J4CKO

iTrader: (1)

Anyone think they have gone over the top, just watching "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" and expected it to be lame, but it wasnt, the effects are still passable but every time I go to watch a modern film the effects seem to be OTT, to much spinning and masses of exquisitely rendered particles and mechanisms but they seem overblown and too complex, the original Star Wars films still look great, anyone else think they do it because they can, not because it is needed

Ant

I think it ruins remakes too if that makes sense

Chip

I agree jacko, effects are way over the top these days.

JohnSmith

They do it because they can, it really is that simple sadly

No longer are they pushing the boundaries with effects (since CGI became almost realistic)

We will never see the likes of Stan Winstons earlier work ever again

JohnSmith

Talking of remakes, the one thing I would say that they should do to some films is to just replace the score

Watching some old classics and they are difficult to watch now with the really poor synth cheesy effects and incidental music

subaruturbo_18

I hate when the special effects take up most of the film.


The majority of those marvel films that have been made recently all seem to be a basic story and loads of special effects. They all get so boring! Probably why i've gotten in to thrillers recently! Complex story and character backgrounds taking rather than graphics

J4CKO

iTrader: (1)

I like Soundtracks on films that are of their time, don't think things like the Raiders of the Lost Ark type films, Star Wars, ET or whatever need re-scoring, even stuff like original Dawn of The Dead in which the soundtrack is really seventies synth is perfect, it is just part of the experience,

i.e. this, from six minutes in


or this,

J4ckos mates theme


On of my current listens is this, Boards of Canada, they are evoking this kind of feel in their music,


Kasabian were quite good at that kind of sound,

EddScott

The focus these days seems to be on special effects first because thats the big draw. A coherent script seems to come 2nd - just look at the Transformers films.

Its also why Christopher Nolan films tend to stand out. He uses special effects but tries to avoid it. Look at Inception, its got effects but much of what could have been done with effects wasn't - the falling hotel rooms, the train in the high street. All could have been done with computers alone but they were only used to clear up the edges.

Prometheus is stunning visually but the script is quite poor - possibly because the writer seems to have struggled moving from episode writing (Lost) to big film making - we will see if he's learnt from the next in the Star Trek reboot series.

Computer games have suffered a simlar fate. Crysis is visually stunning but the gameplay is a bit naff. STALKER or Fallout 3 aren't visually stunning but have depth and character.

I think thats what is missing in just about everything these days. There is just no depth and character in the world, anywhere.

edit - the only film that really pushes modern effects but still keeps a handle on the story is District 9. Hopefully its kept up when Elysium comes out.

JohnSmith

Tron and then Tron Legacy

But then Tron pushed the boundaries of computer technology for its time

JohnSmith

Was thinking of things like the original planet of the apes, assault on precinct 13 etc those kind of movies that could do with a little re-scoring

jjones

original star wars films still look awesome (before they added some CGI tat in the remastered (or whatever bull**** title they gave them) versions).

CrisPDuk

I can usually guess by the director what the Live Action/Effects/Script ratio is going to be.

For example, Tim Burton's films are always heavy on the visuals, but they never overpower the stories Whereas James Cameron always blow his budgets on the (admittedly often groundbreaking) effects & pairs them with scripts a twelve year old could have written

It would appear (although I've yet to see it) that with Prometheus, Ridley Scott has moved into the latter category

As for Michael Bay, who the **** pays actual money to watch the sh!te he churns out

CrisPDuk

Seriously

The bad music is such an integral part of that film

mart360

What?are you mad

The original assault on precinct 13 score is superbly matched. John Carpenter himself did the music if i recall.

Its like saying Enrico Morricone's score for The Thing needs re doing by some boyband lol......

The easy way to tell if its a film or a movie...

Films have scores, or soundtracks

Movies have songs


Mart

mart360

Agreed, Ridley Scott used to do sumptuous visuals, usually accompanied with lavish complex scores, Vangelis rtc

Alien was a complete departure, superb visuals with a virtually non exsistent score

Another radical film for Scott was Legend, again stunning viauals, but the choice of two score,s let it down badly.

James Camerons stuff is very clever, and yes prehaps some of the plots are lacking, he well makes up for it with the visuals.

I think often the studio's themselves try to dictate what they think a film should be, which in some cases harms the original version.

Look at "Aliens" the directors cut, fills in loads of gaps, as does "The Abyss" the directors cut


Mart

mart360

CGI has in someway killed the SFX genre in films,

In the 80's you had a whole raft of films that took SFX to new levels,

Poltergeist - The face scene
Scanners - The head scene
American werewolf in london - The whole film
The Howling - Transition scene's
The Thing - All the transformations

Nowdays its all CGI, and whilst its very clever and can produce some superb visuals, I think its use is often used wrongly, and its become a case of putting in a CGI effect rather than concentrate on the plot.

Mart

Carlh

The missus and me are have been having a star-wars fest. Got just Return of Jedi to watch tonight and she'll have finally seen them all ! lol

Rocky this week....

Saxo Boy

I agree completely.

Take the transformer films for example. There is some outstanding detail on the robots and the animation of them transforming is brilliant. However, it all happens far too quickly and is far too busy. In every film it is just a mass of coloured metal and explosions and I for one, cannot make out anything or absorb what I am seeing.

A film that I found to be really visually pleasing lately was Battleship. Because the film was based around warships the action had to run at a pace that is consistent with a ship in water (i.e. slowly). Much of the action was slower and more strategic and, for that reason, I was able to look around at the detail of the alien craft and take on board what I was seeing.

CGI offers an opportunity to make grand sets that simply cannot be achieved in real life. However, film makers have to slow the pace of the films down so that the viewer gets an opportunity to look around the set and take it all in. In the most recent Transformers film you get to see some great shots of the robot's homeworld. However, the action is so frantic that you can't and don't get a split second to actually look at it and take it all in. Ask me to draw something from that scene and I wouldn't have a hope. Ask me to draw the deathstar, the enterprise, Millennium Falcon, etc and I could draw then in great detail from memory alone. Says it all.

jsh1

iTrader: (1)

It's quite interesting this discussion. I like the differing opinions and the criticisms of directors that produce style over content.

I will probably get flamed for this but I think the master of style over content is George Lucas.

I agree that the Star Wars films are visually groundbreaking although the explosions in space leave a lot to be desired (not just his fault, most directors do this - space is a vacuum and you cannot have flames in space FFS)

Lucas's films are dreadfully directed, terribly scripted and the acting is atrocious. So it's by no means a modern problem.

Jason

CrisPDuk

I do wonder how many recent films would have been better if CGI wasn't so readily available

Jaws is only as good as it is because the shark was crap, forcing Spielberg and the cast to fill out the characters so memorably, if the shark had worked properly, it would have been Deep Blue Sea the first

mart360

Good old Bruce lol

As you say, by filling out the depth of the actors, cinematography, it created a film that although simple proved to be a box office smash.

It also helped that the score blended perfectly, another oft oveerlooked area.


Mart

mart360

Speaking of filmscores, There are certainly a few superb composers out there, who's interpritation/ vision of a film are absoloutly amazing. How they do it is beyond me, but when they get it right

For me my current list of favorites are:

Danny Elfman, couple with Tim burtons visuals

Hans Zimmer, (i dare anyone not to sing along to the pirates of the Carribean theme )

Steve Jablonski - Also does computer games

Mick Kamen Now sadly deceased, but has a huge range of films to his name.

John Carpenter, a Legend in his own right

Ennio Morricone, Who can forget "The Thing"

Vangelis, Coupled with Ridley Scott's visuals


Mart

chrisowe

The actual effects in Close Encounters were rehashed for the 30th Anniversary edition.
There are actually three different versions of the film which are on the blu-ray.

JohnSmith

Nowhere did I say that the films should be rescored with pop bands

What i meant was the music itself is fine, its the sounds they used which are so dated and those which need replacing, not all films and not the whole soundtrack, just elements of some

Whoever mentioned Alien being relatively scoreless, have you watch the version with the alternate score ?

RRH

J4CKO.

Mate.

We're too old for this place. We've served our purpose. Our wisdom may no longer be appreciated

Anyway, it's your round...

JohnSmith

RRH - A blast from the past

J4CKO

iTrader: (1)

Lol, good to hear from you, my "wisdom" is donated whether it is appreciated or not !

Hope all is well, you still going to Anglessey ?

CharlySkunkWeed

iTrader: (7)

A mate lent me Tron on bluray , origional and remake. I felt obliged to watch the origional as i dont ever remember watching it 1st time round. Load of rubbish. It felt like they came up with the effect (and not brilliant at that), and then tried to make a film around it. Was wondering if in 20 years will people watch the remake and think the effects are keek !

CrisPDuk

Read this over the weekend;


Definitely recommended, funny in parts, very funny in the others

oldsplice

I love him. Says everything that Mr OS and I rant about, whenever we try to watch a film these days. And what is it with the soundtracks now? Drives us mad! The 'ambient' music is so loud, it drowns out all the dialogue. Gets on my ****.