Re: Re: Classics?
 

Do you not like Nosferatu or do you just have a problem with the restoration.

Even though people might not need to watch the films that started a trend, I cant say they are not worth watching because so many films have done the same, there is always a strange freshness that is hard to pinpoint about the films even if they are not terribly exciting.

I do not like any version of the original NOSFERATU, and believe me I've seen half a dozen over the years -- and the damn thing keeps getting longer every time I see it!

First there was the 16mm "condensed" version I saw in high school -- kind of like a Reader's Digest condensed book -- cut down to approximately forty-five minutes (no Renfield or Professor Van Helsing character).

Then there was the feature length version they used to show on PBS, but the projection speed was too fast, speeding up the action. Then the laserdisc and DVD fixed that problem, slowing the action back down.

Then there was the time I saw it with a live orchestra performing a recreation of the original music score. The print screened was from Germany (with German subtitles) and contained some footage not seen in export prints, and there was an intermission halfway through, just to drag out things even further.

In between there have been a couple of VHS tapes with new music added (including one with Goth-rock songs by Type-O Negative)

God, I've given that movie every chance, and I never want to see it again!

I thought that cgi effect was first used in "The Abyss"..then developed as time went by...:confused:

My key words there were "wide use". The Abyss helped develop the craft, but after JP anything with CG, good or bad, was considered cutting edge, for awhile. It's like the morphing effect in T-2. The technology existed for them to develop that software, but once they did everybody was morphing into something.

Jurassic Park set the standard for dinosaurs and other monster F/X for the films that followed, just like King Kong did for stop motion (even though other films used stop motion before that) and Godzilla did for guys in rubber suits.

hmm guess your right about that...have you seen "Young Sherlock Holmes" ? They used some kind of new computer animation there too....anyway shall I call you "iamragmar" or "ADOM"
:confused:

Actually we are two different people who chose the same avatar from the ones the forum provides. I am too lazy to shrink anything to the 100x100 limit or whatever it is and upload it.

The animation in Young Sherlock Holmes had a very stop motion look to it. I think that was the beginnings of good CG, where they give the CG models physical things to relate to. The dinos in JP were mostly patterned after the movement of real animals, not just animated by a computer cartoonist, which is one reason they look better than so many that follow.

the CG in the abyss certainly opened the door to new possibilities .. it was used to even greater extent in Terminator 2 ..

metallic morphing where reflections changed in the morphing surface appropriately ...
It looks amazing and can now take us places where we could never go properly before.

the charm of the old FX are cool in their own way - but i remember as a kid wishing they could make things look better..

And now they do ...
The trick is to just blend in the CGI where absolutely nessessary - complex monsters, alien landscapes, etc .... not use it to replace everything ...

..or they can try not to hide it...like in "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow" (2004) were CGI help the movie look more like a comic strip....
..and you know nearly every actor wants to act againts something(even a puppet) ...not against air (blue/green screen).....

I liked the way Sky Captian "embraced" the comic look of it's CGI. I wish HULK had done the same thing and had everything except the actors be CG, then the HULK would have blended in better.

Its just born a classic film.