Amazing footage... (FX reel)
-
Now Available: Tech Talk Podcast with Scott Wilkinson, Episode 19 Click here for details.
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
I somehow doubt that doing it on a studio lot with greenscreen is more expensive than flying actors and crew and equipment to locations all over the world and then paying for filming/location rights and security and food and transportation and closing off streets, etc.
If it was cheaper to do that, then that's what would be done. And for the most part it's seemless to the viewer (I am talking background locations...obviously CGI characters and some effects have a ways to go yet).
I just don't get the whole "It's a shame" thing.
I somehow doubt that doing it on a studio lot with greenscreen is more expensive than flying actors and crew and equipment to locations all over the world and then paying for filming/location rights and security and food and transportation and closing off streets, etc.
If it was cheaper to do that, then that's what would be done. And for the most part it's seemless to the viewer (I am talking background locations...obviously CGI characters and some effects have a ways to go yet).
I just don't get the whole "It's a shame" thing.
Soon the whole world will be a green screen maaan.. the whole world is lie!!
*puff* *toke* *exhale*
I agree with the cost effectiveness, but to me it's the same reason that parts of the Matrix sequels and Indy 5 and others are such a shame (not the only reason mind you).. real locations, people, stunts, etc replaced with something completely virtual yet presented as real or natural. This isn't Avatar.. this is a NY crime drama (or DC legal drama, or urban action thriller, etc)!
The most appalling (and impressive) one was the chick walking down the street who then stops abruptly and turns around to look at a newsstand. The only thing real was her, her friend, and the newsstand and it was all shot on a sunny day outside a studio backlot!
I understand and even agree with the benefits here for filming this way (especially for a TV show), but it doesn't change the fact that it's a big letdown and an overal detraction.
Soon the whole world will be a green screen maaan.. the whole world is lie!!
*puff* *toke* *exhale*
I agree with the cost effectiveness, but to me it's the same reason that parts of the Matrix sequels and Indy 5 and others are such a shame (not the only reason mind you).. real locations, people, stunts, etc replaced with something completely virtual yet presented as real or natural. This isn't Avatar.. this is a NY crime drama (or DC legal drama, or urban action thriller, etc)!
The most appalling (and impressive) one was the chick walking down the street who then stops abruptly and turns around to look at a newsstand. The only thing real was her, her friend, and the newsstand and it was all shot on a sunny day outside a studio backlot!
I understand and even agree with the benefits here for filming this way (especially for a TV show), but it doesn't change the fact that it's a big letdown and an overal detraction.
Joined
·
11,114 Posts
+1
Especially when you can create a world any way you want. CGI will only get better, which I believe will give the viewer an even better experience.
Movies aren't real, and I think you've gotten beyond that. Or do you roll your eyes every time someone gets stabbed or shot? How about when two cars crash into each other? What about the passionate sex you see on the screen? Do those lies bug you?
![]()
Animations - I know you'd never watch one of those.
![]()
Its ALL an illusion, just focus on the story and don't get so heady.
You'd better get used to it or find something else to be entertained by, because CGI is here to stay.
![]()
![]()
+1
Especially when you can create a world any way you want. CGI will only get better, which I believe will give the viewer an even better experience.
Movies aren't real, and I think you've gotten beyond that. Or do you roll your eyes every time someone gets stabbed or shot? How about when two cars crash into each other? What about the passionate sex you see on the screen? Do those lies bug you?
You'd better get used to it or find something else to be entertained by, because CGI is here to stay.
Oh I understand that completely.. but I think there's a real difference between the "fake" blood and acting when someone gets stabbed or shot versus the entire location, surroundings, items, elements, and even freaking people being fake.
I'm not saying it ruins a TV show (like 24, seeing Jack not *actually* in front of the White House) but just that there's a distinct atmosphere of a lack of authenticity about it that doesnt resonate in the other examples you gave.
I'm not saying it ruins a TV show (like 24, seeing Jack not *actually* in front of the White House) but just that there's a distinct atmosphere of a lack of authenticity about it that doesnt resonate in the other examples you gave.
The line is getting blurry... I doubt most people could pick out a well done green or blue screen anymore, including that shot of 24. When watching that (on disc) I was wondering how they got all the permits!
I think the hard part is for the actors, it is easier to act to reality, so maybe this will simply expand the split between great actors and poor actors.
The line is getting blurry... I doubt most people could pick out a well done green or blue screen anymore, including that shot of 24. When watching that (on disc) I was wondering how they got all the permits!
I think the hard part is for the actors, it is easier to act to reality, so maybe this will simply expand the split between great actors and poor actors.
I guess I don't understand why that's appalling to you
![]()
Is it appalling while your'e watching the movie (which I would bet 99.99% of people wouldn't even be able to tell it was green screen), or is it in hindsight when you watch the "making of" and see it was green screen? Or are you appalled that you are fooled by it? I mean that's the purpose of special effects...to fool you into thinking something is real that isn't (be it explosions, gunshots, blood spray, spaceships, aliens, etc). If anything, I am left impressed by stuff like that, not appalled.
I just don't get it (seriously). It makes no difference to me if they did it on a lot or real location if it looks like a real location. Like the one with 2 guys sitting on the Lincoln Memorial steps. It's seemless, and would be near impossible to get a shot of a near-empty mall on any given day...
Do you get upset when you find out they use rain machines instead of waiting for natural rain? I mean, it's fake rain!
![]()
I would also point out that locations have been fake for years. You don't think Archie Bunker's living room was a real house, do you? And they put a studio audience in the next room? M*A*S*H* wasn't filmed in Korea either
![]()
I guess I don't understand why that's appalling to you
Is it appalling while your'e watching the movie (which I would bet 99.99% of people wouldn't even be able to tell it was green screen), or is it in hindsight when you watch the "making of" and see it was green screen? Or are you appalled that you are fooled by it? I mean that's the purpose of special effects...to fool you into thinking something is real that isn't (be it explosions, gunshots, blood spray, spaceships, aliens, etc). If anything, I am left impressed by stuff like that, not appalled.
I just don't get it (seriously). It makes no difference to me if they did it on a lot or real location if it looks like a real location. Like the one with 2 guys sitting on the Lincoln Memorial steps. It's seemless, and would be near impossible to get a shot of a near-empty mall on any given day...
Do you get upset when you find out they use rain machines instead of waiting for natural rain? I mean, it's fake rain!
I would also point out that locations have been fake for years. You don't think Archie Bunker's living room was a real house, do you? And they put a studio audience in the next room? M*A*S*H* wasn't filmed in Korea either
For lack of a better definition.. I guess it's just the principle of making the scene in general. I find it unsettling that they seem to not even "try".. I can see the head honchos now:
"You want to film in NYC! Pfft! Just take the chick and the guy and reuse an old newsstand from the prop department.. go out back during lunch our and get someone to hold up the green screen and make it happen! Jeez.. NYC.. next thing I know you'll want footage of a real airplane and real explosions and even a real animal! Hahaha!"
"You want to film in NYC! Pfft! Just take the chick and the guy and reuse an old newsstand from the prop department.. go out back during lunch our and get someone to hold up the green screen and make it happen! Jeez.. NYC.. next thing I know you'll want footage of a real airplane and real explosions and even a real animal! Hahaha!"
Joined
·
30,375 Posts
Most TV shows that are set in NYC are actually filmed in LA. So, yes, not only would it be prohibitively expensive to fly the entire cast and crew out to New York for a couple pick-up shots on the sidewalk, it would also significantly delay the production schedule for the rest of the episode. TV shows are already on tight enough schedules and budgets as it is. There's no time or money for a waste like that when it could be more easily shot on the studio backlot.
I have to say, this is a very strange argument coming from you.
Most TV shows that are set in NYC are actually filmed in LA. So, yes, not only would it be prohibitively expensive to fly the entire cast and crew out to New York for a couple pick-up shots on the sidewalk, it would also significantly delay the production schedule for the rest of the episode. TV shows are already on tight enough schedules and budgets as it is. There's no time or money for a waste like that when it could be more easily shot on the studio backlot.
I have to say, this is a very strange argument coming from you.
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
