I loved the experience. Pure cinema.
share3 hours ??? I can't handle it.
shareTo each their own. I will say, if you're gona watch a long movie, this is the one to watch. I prefer a tight 90 minute runtime in general but I found enough on screen to keep me interested. If you go in relying on just the plot to keep you entertained you prob won't like it.
sharewuss
shareI've seen it twice and I will likely see it one more time before it leaves the theatre. I certainly can't wait for it to be in my grubby paw when I buy the 4K version on disc.
shareGoddamn right. It’s a true cinematic work of art, if I do say so myself. Mesmerizing from start to finish.
On a related note, I get that the film’s length is excessive to others — not includ those with mostly unkind things to say about it — but to my mind it doesn’t feel like it’s too much. Yes, it takes a patient viewer to watch it because it is long and the pacing is rather slow. That said, I find the entire film engrossing and the complete opposite of tedious, so not for a second did I think the running time was unnecessary. Plus, experiencing it the way I believe it’s supposed to be (on a screen bigger than anyone’s living room) is spectacular.
Why? Because of the computer made cartoon scenes of flying over the cities? A 9 year old and ANY laptop can do that these days, no talent or skills needed. That disqualifies it. Show me a 9 year old that could produce the city in the 1982 movie WITHOUT a computer and I would be impressed.
https://www.blender.org/
So, thin plot overshadowed by "shiny, pretty" makes this a "masterpiece"???
I think the OP was just messing around anyway. :D
I'm really excited to see what you can do with blender. Please show us - if it is so easy...
I'm sorry to say --- you have no idea at all. The special effects were amazing and almost never looked digital. The city scenes made me wonder, if they used real models for some parts - because it looked soooo good.
Set pieces were amazing. The hologram "sex" blending scene was visually a work of art.
You have no Idea what it takes to make a film look that good.
Last film I visually enjoyed that much, was Gravity.
I know nothing about filmmaking. heh. okay. :D
CGI is not my interest. Google youtube to see what people are doing with it. I'm actually working to make things WITHOUT CGI, and THAT is a lot more fun!
CGI is photrealistic now. Why does that puzzle you?
Why even "FILM" ANYTHING anymore when you can CGI all of it? That would be a PIXAR movie. :D :D
90% of this could have been filmed PRACTICALLY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeYHDESZUF0
Yea, for CGI! adding more fake layers to EVERYTHING we see now.
I'm with you on one thing - filming practical and mostly without greenscreen, looks better - but good CGI isn't made with hitting a few buttons.
In most Blockbusters you can tell, when they use CGI - a lot of Marvel Films look bland at points - because nothing feels real. And then there are films like Blade Runner 2049, Gravity, Prometheus or Disctrict 9 which use a lot of CGI but it doesn't bother because it looks so good. That is a quality not easy achieved and depends on a lot of planning and a lot of time. Like filming practical effects does too.
Watch the Making of Gravity - I didn't know how much was CGI while watching it in the cinema - its incredible. But they devoted so much time in the special effects that they got this amazing quality. (almost 4 years)
And Pixar Movies never look real - it is way easier to have non realistic characters, because you won't get into the uncanny valley - like Tron with the young Jeff Bridges - for example.
My point about PIXAR is that it is ALL computer generated cartoon. Photorealistic CGI is the exact same thing: Generated cartoon with much higher detail. :(
sharethis movie is very far away from being a masterpiece, its hollywood plastic
shareIt's a very good movie, but not a masterpeice...
A bit too much of a set up to the next sequel and I thought it could have used a few more minutes towards the end...
Also, while the CGI is mostly photorealistic, it didn't move me... CGI is never spectacular as it reminds me of atari... The hologram stuff was only cool during the first scene in the rain as joi simulates the drops of water on her hand, then it was just normal. I liked that it didn't get in the way... I like CGI to be inoffensive rather than spectacular so that works...