In other news: Water is wet, the sky is blue, and a thread about a crap movie getting crap reviews will inevitably be attacked by fanboys because the critics obviously can't be trusted because they didn't bother to give the movie a chance because it's based on a video game. Or maybe it's Disney's fault again. I guess that petition to force Disney to stop paying off all of the reviewers to crap on every non Disney movie just didn't work. But seriously though, how could anyone actually be surprised by this?
Video game movie not up to much. In other news, sky remains blue.
*sigh*
I wasn't expecting greatness, the preview footage made it clear we weren't getting anything like that but I had dared to hope for a fun romp.
Meanwhile, comment sections are filling up with denial from people who haven't seen the movie but know beyond a doubt that it must be awesome. Also, water remains wet.
Did you do this on purpose, or is this another case of two scientists working on opposite sides of the world both independently and unwittingly inventing the exact same snarky comment?
OT: You mean that the movie isn't entirely CG animation? Why would anybody think that having live actors in a Warcraft movie was a good idea?
The problem is if the movie is fully animated in CGI including CGI humans than it would be considered animation. And sadly we live in an animation age ghetto where unless your Disney or SUperheroes and look cartoony as fuck and a Comedy, you will never be taken seriously.
There have been attempts to make more serious, for more older people animation and none of them became box office smashes.
In other news: Water is wet, the sky is blue, and a thread about a crap movie getting crap reviews will inevitably be attacked by fanboys because the critics obviously can't be trusted because they didn't bother to give the movie a chance because it's based on a video game. Or maybe it's Disney's fault again. I guess that petition to force Disney to stop paying off all of the reviewers to crap on every non Disney movie just didn't work. But seriously though, how could anyone actually be surprised by this?
Video game movie not up to much. In other news, sky remains blue.
*sigh*
I wasn't expecting greatness, the preview footage made it clear we weren't getting anything like that but I had dared to hope for a fun romp.
Meanwhile, comment sections are filling up with denial from people who haven't seen the movie but know beyond a doubt that it must be awesome. Also, water remains wet.
Did you do this on purpose, or is this another case of two scientists working on opposite sides of the world both independently and unwittingly inventing the exact same snarky comment?
OT: You mean that the movie isn't entirely CG animation? Why would anybody think that having live actors in a Warcraft movie was a good idea?
The problem is if the movie is fully animated in CGI including CGI humans than it would be considered animation. And sadly we live in an animation age ghetto where unless your Disney or SUperheroes and look cartoony as fuck and a Comedy, you will never be taken seriously.
There have been attempts to make more serious, for more older people animation and none of them became box office smashes.
Beowolf was pretty crap, as was the CG involved. As for non-Disney animation being taken seriously:
Anomalisia
Boy and the World
Shaun the Sheep
When Marnie was There
The Boxtrolls
How to Train Your Dragon 2
Song of the Sea
The Tale of Princess Kaguya
All nominees for best animated feature Oscar over the past 2 years. Not including the LEGO Movie, which should have won two years ago. That's a lot of liked and respected non-Disney animated movies.
In other news: Water is wet, the sky is blue, and a thread about a crap movie getting crap reviews will inevitably be attacked by fanboys because the critics obviously can't be trusted because they didn't bother to give the movie a chance because it's based on a video game. Or maybe it's Disney's fault again. I guess that petition to force Disney to stop paying off all of the reviewers to crap on every non Disney movie just didn't work. But seriously though, how could anyone actually be surprised by this?
Video game movie not up to much. In other news, sky remains blue.
*sigh*
I wasn't expecting greatness, the preview footage made it clear we weren't getting anything like that but I had dared to hope for a fun romp.
Meanwhile, comment sections are filling up with denial from people who haven't seen the movie but know beyond a doubt that it must be awesome. Also, water remains wet.
Did you do this on purpose, or is this another case of two scientists working on opposite sides of the world both independently and unwittingly inventing the exact same snarky comment?
OT: You mean that the movie isn't entirely CG animation? Why would anybody think that having live actors in a Warcraft movie was a good idea?
The problem is if the movie is fully animated in CGI including CGI humans than it would be considered animation. And sadly we live in an animation age ghetto where unless your Disney or SUperheroes and look cartoony as fuck and a Comedy, you will never be taken seriously.
There have been attempts to make more serious, for more older people animation and none of them became box office smashes.
Beowolf was pretty crap, as was the CG involved. As for non-Disney animation being taken seriously:
Anomalisia
Boy and the World
Shaun the Sheep
When Marnie was There
The Boxtrolls
How to Train Your Dragon 2
Song of the Sea
The Tale of Princess Kaguya
All nominees for best animated feature Oscar over the past 2 years. Not including the LEGO Movie, which should have won two years ago. That's a lot of liked and respected non-Disney animated movies.
I'm curious as to how the Uncanny Valley, a phenomenon that's fairly well documented, is bullshit. Are you saying its not a thing, or that we all need to get over it?
I'm curious as to how the Uncanny Valley, a phenomenon that's fairly well documented, is bullshit. Are you saying its not a thing, or that we all need to get over it?
Well that is what I like to know because so far when it comes to Photo-Realism I am rarely bothered by it and even if it looks fake I accept but I can appreciate the amoung of work it probably went to making a Photo-Realistic thing like a Human Being for example.
I come from the perspective of a guy that has played many video games and video games have tackled the more Photo-Realisitc animation for a LONG time now. Not once do I ever hear people complain about the Uncanny Valley in the graphics of Video Games especially ones that have a more photo-realisitc look. I mean look at games like the Uncharted games:
Characters like Nathen Drake in that game looks rather photo-realistic in my eyes. And the graphics were praised for how Photo Realistic it looked.
But my other reason I call Uncanny Valley out on things is because I just see a beauty in Photo-Realism in CGI animations.
My interest for it, again, started when I first saw the cinematics for Warcraft 3 (and games like Final Fantasy 8 and 10)
And that is what confuses me is that for videos games people praises it, but for animated movies, they call it uncanny valley and creepy and distracting. Even to something like Beowulf and A Christmas Carol (both movies that I like) that is completely CGI so the excuse that it looks fake does not hold wait when there is no live action thing to be found.
In other news: Water is wet, the sky is blue, and a thread about a crap movie getting crap reviews will inevitably be attacked by fanboys because the critics obviously can't be trusted because they didn't bother to give the movie a chance because it's based on a video game. Or maybe it's Disney's fault again. I guess that petition to force Disney to stop paying off all of the reviewers to crap on every non Disney movie just didn't work. But seriously though, how could anyone actually be surprised by this?
Video game movie not up to much. In other news, sky remains blue.
*sigh*
I wasn't expecting greatness, the preview footage made it clear we weren't getting anything like that but I had dared to hope for a fun romp.
Meanwhile, comment sections are filling up with denial from people who haven't seen the movie but know beyond a doubt that it must be awesome. Also, water remains wet.
Did you do this on purpose, or is this another case of two scientists working on opposite sides of the world both independently and unwittingly inventing the exact same snarky comment?
OT: You mean that the movie isn't entirely CG animation? Why would anybody think that having live actors in a Warcraft movie was a good idea?
The problem is if the movie is fully animated in CGI including CGI humans than it would be considered animation. And sadly we live in an animation age ghetto where unless your Disney or SUperheroes and look cartoony as fuck and a Comedy, you will never be taken seriously.
There have been attempts to make more serious, for more older people animation and none of them became box office smashes.
Beowolf was pretty crap, as was the CG involved. As for non-Disney animation being taken seriously:
Anomalisia
Boy and the World
Shaun the Sheep
When Marnie was There
The Boxtrolls
How to Train Your Dragon 2
Song of the Sea
The Tale of Princess Kaguya
All nominees for best animated feature Oscar over the past 2 years. Not including the LEGO Movie, which should have won two years ago. That's a lot of liked and respected non-Disney animated movies.
Because the stop-motion characters in Anomalisia can actually show feelings and emotions instead of looking like the (ironically) lifeless puppets from Beowulf. And Beowulf is not photo-realistic, not by a long shot, and if it were, then what is the point of animating it instead of just doing it live action. If your complaint about animated movies is that they don't look "real" enough, then why are you watching animated movies? Just watch "real" movies.
Also, you look a little silly playing the "snobbery" card when you claim that the lack of quality non funny or "cartoony" animation results in us living in an "animation age ghetto", which quite frankly actually makes no sense.
In other news: Water is wet, the sky is blue, and a thread about a crap movie getting crap reviews will inevitably be attacked by fanboys because the critics obviously can't be trusted because they didn't bother to give the movie a chance because it's based on a video game. Or maybe it's Disney's fault again. I guess that petition to force Disney to stop paying off all of the reviewers to crap on every non Disney movie just didn't work. But seriously though, how could anyone actually be surprised by this?
Video game movie not up to much. In other news, sky remains blue.
*sigh*
I wasn't expecting greatness, the preview footage made it clear we weren't getting anything like that but I had dared to hope for a fun romp.
Meanwhile, comment sections are filling up with denial from people who haven't seen the movie but know beyond a doubt that it must be awesome. Also, water remains wet.
Did you do this on purpose, or is this another case of two scientists working on opposite sides of the world both independently and unwittingly inventing the exact same snarky comment?
OT: You mean that the movie isn't entirely CG animation? Why would anybody think that having live actors in a Warcraft movie was a good idea?
The problem is if the movie is fully animated in CGI including CGI humans than it would be considered animation. And sadly we live in an animation age ghetto where unless your Disney or SUperheroes and look cartoony as fuck and a Comedy, you will never be taken seriously.
There have been attempts to make more serious, for more older people animation and none of them became box office smashes.
Beowolf was pretty crap, as was the CG involved. As for non-Disney animation being taken seriously:
Anomalisia
Boy and the World
Shaun the Sheep
When Marnie was There
The Boxtrolls
How to Train Your Dragon 2
Song of the Sea
The Tale of Princess Kaguya
All nominees for best animated feature Oscar over the past 2 years. Not including the LEGO Movie, which should have won two years ago. That's a lot of liked and respected non-Disney animated movies.
Because the stop-motion characters in Anomalisia can actually show feelings and emotions instead of looking like the (ironically) lifeless puppets from Beowulf. And Beowulf is not photo-realistic, not by a long shot, and if it were, then what is the point of animating it instead of just doing it live action. If your complaint about animated movies is that they don't look "real" enough, then why are you watching animated movies? Just watch "real" movies.
Also, you look a little silly playing the "snobbery" card when you claim that the lack of quality non funny or "cartoony" animation results in us living in an "animation age ghetto", which quite frankly actually makes no sense.
And I am happy that movies like Anomalisa exists. But I wish more of them can exists.
Now regarding Beowulf's CGI. Well the problem with making it live action would produced the same problem you have with Warcraft.
The live action actors would look out of place next to CGI monsters like Grendel and the Dragon and that whole Sea Monsters Sequence would be impossible to film in live action.
And the idea that it being all animated gives you complete freedom in cinematography and unrestricted use of the director's and storyboard artist's imagination.
I already explain my facisnation of photo realism in CGI above.
I'm curious as to how the Uncanny Valley, a phenomenon that's fairly well documented, is bullshit. Are you saying its not a thing, or that we all need to get over it?
Well that is what I like to know because so far when it comes to Photo-Realism I am rarely bothered by it and even if it looks fake I accept but I can appreciate the amoung of work it probably went to making a Photo-Realistic thing like a Human Being for example.
I come from the perspective of a guy that has played many video games and video games have tackled the more Photo-Realisitc animation for a LONG time now. Not once do I ever hear people complain about the Uncanny Valley in the graphics of Video Games especially ones that have a more photo-realisitc look. I mean look at games like the Uncharted games:
Characters like Nathen Drake in that game looks rather photo-realistic in my eyes. And the graphics were praised for how Photo Realistic it looked.
But my other reason I call Uncanny Valley out on things is because I just see a beauty in Photo-Realism in CGI animations.
My interest for it, again, started when I first saw the cinematics for Warcraft 3 (and games like Final Fantasy 8 and 10)
And that is what confuses me is that for videos games people praises it, but for animated movies, they call it uncanny valley and creepy and distracting. Even to something like Beowulf and A Christmas Carol (both movies that I like) that is completely CGI so the excuse that it looks fake does not hold wait when there is no live action thing to be found.
The 'Uncanny Valley Response' is triggered when something looks close enough to humans to trigger a person's expectations of what a human is supposed to look like, and move like, but then that thing fails to live up to those expectations. When the thing fails to follow the 'rules' of what someone expects, it triggers a revulsion response. It's not even limited to CGI or robots - Dead bodies live on the edges of the valley.
Video games, while approaching 'photo-realistic' levels of graphics, aren't close enough to trigger that response in most people. When I look at Nathan Drake, I can quite clearly see he's fake, despite all the wonderful facial lines and his defined hair. Thus, I don't expect him to act or move like a human being (Though, to be fair, they did do a pretty good job of animating characters in that game, from what I've seen).
On the other hand, we have Beowulf, and while you can make the claim it's less sophisticated then Uncharted (I wouldn't argue against it), it actually does use real people as direct input from actors, informing the character. And it shows when it comes to viewer response - Something about the characters hits that part of the brain that says 'Human,' but then everything else hits the part that says 'Nope.'
If it doesn't do that for you, great. Good for you. But this 'you're all wrong because I don't feel the same way' line of thought is caustic. It's the same failed thought process that leads people to think being gay is wrong because it makes them feel icky - How you feel doesn't invalidate how other people feel. And while opinions on the Uncanny Valley don't have such far reaching and important impacts as opinions on homosexual behavior, the thought process is still aggravating and unproductive.
EDIT:
Samtemdo8 said:
You do know what the Animation Age Ghetto is right?
These days, the ghetto appears to have almost completely collapsed, due to the successes of anime and such shows as South Park, Family Guy, The Simpsons, Rick and Morty, and Futurama, though these show's reliance on Vulgar Humor has led to a new misconception that all animated shows for adults are self-consciously tasteless comedies.
I'm curious as to how the Uncanny Valley, a phenomenon that's fairly well documented, is bullshit. Are you saying its not a thing, or that we all need to get over it?
Well that is what I like to know because so far when it comes to Photo-Realism I am rarely bothered by it and even if it looks fake I accept but I can appreciate the amoung of work it probably went to making a Photo-Realistic thing like a Human Being for example.
I come from the perspective of a guy that has played many video games and video games have tackled the more Photo-Realisitc animation for a LONG time now. Not once do I ever hear people complain about the Uncanny Valley in the graphics of Video Games especially ones that have a more photo-realisitc look. I mean look at games like the Uncharted games:
Characters like Nathen Drake in that game looks rather photo-realistic in my eyes. And the graphics were praised for how Photo Realistic it looked.
But my other reason I call Uncanny Valley out on things is because I just see a beauty in Photo-Realism in CGI animations.
My interest for it, again, started when I first saw the cinematics for Warcraft 3 (and games like Final Fantasy 8 and 10)
And that is what confuses me is that for videos games people praises it, but for animated movies, they call it uncanny valley and creepy and distracting. Even to something like Beowulf and A Christmas Carol (both movies that I like) that is completely CGI so the excuse that it looks fake does not hold wait when there is no live action thing to be found.
The 'Uncanny Valley Response' is triggered when something looks close enough to humans to trigger a person's expectations of what a human is supposed to look like, and move like, but then that thing fails to live up to those expectations. When the thing fails to follow the 'rules' of what someone expects, it triggers a revulsion response. It's not even limited to CGI or robots - Dead bodies live on the edges of the valley.
Video games, while approaching 'photo-realistic' levels of graphics, aren't close enough to trigger that response in most people. When I look at Nathan Drake, I can quite clearly see he's fake, despite all the wonderful facial lines and his defined hair. Thus, I don't expect him to act or move like a human being (Though, to be fair, they did do a pretty good job of animating characters in that game, from what I've seen).
On the other hand, we have Beowulf, and while you can make the claim it's less sophisticated then Uncharted (I wouldn't argue against it), it actually does use real people as direct input from actors, informing the character. And it shows when it comes to viewer response - Something about the characters hits that part of the brain that says 'Human,' but then everything else hits the part that says 'Nope.'
If it doesn't do that for you, great. Good for you. But this 'you're all wrong because I don't feel the same way' line of thought is caustic. It's the same failed thought process that leads people to think being gay is wrong because it makes them feel icky - How you feel doesn't invalidate how other people feel. And while opinions on the Uncanny Valley don't have such far reaching and important impacts as opinions on homosexual behavior, the thought process is still aggravating and unproductive.
EDIT:
Samtemdo8 said:
You do know what the Animation Age Ghetto is right?
These days, the ghetto appears to have almost completely collapsed, due to the successes of anime and such shows as South Park, Family Guy, The Simpsons, Rick and Morty, and Futurama, though these show's reliance on Vulgar Humor has led to a new misconception that all animated shows for adults are self-consciously tasteless comedies.
The thing is I am hoping and waiting for it to COMPLETELY collapse because I agree that most adult animation is are just "self-consciously tasteless comedies"
Hopefully the upcoming Samurai Jack for Adult Swim and the R Rated Batman the Killing Joke will finally collapse it.
If it doesn't do that for you, great. Good for you. But this 'you're all wrong because I don't feel the same way' line of thought is caustic. It's the same failed thought process that leads people to think being gay is wrong because it makes them feel icky - How you feel doesn't invalidate how other people feel. And while opinions on the Uncanny Valley don't have such far reaching and important impacts as opinions on homosexual behavior, the thought process is still aggravating and unproductive.
As much as I and Sam argue I don't think that's a fair comparison. He's not trying to impede on anyone's rights, or even prevent movies he doesn't like from coming out, and he has stated on numerous occasions he's fine with other people liking whatever they like. He just happens to have shitty taste in movies which, while unfortunate for him, doesn't affect anyone else in any way.
Silentpony said:
Come on guys, can't we all just agree they should have made a Starcraft movie instead?
And either go full CGI like Final Fantasy Spirits Within, or don't and just make it like Starship Troopers.
Seriously this. Especially when everyone trying to prove how awesome Warcraft is is just using CGI animations to make their point, so just make a feature length CG movie. And if you say "but I want a live action version", well you're not getting a live action version. You're getting live action humans spliced unconvincingly into a CG movie.
Either you go full CGI and make a good job with it, like Overwatch, or you go for real actors who can act.
The botched mix that is the half-CGI cartoon half-movie WoW movie monstrosity, just doesn't sit well with me.
Either you go full CGI and make a good job with it, like Overwatch, or you go for real actors who can act.
The botched mix that is the half-CGI cartoon half-movie WoW movie monstrosity, just doesn't sit well with me.
If it doesn't do that for you, great. Good for you. But this 'you're all wrong because I don't feel the same way' line of thought is caustic. It's the same failed thought process that leads people to think being gay is wrong because it makes them feel icky - How you feel doesn't invalidate how other people feel. And while opinions on the Uncanny Valley don't have such far reaching and important impacts as opinions on homosexual behavior, the thought process is still aggravating and unproductive.
As much as I and Sam argue I don't think that's a fair comparison. He's not trying to impede on anyone's rights, or even prevent movies he doesn't like from coming out, and he has stated on numerous occasions he's fine with other people liking whatever they like. He just happens to have shitty taste in movies which, while unfortunate for him, doesn't affect anyone else in any way.
One man's trash is another man's treasure. I like Beowulf, I never said it was the best movie of all time like it beats the best movies in history like the Godfather and Saving Private Ryan and Robocop 1, I just think its a good movie. Same goes for say for the Pirates of the Carribean sequal with the exception of 4.
And sometimes one man's treasure is another man's trash for example I just really dislike The Force Awakens. I just did not find the characters interesting. Another movie I was dissipointed in is Straight Outta Compton and that movie got glowing praise from everyone yet it just fell off the mark for me.
And there are times we both agree for I like Robocop 1 alot and I dislike the remake (But I still think Robocop 2 is the worst of all)
Either you go full CGI and make a good job with it, like Overwatch, or you go for real actors who can act.
The botched mix that is the half-CGI cartoon half-movie WoW movie monstrosity, just doesn't sit well with me.
Either you go full CGI and make a good job with it, like Overwatch, or you go for real actors who can act.
The botched mix that is the half-CGI cartoon half-movie WoW movie monstrosity, just doesn't sit well with me.
Well, yeah that would work. To be fair to Duncan Jones though, he didn't write the Warcraft script and Avatar had a budget about 2.5x larger than Warcraft.
Either you go full CGI and make a good job with it, like Overwatch, or you go for real actors who can act.
The botched mix that is the half-CGI cartoon half-movie WoW movie monstrosity, just doesn't sit well with me.
Well, yeah that would work. To be fair to Duncan Jones though, he didn't write the Warcraft script and Avatar had a budget about 2.5x larger than Warcraft.
Not to mention that James Cameron has way more audience pull than Warcraft does. Plenty of people went to go see Avatar simply on the hype of "one of the greatest Director's of our generation's new movie, over 20 years in the making!' thing they did. They were like "Hey, I like Cameron's other movies! They were great! This will probably be great too!" Boom, ticket sale. Nevermind that the movie isn't actually that good, as anything other than a technical movie. And I would question the "real actors who can act", line. While I agree the actors in Avatar are good actors, the shitty dialogue they were given....well...even the best actors can only do so much with a turd script.
Then you have Warcraft, which is still very niche, despite being the grandfather of MMO's. Anyone who isn't at all interested in video games (and there are a lot of them), aren't likely to go see it. They don't care. Some will sure, but not enough to make a huge dent in sales. So you're limited to the WoW/Nerd community.
I plan on seeing the movie, because I think it looks semi-decent, and I don't have the problem everyone else seems to have with the CGI/Live action hybrid thing. Nor do I have a problem with them taking liberties with the muddied to all hell Warcraft storyline.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
