The Adventures of Tintin - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 08:12 AM
AVS Special Member
 
sirjonsnow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 4,488
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

Name ANY animated character that's EVER been mistaken for someone real. Failure to do so would be a fact, not an opinion.

Bernie. He was animated by hand and people constantly thought he was live, one woman even had sex with him!
sirjonsnow is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 08:21 AM
AVS Special Member
 
spectator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,036
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

Name ANY animated character that's EVER been mistaken for someone real.

Show me someone who would mistake a photographed character for real and I'll show you someone simply uneducated about/inexperienced with cinema in general. They're just different visual storytelling means. Neither of them are "real", but they each have distinct qualities that make them able to express certain aspects of life in more "realistic" or resonant ways.

I don't feel special...
spectator is offline  
post #93 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 08:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RobertR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: California
Posts: 6,119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by sirjonsnow View Post

one woman even had sex with him!

Crazy people can always make their own reality.
RobertR is offline  
post #94 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 08:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RobertR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: California
Posts: 6,119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by spectator View Post

Show me someone who would mistake a photographed character for real and I'll show you someone simply uneducated about/inexperienced with cinema in general.

Now you're just using semantics to avoid the issue. You can't name an instance where people can't tell the difference between film of a real person and an animated character and you know it.
RobertR is offline  
post #95 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 08:41 AM
AVS Special Member
 
MovieSwede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 6,770
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

Name ANY animated character that's EVER been mistaken for someone real.

Avatar comes to mind, and no im not talking about the Na┬┤vi.
MovieSwede is offline  
post #96 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 08:41 AM
AVS Special Member
 
spectator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,036
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

You can't name an instance where people can't tell the difference between film of a real person and an animated character and you know it.

I wouldn't contest that assertion, but I also have no idea what it has to do with the question at hand. Photographed people and drawn/CG/puppet/whatever-animated people are both artificial and look artificial to the familiar eye. Finding one more "realistic" than the other depends upon how you prioritize which qualities of reality are the most important to represent with fidelity and whether literal or figurative suggestions of these qualities are more resonant with you as an audience. This is all subjective and, thus, a matter of opinion, not of fact.

I don't feel special...
spectator is offline  
post #97 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 08:48 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Morpheo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Montreal by day, Paris by night...
Posts: 6,573
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 117 Post(s)
Liked: 306
Quote:
Originally Posted by spectator View Post

Show me someone who would mistake a photographed character for real and I'll show you someone simply uneducated about/inexperienced with cinema in general. They're just different visual storytelling means. Neither of them are "real", but they each have distinct qualities that make them able to express certain aspects of life in more "realistic" or resonant ways.

I think no one disputes the fact that both forms are just a representation of reality, therefore none of them is real. BUT, the animated medium suits more certain types of stories, the same for live action. @movieswede, I don't think anything can be made into an animation. Technically yes of course, but does it work all the time?

...Tintin was made for live action decades ago, and the film was not very good (Tintin and the Golden Fleece, 1961). Popeye too in 1980 (with Robin Williams!), the film just sucked. Certain characters are animated, others not. Indy is not. Tintin is perfect for the animated world.
Morpheo is online now  
post #98 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 08:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RobertR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: California
Posts: 6,119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by spectator View Post

I wouldn't contest that assertion, but I also have no idea what it has to do with the question at hand. Photographed people and drawn/CG/puppet/whatever-animated people are both artificial and look artificial to the familiar eye.

Once again, you're avoiding the issue by choosing to talk about the limitations of photography. It's apparent that the animators who made Tin Tin worked their asses off trying to make the movie look more like film of real people, so they obviously know what it is they're shooting for, even if they know they can never get there.

Quote:


Tintin was made for live action decades ago, and the film was not very good (Tintin and the Golden Fleece, 1961). Popeye too in 1980 (with Robin Williams!), the film just sucked. Certain characters are animated, others not. Indy is not. Tintin is perfect for the animated world.

Well said.
RobertR is offline  
post #99 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 09:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
MovieSwede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 6,770
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post

I think no one disputes the fact that both forms are just a representation of reality, therefore none of them is real. BUT, the animated medium suits more certain types of stories, the same for live action. @movieswede, I don't think anything can be made into an animation. Technically yes of course, but does it work all the time?

...Tintin was made for live action decades ago, and the film was not very good (Tintin and the Golden Fleece, 1961). Popeye too in 1980 (with Robin Williams!), the film just sucked. Certain characters are animated, others not. Indy is not. Tintin is perfect for the animated world.

The usually reason why something fails when its moved to another medium is how you approach the transition to the new medium. There are infinit ways of doing this, that it often fails are not evidence that it cant succeed.

Just look at the different take on Batman, you got the entire scale from Adam West campy to Christian Bales serious, with Keaton somewere in the middle.
MovieSwede is offline  
post #100 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 09:13 AM
AVS Special Member
 
spectator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,036
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

Once again, you're avoiding the issue by choosing to talk about the limitations of photography.

I'm not avoiding anything. You and I simply see "the issue" in different places. Which, again, speaks to the subjective nature of this question of opinion.

I don't feel special...
spectator is offline  
post #101 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 10:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
RobertR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: California
Posts: 6,119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by spectator View Post

I'm not avoiding anything.

You tried to equate the limitations of photography with the limitations of simulating real people with animation. Once again, an attempt to confuse the issue.
RobertR is offline  
post #102 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 10:50 AM
AVS Special Member
 
spectator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,036
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

You tried to equate the limitations of photography with the limitations of simulating real people with animation. Once again, an attempt to confuse the issue.

It's not an attempt to confuse the issue, buddy; it's an honest expression of the way I see the issue. I'm sorry if you are confused, but I'm not trying to confuse you and I'm not trying to avoid or obfuscate anything. I see a line in one place and you see it in another. As far as I'm concerned, this just speaks to my point that this question is all subjective and you can't attribute statements of fact to it.

I don't feel special...
spectator is offline  
post #103 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 11:13 AM
AVS Special Member
 
PeterTHX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,906
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 64 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

Name ANY animated character that's EVER been mistaken for someone real. Failure to do so would be a fact, not an opinion.



You were saying?

My opinions do not reflect the policies of my company
PeterTHX is offline  
post #104 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 12:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Morpheo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Montreal by day, Paris by night...
Posts: 6,573
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 117 Post(s)
Liked: 306
Davy Jones doesn't have human skin, that helps. Look at Jeff Bridges in Tron Legacy, was his virtual younger self convincing? not 100%. And the effect was amazing btw, but not truly convincing. Back to Tintin, the animation is jaw-dropping, but you never forget you're looking at an animated movie. That's fine as far as I'm concerned, it's just that it can't be said that these characters look as real as a live action person...

(btw, Davy Jones is really one of the best looking CGI characters ever conceived)
Morpheo is online now  
post #105 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 12:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
spectator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,036
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Whether or not an animated character can be made to look as "photorealistic" as a live-action character is beside the point.

I don't feel special...
spectator is offline  
post #106 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 12:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MovieSwede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Gothenburg
Posts: 6,770
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Liked: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post

Davy Jones doesn't have human skin, that helps.

Have you ever seen a woman without her makeup?

Quote:


Look at Jeff Bridges in Tron Legacy, was his virtual younger self convincing? not 100%. And the effect was amazing btw, but not truly convincing.

You also have Terminator Salvation. Some angles look better then other. But I do believe it can be done right. Its the details that will make the difference.

Quote:


Back to Tintin, the animation is jaw-dropping, but you never forget you're looking at an animated movie. That's fine as far as I'm concerned, it's just that it can't be said that these characters look as real as a live action person...

To be fair, they were never intended to look 100% real life. But a mix between the comic look and real life look.
MovieSwede is offline  
post #107 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 01:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Morpheo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Montreal by day, Paris by night...
Posts: 6,573
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 117 Post(s)
Liked: 306
Quote:
Originally Posted by spectator View Post

Whether or not an animated character can be made to look as "photorealistic" as a live-action character is beside the point.

ok so I posit that an image of a person is not a real person -


now that it's been established, IN MY OPINION, Tintin is more suited to the animated world, and Indiana Jones is more suited to the live action world.
Morpheo is online now  
post #108 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 01:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Morpheo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Montreal by day, Paris by night...
Posts: 6,573
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 117 Post(s)
Liked: 306
Quote:
Originally Posted by MovieSwede View Post

To be fair, they were never intended to look 100% real life. But a mix between the comic look and real life look.

and they succeeded.
Morpheo is online now  
post #109 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 01:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RobertR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: California
Posts: 6,119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterTHX View Post



You were saying?

What are you saying? It's obvious he isn't real.
RobertR is offline  
post #110 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 01:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RobertR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: California
Posts: 6,119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post

ok so I posit that an image of a person is not a real person -


now that it's been established, IN MY OPINION, Tintin is more suited to the animated world, and Indiana Jones is more suited to the live action world.

I think the near-universal reaction to an animated Indiana Jones movie would be that it's a significant "reduction" from live action.
RobertR is offline  
post #111 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 03:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
mr. wally's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: land of the pumas
Posts: 3,812
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 47
how about gollum?

neflixis our nemesis
mr. wally is offline  
post #112 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 03:32 PM - Thread Starter
 
dvdmike007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 8,687
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr. wally View Post

how about gollum?

For acting, fantastic.
Quality? Not so much, nothing beats ilm especially when SWS was involved
dvdmike007 is offline  
post #113 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 05:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
PeterTHX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,906
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 64 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

What are you saying? It's obvious he isn't real.

Most people, myself included, thought it was the actor in a suit + makeup and perhaps just the tentacles on his face were enhanced.

Truth is, the entire character is CG with the on set footage of the actor used as reference...it wasn't mo-cap and even his eyes are CG.

My opinions do not reflect the policies of my company
PeterTHX is offline  
post #114 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 05:02 PM
AVS Special Member
 
PeterTHX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,906
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 64 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post

Davy Jones doesn't have human skin, that helps. Look at Jeff Bridges in Tron Legacy, was his virtual younger self convincing? not 100%. And the effect was amazing btw, but not truly convincing

It wasn't supposed to. When you first see him you're supposed to realize something is "off" about Sam's father.

Or are you referring to the "bedtime story" version in the beginning where they pretty much kept him in shadow?

My opinions do not reflect the policies of my company
PeterTHX is offline  
post #115 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 07:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
srw1000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 2,586
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post

Snow White? I think we had numerous live action versions already no? And a new one on its way with Kristen Stewart.

While one of the two new Snow White coming out may be good movies, it's hard to imagine them supplanting the Disney version in the minds of the public.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post

As for Pixar, maybe a few reasonably intelligent people over at Disney or Pixar (or another studio for instance) would find it hard to imagine too - because it would be silly! It all comes down to the concept of the story, would it work in a live action film? Would it work in a animated film? I don't think it would, Indiana Jones is Harrison Ford no matter what, and Bond is....a lot of people lol but he's still 'live'. Their stories belong to the real world, even when said stories make no sense (the fridge)

Toy Story was used as an example to challenge the claim that was put forth: Using real people and real locations will always trump animation, no matter how much those fascinated with technology for its own sake proselytize otherwise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post

Of all the titles you mentioned, I could be wrong but the adult ones were not exactly resounding successes, some of them reached the cult status but I guess if Lucasfilm produced an animated Indy they would have more than 'cult movie' in mind in terms of profits...

Are you defining success as artistic, critical, or by financial gain? In the short and non-exhaustive list there are examples that would meet any of those standards.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post

The Disney titles were successes *because* they were made for children. Otherwise do you think the 20-40 year olds would have run to the theaters to see it? Nope. Cocteau's Beauty And The Beast is still the best version of the story by far.

Yes, Disney markets their animated product to a specific audience. But that shouldn't be taken as proof that animation can only be made for children. Some of these films have a large crossover audience.

Take the movie Up, for example. Do you really think that the prologue was aimed solely at children? Are they fully capable of understanding and appreciating the life-long bond that Carl and Ellie shared?

As for Beauty and the Beast, that goes back to the question of what defines success.

Scott

srw1000 is offline  
post #116 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 07:14 PM
Senior Member
 
roadster-s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Montreal Canada
Posts: 365
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Tintin was a really entertaining movie, I enjoyed it

My dedicated home theater room:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
roadster-s is offline  
post #117 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 07:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
srw1000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 2,586
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

No, it's not merely my "bias" to say that animated representations of things aren't as convincing as the real things themselves. It's a simple fact. Actually, it's more than that--it's a tautology to say that reality is real and cartoons aren't. We don't live in Roger Rabbit land.

Where did this argument come from?

The purpose of cinema isn't necessarily to be a factual display of reality. The kinds of films were talking about are all fantasy, whether animated of shot in the real world. The key is the story and how the combination of visuals and soundtrack combine to create an experience that absorb the audience in that story.

Back to my earlier question, do the same standards also apply to other visual art forms? Photography of real people or real locations are always considered vastly superior to those that are drawn or hand-painted? After all, they would be more convincing. We don't live in a world consisting of oil and canvas.

Scott

srw1000 is offline  
post #118 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 07:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
lovinthehd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: OROR
Posts: 6,611
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 206 Post(s)
Liked: 780
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertR View Post

I think the near-universal reaction to an animated Indiana Jones movie would be that it's a significant "reduction" from live action.

That would all depend on the quality of the animated production. Like it was high art from Lucas in the first place, let alone Harrison Ford. Harrison can't do it anymore in any case, he's too old....maybe he could be in a dad role like Connery was.

lovinthehd is offline  
post #119 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 07:36 PM
AVS Special Member
 
srw1000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 2,586
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morpheo View Post

I think no one disputes the fact that both forms are just a representation of reality, therefore none of them is real. BUT, the animated medium suits more certain types of stories, the same for live action. @movieswede, I don't think anything can be made into an animation. Technically yes of course, but does it work all the time?

...Tintin was made for live action decades ago, and the film was not very good (Tintin and the Golden Fleece, 1961). Popeye too in 1980 (with Robin Williams!), the film just sucked. Certain characters are animated, others not. Indy is not. Tintin is perfect for the animated world.

So, exactly where does Batman fit in then? He started as a comic book character. By your logic above, was he meant to be animated? There are some Batman films that worked well as live action features. Does that diminish the animated material?

So, which is it? is Batman meant to be a live action character or an animated one?

Success hinges on the story and execution. There's no reason why a live action Tin Tin couldn't work, just as there's no reason why an animated Indiana Jones movie couldn't work.

Scott

srw1000 is offline  
post #120 of 166 Old 04-04-2012, 08:22 PM
AVS Special Member
 
RobertR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: California
Posts: 6,119
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 143 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by srw1000 View Post

Where did this argument come from?

It came from your notion of animating Harrison Ford to deal with the fact that he's too old to be Indy.

Quote:


Toy Story was used as an example to challenge the claim that was put forth: Using real people and real locations will always trump animation, no matter how much those fascinated with technology for its own sake proselytize otherwise.

The Toy Story characters aren't real people; they're pure fantasy (an animated talking toy can hardly be equated with a real person), so that example doesn't work.
RobertR is offline  
Reply Blu-ray Software

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off