.S.: Damn you cat hater!
by DerLanghaarige
Mar 27th, 2008
08:41:16 AM
Sounds like
by thefrood
Mar 27th, 2008
08:41:41 AM
A feature length version of The Beastie Boys "Intergalactic" video. Which in my head is pretty cool actually! I tend to live in my head a lot... It's a fun place to be... I didn't take my medication today...
We need a Megas XLR movie!
by DerLanghaarige
Mar 27th, 2008
08:44:07 AM
I was pretty sure it was coming, after Transformers performed that good at the Box Office.
(Cat hater >:( )
Mo-cap people freak me out.
by Knuckleduster
Mar 27th, 2008
08:44:10 AM
They look like sex dolls running around like constipated drug addicts.
The possibilities of Performance Capture in porn movies.
by DerLanghaarige
Mar 27th, 2008
08:46:43 AM
Just imagine that!
William Landis
by Merrick
Mar 27th, 2008
08:58:17 AM
That's right. Maybe these robots will stomp them some kitties? Greatness may await!
Erghk.
by Tourist
Mar 27th, 2008
09:01:47 AM
This sounds as awesome as that Monsters Vs. Aliens flick, or the awesomeness of Sky Captain. Big Budget fan flick shorts gone wild. Note to DerLanghaarige, you need to spread the word to the japanese. I NEED my live action Urotsukidoji before I die.
Merrick hates pussy.
by DerLanghaarige
Mar 27th, 2008
09:05:36 AM
Well..y'know what I mean.
Zemeckis' son will get nominated for best director
by donwillymo
Mar 27th, 2008
09:05:54 AM
seems to be the trend
by donwillymo
Mar 27th, 2008
09:06:08 AM
Michael Dougherty
by kwisatzhaderach
Mar 27th, 2008
09:07:36 AM
What a great screenwriter. My mind is filled with all the memorable dialogue and scenes from Superman Returns. How DO htese guys get hired? Remember the days when you had to be a great writer to be hired to write a Hollywood movie?
I still can't believe
by kwisatzhaderach
Mar 27th, 2008
09:08:55 AM
the guy that made Romancing the Stone and Back to the Future made Polar Express and Beowulf. Zemeckis lost it ages ago.
Monster House
by skimn
Mar 27th, 2008
09:08:59 AM
used motion capture also, to help the animators. Mo cap doesn't automatically mean it'll be like Polar or Beowulf.
MAZINGER Z!!
by Prof_Ender
Mar 27th, 2008
09:11:39 AM
Now that would be awesome. Giant robots need to show up more in Hollywood movies nowadays.
Michael Dougherty...
by TroutMaskReplicant
Mar 27th, 2008
09:17:16 AM
I'd give the guy a get out of jail free card. Better him than Akiva Goldsman, Ted Elliott and Terry Rossio or Simon Kinsberg. Whether or not he's worthy of respect will depend on his upcoming films...
RICK 'R' TREAT
by Series7
Mar 27th, 2008
09:19:36 AM
Is going to join the AICN never released club like The Rignal or Ranboys before it. In that we are going to hear every little intimate last detail about the movie, everyone and there mom (except Harry) well have reviewed it and talk about how they are not sure if they fully like it or not. We'll get more news about it. Hear something about a release date. two years will go by, 15 more reviews of the movie will "LEAK" in. Then it will finally be released in like 20 theaters throughout America.
Skimn, you saw Monster House, right?
by DerLanghaarige
Mar 27th, 2008
09:22:26 AM
The kids looked worse than the humans in the first Toy Story! (And I'm just talking about the humans in Toy Story, not the toys or everything else in the movie).
Rick R Treat..
by skimn
Mar 27th, 2008
09:23:10 AM
..Merrick, try spellcheck..I bet that was cockblocked by Saw IV and hopefully we'll see it next Halloween.
Once Zemeckis has perfected the motion capture
by slone13
Mar 27th, 2008
09:31:20 AM
He will deliver me a Back to the Future 4.
Monster House
by skimn
Mar 27th, 2008
09:33:46 AM
I don't think they were striving for photo realism of the characters, just slightly "cartoony" versions. Its a tricky balance when animating humans in CG. Thats why we get so many animals, bugs, robots, monsters and such in CG animation. I think Brad Bird struck the best balance in The Incredibles.
I do love the old-timey tin can style giant robot...
by FlickaPoo
Mar 27th, 2008
09:35:47 AM
...especially if they have old car antennas on'em...with the little radio signal dotted lines... "calling all...." "calling all...."...
Oh goody...
by gengrievous82
Mar 27th, 2008
09:43:45 AM
more performance capture.
THIS SOUNDED GOOD...
by BurgerTime
Mar 27th, 2008
10:03:48 AM
...until I read those dreaded words "performance capture." Y'know, I've nearly written Robert Zemeckis off as a serious filmmaker. He seems to hypnotized by this stuff. While I agree that it's a cool technology with a lot of future potential, I just don't think it's there yet. Certainly not good enough for one of the most formidable directors of the day to be tossing away his career on.
Calling All Terminators?
by bobinnova
Mar 27th, 2008
10:06:12 AM
Nope, still doesn't sound any better.
This year's "Little Miss Sunshine"
by RogueWarrior65
Mar 27th, 2008
10:09:16 AM
Or would that be This Year's "Juno"? Robots apparently are the hot subject matter right now. I remember an old sci-fi movie that had a huge killer robot that was basically two cubes stacked with a cylinder in between and it had four cylinder legs that worked like pistons. No clue how it actually walked. What was the name of this movie?
The problem wasn't the lack of photo realism...
by DerLanghaarige
Mar 27th, 2008
10:17:04 AM
...in Monster House, it was just that despite being made with "the future of computeranimated filmmaking" the faces and the whole movements looked as bad as in Hoodwinked! Absolutely NOTHING made it look like they used real actors.
Cameron + Jackson...
by TroutMaskReplicant
Mar 27th, 2008
10:19:19 AM
We might balk at what has come out of performance capture films thus far, but it'll be interesting to see what 2009 has to give us when Weta shows its Mo-Cap cards...
...
by TroutMaskReplicant
Mar 27th, 2008
10:22:02 AM
I suppose that should be Spielberg not Jackson, his Tintin comes first.
Robot Jox was it that movie?
by messi
Mar 27th, 2008
10:36:30 AM
i liked that movie.
Sounds like
by dopepope
Mar 27th, 2008
10:39:05 AM
an American Negadon. Could be awesome!
Robert Zemeckis is fucked. Truly fucked. What a waste.
by ricarleite
Mar 27th, 2008
10:49:29 AM
Such a visionary filmmaker stuck now with playing with Microsoft Movie Maker. Fucking sad.
RE: slone13
by ricarleite
Mar 27th, 2008
10:58:29 AM
IF Zemeckis is doing this motion capture shit just to perfect the technology so he can do a Back to the future 4 with a Michael J Fox that doesnt twitch all the time and a Cristopher Lloyd that doesnt look it belongs to a museum, THAN he'll be the greatest filmmaker of ALL TIME.
This flick also needs giant Lions
by Xiphos
Mar 27th, 2008
10:59:53 AM
Because giant lions just kickass. TomBodet should be happy to see this movie you know with the robots and all.
What I don't understand is that CGI characters,
by skimn
Mar 27th, 2008
11:02:05 AM
based on motion capture, that are inserted into footage, such as Gollum, King Kong and Davy Jones, are so much more lifelike and realistic than fully animated footage. Is it a question of computing power, or what?
..or is
by skimn
Mar 27th, 2008
11:03:51 AM
Weta and ILM just that much better at CGI?
RE: skimn
by ricarleite
Mar 27th, 2008
11:08:56 AM
Both. Also, at animated features, detailed realism is not the goal. Remember Final Fantasy? They usually go for a cartoony look. Also, the backgrounds and lightning feel kinda different from grainy daylight-lit celluloid filming humans. It's VERY subtle, but we can detect it because we are used to film. If you got someone from the 19th century and showed him Final Fantasy, though, I believe he wouldn't realize it's not real. So, in a nutshell, Weta and ILM want realism, and the context those characters are makes it easier for us to be fooled.
I'd much rather see "Calling all Quakers!"
by dastickboy
Mar 27th, 2008
11:23:48 AM
Failing that "Today we kill, tomorrow we die!"
Giant robots RULE!
by Automaton Overlord
Mar 27th, 2008
11:30:02 AM
boxy retro-bots with grills for mouths and claws for hands! By-the-way, Cats also rule. Pound for pound cats are equaly or more bad-ass than dogs. The largest canine in the world would fucking run away squealing if it saw a 500lb Amur tiger.
Check your spelling before posting!
by jambone
Mar 27th, 2008
11:42:23 AM
It is a shame
by metaluna
Mar 27th, 2008
11:43:17 AM
that such a good film maker feels he has to play with computers all the time. Whatever happened to STORY FIRST? Seems like the visuals just swamp everything. CGI characters are just... unrealistic and unbelievable cartoons of human beings. It's just a crazy idea I have, but why not just film real people? I have to give Lucas credit for something in that at least he used actors in the crappy SW prequels although I suspect that if he could, he'd erase them too first chance he got.
It IS a shame
by Mentok
Mar 27th, 2008
01:10:11 PM
I miss Zemeckis movies as well. It's a shame he won't get back to making movies instead of whatever you want to call Beowulf and Polar Express.
I am so fucking there.
by Galva
Mar 27th, 2008
01:26:20 PM
The title alone gave me a hard on.
dastickboy...
by Galva
Mar 27th, 2008
01:28:06 PM
Those titles also gave me hard ons.
Simeon Wilkins and his clone
by icen9ne
Mar 27th, 2008
02:59:49 PM
help write CALLING ALL ROBOTS. Zemeckis has technology that rivals the Japanese!!!
WHAT'S THE DEAL WITH OVALTINE?
by Kurzinski Valentine
Mar 27th, 2008
04:11:32 PM
The can is round, the mug is round..why don't they call it ROUNDTINE?
If the Superman Returns writer is involved,
by Rupee88
Mar 27th, 2008
04:14:29 PM
then you know it will suck.
For the love of God don't try to make it photoreal!
by Movietool
Mar 27th, 2008
04:14:54 PM
Please, Zemekis, I'm begging you - find some talented character designers and try a little abstraction! I'm not talking about making it look like The Incredibles - but the photoreal stuff DOESN'T WORK YET! And don't use anyone who worked on Monster House - which featured some of the most uninspired character in animation history. And please, hire some ANIMATORS to ANIMATE the faces. Mocap all you want from the neck down, but animation needs exaggeration and MoCap does exactly the opposite - it makes all your characters look like they're half paralyzed.

So, let's recap.

1. No Photorealism - give the characters a little design. Just enough so the audience accepts them as animated characters and doesn't spend the whole movie thinking "ugh, that looks fake."

2. No Monster House designs - it looked awful

3. Get animators to HAND animate the faces.

Okay, I feel better.

Why the f**k do director try this?
by gmc2k2
Mar 27th, 2008
06:10:50 PM
I could understand if the bduget of a movie would be considerably higher by making a live action compared to an animation but when the cost of this photo realistic performance capture far outweighs the cost of a live action what is the diector achieving? something like finding nemo or incredibles of course needed to be animation but Beowulf? for all its greatness it would of been 100 times better as a live action if they made it scene for scene....Performance capture as movies already reduces its audience just for being what it is, imagine what beowulf or polar express would have done on box office returns and dvd revenue if they were live action?and what technology is it advancing?the ability to change the physical appearance of the actors/actresses? just get christan "method" bale in....plus we would have gotten a naked angelina jolie....and if you swing the other way ray winstone....ha
GIANT FUCKING KAIJU ROBOTS AND MONKEYS!
by TomBodet
Mar 27th, 2008
06:42:59 PM
We'll take both, please. And one Guilala cameo(complete w/ Kaiju Deely Bobbers, natch) just because. Sounds good!
Wouldn't it be funny if..
by metaluna
Mar 27th, 2008
07:18:20 PM
All directors we're only allowed 20 million dollars max to make a movie by law?
MAN IN MOTION CAPTURE SUIT!!!
by polyh3dron
Mar 27th, 2008
07:40:05 PM
MAN IN MOCAP SUIT!!
Motion capture...
by Fred
Mar 27th, 2008
08:50:34 PM
...a bunch of 4 year olds on a sugar high armed with nerf hand weapons pummeling the crap out of each other.
Zemeckis needs to...
by The Amazing G
Mar 27th, 2008
08:52:20 PM
team up with Bob Gale and make a live action movie again (though to be fair this movie sounds alright)
GIANT ROBOT LIONS EATING TACOMA!!!!
by TomBodet
Mar 27th, 2008
09:03:48 PM
You'd think they'd know Better-by now....
CGI humans need ear motions
by ThePilgrim
Mar 27th, 2008
09:08:25 PM
Bulge effects to the temple area and corners of the jaw when the mouth/jaw is moving. For example Clenched In Jaw causes Bulged-Out Temple Area and Bulged-Out backend corners of jaw.

The ear lobes have to move around a bit in relation to jaw movements as well. Place your finger on that triangular piece of skin just before the hole in your ear. Talk for a bit feel it moving about. It moves quite a bit and so does the lower lobe portion.

This was overlooked this in Beowulf.

Also The skin needs to react like it has blood flowing through it controlling it's color. When someone gets mad the skin needs to get red if they die it goes pale if a hand is resting on the face for a long time it leaves a red or white color print.

You guy still ignore the fingernails and how they change colors when the hand grasps things.

The mercury flow of the facial animation has to stop.

Someone needs to study how much each area moves in relation to facial actions.

Draw a line grid on a real face study it in 10x resolution look at how much the skin moves and set up a program that refuses skin surface animation effects that deviate from true possible pull effects that the skin would endure in what ever facials animated pose is made.

The teeth under the mouth have to have a deformation effect against the skin pushing it about and thinning it, depending on how the skin is pulled against it.

This CGI stuff will look real one day- you have to keep pushing it. And CGI is getting to the point where it cost less than it does to hire actors and shoot real stuff.

A bit moe on the skin pull stuff
by ThePilgrim
Mar 27th, 2008
09:17:24 PM
The reason to study the skin pull effect through a line drawn grid is so you can write a program that moves the poly mesh in exacting increments that are equal too how those areas of the skin will move when that motion is made.

Basically recreating how the skin areas all over the face and neck respond- How some areas have less and or more give too them.

The face is still animated as it is captured in mocap, but the flesh has it own directive as too how it decides too respond too those give and pulls.

Cigars are evil / you won't miss 'em
by Osmosis Jones
Mar 27th, 2008
10:01:41 PM
We'll find ways to simulate that smell / Oh my, what a sorry fella / rolled up and smoked like a panatella / Here on level one of ROBOT HELL!
Zemeckis has contracted Lucasitis
by leobloom
Mar 27th, 2008
10:15:31 PM
a disorder that affects directors so that they become more interested in the technical aspects of filmmaking and sacrifice narrative and the art of storytelling in the process. (See also James Cameron)
This is the only way...
by slicer
Mar 27th, 2008
10:40:22 PM
This is the only way performance capture will actually work. If they use it to create ROBOTS! Because that's what the human characters look like with this tech anyway! So, with that said, this movie will probably be awesome. Unless of course the plot sucks.
GOBOTS THE MOVIE
by side_swipe
Mar 28th, 2008
01:00:36 AM
damn....
Yawn, I hate these phoney movies.
by The Gospel According to Bastardface
Mar 28th, 2008
08:15:41 AM
It's not animation. It's not cinema. It's a weird hybrid that bores me to goddamn tears.
Meh
by Jaka
Mar 28th, 2008
11:35:59 AM
Zemeckis' mocap looks like a Shrek movie. Beowulf is really pretty silly looking in places. Not interested in this so much.
Click for previous story Talk Back More on this story Click for next story

User login

Quick Talkback

Please login to post talkback.