Badmovies.org Forum

Movies => Bad Movies => Topic started by: Chadzilla on March 05, 2001, 08:57:56 PM



Title: CGI thought
Post by: Chadzilla on March 05, 2001, 08:57:56 PM
Seems to me that the potential for CGI has not yet been fully explored.  My guess is that, eventually, an individual (or team of individuals) will make that important breakthrough that will show just how truly incredible this special effects technology can be.  This person (or persons) will be to CGi what Albert Whitlock was to matte painting and Ray Harryhausen was to stop motion or Stan Winston was to animatronics.  As with matte work, stop motion, animatronic, and make-up effects I have seen some flawless CGI and some really, really bad stuff.  But I have yet to see someone bring personality and heart to it, CGI remains cold and two dimensional, but I also think that it is strictly a matter of time before that step from simple effects work to something magical will be made.

What do you think?


Title: Re: CGI thought
Post by: Mofo Rising on March 05, 2001, 09:48:52 PM
I think you should check out www.finalfantasy.com.


Title: Re: CGI thought
Post by: Squishy on March 06, 2001, 04:24:53 AM
While I hate his movie with a passion--and I hate his character with a bowel movement--and the CGI throughout the film were not always 100%spot-on--when are they ever?--for two hours plus I accepted JarJar Binks as a real "actor," more real than some, if not most, of his flesh-and-blood co-stars. I never want to see him again, but I never once looked at him and said, "Wow, what a great effect!" Instead, I said "Jeeeeez, this guy sucks donkey balls." Perhaps this is the true success of the otherwise utterly loathsome "Episode One."

The very final shot of the equally bad "Jurassic Park: The Lost World" was also a mind-blower; I could watch that pteranodon over and over again. You could see the blood vessels in its wing membranes, for crying out loud.

Like any style of special effect, when enough time and money are available and balanced, CGI can be fantastic--but like any style of special effect, one shouldn't expect them to (a) be flawless, and (b) carry a turd script.

Yo, Emmerlich, Devlin, Spielberg and Lucas--you readin' that?


Title: Re: CGI thought
Post by: flangepart on March 06, 2001, 04:01:16 PM
JarJar Binks...I Will put him on a bullseye next time i go to the range,Do you hear me,George?! That said...I agree,Squishy....Lighting,movement,body language,it all came together.Resaulted in a Character people tend to aim at-i mean dislike...did i mention bullseyes? oh,good. Their easy to make,in case anyone else need some...


Title: Re: Jar-Jar Binks
Post by: Chadzilla on March 06, 2001, 04:11:37 PM
You guys do not want to know how long my wife and I argued about whether or not Jar-Jar was a guy in a suit (she was convinced he was a black man in a suit, sorry George but the character was racist as all get out) or a computer generated image.


Title: Re: Jar-Jar Binks
Post by: Abby on March 06, 2001, 05:46:20 PM
I don't get it ... if the character Jar Jar was played by a black fellow, developed by a black fellow, and in many cases written by a back fellow (the actor takes the blame for the "Exsqueeze me" and nearly alll of the dialogue; he also says he really digs Jamaican culture and purposely added the flavor), then how can it be racist? Just because the actor's own culture comes through in his character portrayal doesn't mean it's racist. When did cultural characteristics become such a bad thing? It's not as if people will equate Jamaicans with long frog-like tongues and underwater cities after seeing "Episode 1."

So yeah, Jar Jar was indeed a guy in a suit who was later replaced by a CGI figure.

The Federation goons in Episode 1 ... that's another story.

And whoever mentioned Final Fantasy was right ... that flick is going to break ground, even if the story sucks. Then again, Titan AE looked pretty slick, too.


Title: Re: Jar-Jar Stinks
Post by: Squishy on March 06, 2001, 06:14:36 PM
Funny thing about JarJar's "meesa suck bantha poodoo massa shonuf yowsa yowsa" dialog; if it was all personally cultivated by Mr. Best for the character he played, why do ALL "dem pipples" speak the same way? ...because Mr. Best got a big fat check to fall on his sword in place of his General (or, as JarJar would say, massa), I'd wager.

I honestly don't know how this stuff made it all the way onscreen. Were people too awed by or afraid of Lucas to protest? Was Lucas asleep at the wheel, supervising the effects and ignoring the dialog rushes? Does he have a secret desire to sabotage himself? Or did he just want to test the theory someone put forth, back in 1980 or so, that people would consume cow dung if it came wrapped in a package with the "Star Wars" logo on it?

(Check out the character names as listed in "Episode 2"s IMDb profile (http://www.imbd.com) for more examples of Lucas' subtle touch. Cough.)


Title: Re: Jar-Jar Stinks
Post by: Abby on March 06, 2001, 09:14:19 PM
According to Amhad Best (I think that's his name) he asked Lucas if he could develop Jar Jar ... from Jar Jar spawned the rest of the species. He bragged about this before the film came out ... before Jar Jar bombed.

There's a book called "Coons, Mulattoes, Mammies and Bucks" about blacks in cinema. It pretty much accuses every single black actor who ever appeared onscreen of playing the "white man's" game by playing stereotypes. Whoopie Goldberg, Spike Lee. You name it, they sold out.

Frankly, I find that line of thinking more offensive than the "n" word.

But we're not talking about "the n" word. We're talking about a Jamaican accent portrayed by a black fellow who really digs Jamaica. We're not even talking about a character who smokes big joints and sways to Island tunes. The fact that the character is 'comic relief' is what gets people upset, I guess.

Weird Al's old song "Gonna Buy Me A Condo" is racist too.


Title: Re: Jar-Jar Stinks
Post by: Nathan on March 07, 2001, 01:15:15 PM
What's even oder is that, when all the calls of "Racist stereotype!" began echoing over Episode I, at least half of those complaining derided Jar-Jar as being a slur against East Indians.

You know, Jamaicans, East Indians, they're so close and all.  All those non-whites look the same, right?

I loathed Episode I as much as the next guy, but I think some people were simply falling all over themselves to find something deep to hate.  It makes about as much sense as castigating the original Star Wars for it's anti-African-American mesasge (didn't you realize the racist motives behind using James Earl Jones' voice?)

Nathan
(And damn Brian Blessed for contributing to the stereotype of big-bearded British Shakespearean actors!)Abby wrote:


Title: Re: Jar-Jar Stinks
Post by: FLANGEPART on March 07, 2001, 04:07:42 PM
Tell me what you think.  It seems the problim,my friends, is not in our movie stars,but in ourselves. Much as i ...dislike...JarJar Binks, lets remember....He is suposed to be an alien character, of a fictional species, in a clearly(?) Defined place and time. The film, By Its Nature!...is playing what if? As sci-if/fanticy is all about. The problim, i think, is how mutch baggage we all bring to the play. What if JarJar had spoken like everyone else? Lingua-galatic, so to speak. Could that have been a weakness in the mecanics of telling the story? Maby,if his cultural heritage was somehow  important to the resolution of the story. Do you guys think it was, cause i don't. If true, then his character traits were only window dressing, "local flavor", but not important. I guess what i'm thinking is, sence the 20th century american human audience is what Lucas was playing to, the simpelist story line was the most doable. Look how hard its been to do Dune Right! Talk about needing to know the background! Sheesh...well,lets just go with this idea...had JarJar spoken like every one else, how would that have changed the identiy of the character, and would you have,...would I have been...more accepting of the Guy?


Title: Re: Jar-Jar Stinks
Post by: Squishy on March 07, 2001, 04:45:56 PM
JarJar's bumbling, utter submissiveness and self-subjugation aside (this was never about his accent, even if his dialog just compounded the issue), when you have a treacherous slant-eyed midget with a Fu-Manchu mustache and a double-dealing slave-trader with a swollen, hooked nose, I'm pretty sure you can dismiss "accident," or "unintentional," let alone "eye of the beholder." Maybe "subconscious" will work, or "asleep at the wheel," but not "accident." Collectively, the non-human aliens in "Episode One" practically define a Klansman's list of stereotypes. JarJar's just the most glaring example.


Title: Re: Jar-Jar Stinks
Post by: Chadzilla on March 07, 2001, 05:44:25 PM
I personally had never given it that much thought (it was only after mulling over the subtle stereotyping that goes on in movies that I formed an opinion - now the fleeing Japanese shot in The Lost World: Jurassic Park, that's a funny homage to Godzilla movies and about as racist as an actual Godzilla movie is).  

But I did find Jar Jar stupid and just plain not funny (so did my six year old son, who was five at the time, but both my wife and mother loved him - I even gave my wife some Jar Jar toys for her birthday, yes we are a strange family).  If Binks had been played more seriously by the actor then, perhaps, the "black face backlash" against the character may not have happened.  True it was a fictional character on a fictional world (and the accent WAS bogus, so sayeth the actor) - but nonetheless, when we saw the movie my wife (who is into studious b-movie watching about as much as she is into football, i.e. NOT AT ALL) giggled and leaned over to whisper in my ear (in a mockingly, joyfully, and extremely polictically incorrect fashion) of Meesa Jar Jar Binks - "He is such a silly negro teeheeteehee."  I think THAT comment perfectly sums up the reasons for the backlash best of all.


Title: Re: Jar-Jar Stinks
Post by: Abby on March 07, 2001, 05:56:14 PM
So every clumsy, submissive, bumbling sidekick is a racial stereotype? Where does that leave Jerry Lewis, considering all those Dean Martin flicks he starred in?

I will say that as a white American, I do think flying blue critters with trunks represent an inferior race ... except their knack for blocking out Jedi mind tricks. I won't hire a flying blue critter with a trunk. I don't encourage marriage between flying blue critters with trunks and humans. Heck, I don't want to drink from the same water fountain as a flying blue critter with a trunk. Flying blue critters with trunks do not deserve to enjoy public transit either ... they have wings, after all.

Sure, you might express public outrage NOW. But admit it: behind closed doors, you feel the same way about flying blue critters with trunks as I do.


Title: Re: Jar-Jar Stinks
Post by: Chadzilla on March 07, 2001, 06:18:35 PM
You know what they say about those flying blue critters with BIG trunks, don't cha? hehehehehe.


Title: Re: Jar-Jar Stinks
Post by: Squishy on March 08, 2001, 02:31:47 AM
(Steps off soapbox)

Did you hear about the tire invented by flying blue critters? It not only stops on a dime, it picks it up! Flying blue critters control the media, you know. I'm not racist, I just hate flying blue critters. But in my neighborhood, it's the ***damn JarJars we have to worry about.

(Whoops, guess I'm back on)

Bumbling is fine. Lazy is fine. Stupid is fine. Combine it with an isolated case displaying exaggerated features--physical or vocal--normally associated with racial stereotypes that portray their target as bumbling, lazy, and stupid, and you are asking for trouble, intent be damned. Same goes for combining money-grubbing and big schnozolas, and mixing vicious cowardice and "slant eyes."

In "Episode Two," I fully expect people who actually go to see ice-cold JarJar cut down twenty bad guys with a laser blaster at one point, turn to the camera and say:

"They call me MISTER Binks!"

...like that'll make it all better.


Title: Re: Jar-Jar Stinks
Post by: Mofo Rising on March 08, 2001, 03:19:34 AM
Some of my best friends are flying blue elephant creatures. . .

No, it's already been shown that we bring our own prejudices with us.  Of course this is a fantasy world, but we bring our own prejudices with us.  Of course we do.  If these were true alien worlds we would not understand a damn thing about these alien cultures.  Try reading some sci-fi where they truly try to keep it all science based.

The cultures in Star Wars are not true alien civilizations.  They're like fantasy worlds, where we make up cultures based on previous cultural incarnations.  Like in D&D where elves are the high minded artistic types and dwarves are the base minded workers.  There is no excuse for not paying attention to the cultural annotations that these races aroused in Episode I.

I don't think that Lucas really realized the message that he was putting across when he put these characters out, but they're still there anyway. At least I'm hoping he didn't.

Here's what I'm thinking.  In Star Wars these races had nothing otherwise besides their racial signifiers.  At least in D&D worlds we have these "dwarves and elves" races carry themselves with their own inward dignity.  You could imagine that they would be a society in themselves.  Not so in the new Star Wars.  They're only there to be the enemies.

There isn't a good track record for considering personality traits as subhuman.  Say this is a fantasy world as much as you want, but there is no true fantasy world.  It's all based on the consensus reality.  For George Lucas to ignore this fact is almost criminal.  At the very least he can never cop innocence.

There is racism because Lucas never considered true alien cultures, and only added the "enemy stereotypes" of his pasts on to the aliens of his "fantasy".

Let me ask you this, outside of this fanboy base, do you ever discuss the new Star Wars movie with anyone?  I don't.  Everybody ceased to care after they saw the movie sucked.  It's a harsh truth to realize that even Star Wars is subservient to the law of diminishing returns.

@!#$ all y'all.


Title: Re: Jar-Jar Stinks
Post by: Abby on March 08, 2001, 04:23:38 AM
I still disagree with y'all. The archetype of a shifty, greedy, gambling, cruel slave owning type need not be attributed to race.  Such characters exist in literature of every culture.

However, I was among the many who thought Lucas might as well have cast Howard the Duck as Obi-Wan for how crummy Phantom Menace turned out.

For so many years leading up to the prequel, I annoyed friends by saying, "Look, Lucas never did anything good after Star Wars. Raiders was Spielberg's baby. Remember those Ewoks Adventures? Remember the Holiday Special? Remember Howard? Remember Willow? Remember that boring Dryfess stuff? Look what he did to the original movies with the rereleases! Look at all the NEW dumb toys and comic books. And those awful novels ..."

I mean, the Young Indiana series wasn't terrible, but the same people who wrote and directed it were creative kings on Episode I. They'd never worked on an actual film before. The dude who designed all of the critters for the original series wasn't even asked to contribute.

But I didn't want to believe myself, so I, too, was gravely disappointed when I saw Episode I. I'd hoped I was wrong about everything.

You know what's even sicker? Have you ever checked out The Force.net's huge trivia sections? Like, just about everyone who worked on the movie has a little ego cameo. The fact that everyone's ego was allowed to bear down on the project might be why everything sucked so badly.

I'm not terribly interested in the next flick. I think (hope) Lord of the Rings will make Lucas look like a jackass. Actually, Blair Witch made Lucas look like a jackass.

The only thing the next movie has going in its favor is that Phantom Menace nearly bankrupted Kenner, George's personal toy company slut. While I doubt the army of "I Hate Jar Jar" sites dented his ego, the dismal sales for Phantom product was a message sent in a language he understands.


Title: Re: Well, We Agree On That Much
Post by: Squishy on March 08, 2001, 07:56:21 AM
(1) "Episode One" blew.

(2) I know at least three people, possibly four, who won't be chucking bucks at "Episode Two" and its stream of merchandise.

Honestly, by the time the end credits had finished, I had patched up all the plot holes and discrepancies and dull parts of "Phantom Menace" in my head and streamlined the whole thing into a coherent story.

This is not bragging; it's the equivalent of putting a round peg in a round hole, or not peeing yourself when you're nineteen, sober, and healthy.

Why it wasn't accomplished by Lucas and team, I'll never understand.


Title: Re: Jar-Jar Stinks
Post by: Nathan on March 08, 2001, 11:42:34 AM
But see, there again -- is Jar-Jar a stereotype of East Indians?  Manchu Asians?  Jamaicans?  If no one can agree as to the racial stereotype he represents, it's pretty silly to argue about how offensive said stereotype is.

Nathan


Title: Re: Jar-Jar Stinks
Post by: FLANGEPART on March 08, 2001, 01:32:32 PM
Got to agree,abby. The simple fact is, A-holes exist every where. People are just people, we do the best we can with the cards we're delt. Cribbage,anyone? But, thats life.  Well,here's hopeing LOTR does justice to Tolkin. Did you ever hear the 12 part BBC radio play of the story.That was wonderful. I think,in fact,Ian Holm,who voices Frodo, is going to do him in the Film! Cool Beans! Well,be good, and remember...never turn your back on an ork!