6700 réponses à ce sujet

[massranger]

X x Spartan xX wrote...

no crap but im just saying the movie wouldnt totally be mass effect without shepard but your shepard. look im realy looking foward to it even if it dosent meet my expectations. im simply happy that mass effect will be portaryed on the big screen. but god i hope its good

I thought you were saying you didn't want Shepard in the movie, if you weren't saying that... my bad.

[tha_kill]

@ massranger:

has u seen avatar? the expressions are very realistic just look it up on youtube, the actor's face has been also recorded and made digital, everything u see in the movie every move etc. is done by real actors

[Auzden]

the only thing i dont want from this movie is like for me to get super excited and go to see it and it sucks ****... like the last airbender did.... but i dont think so the folks at legendary are better then that and im looking forward to a success

[massranger]

tha_kill wrote...

@ massranger:
has u seen avatar? the expressions are very realistic just look it up on youtube, the actor's face has been also recorded and made digital, everything u see in the movie every move etc. is done by real actors

 
I have seen avatar, I thought it blew.  But that's besides the point.  I think that type of CGI is fine on a smaller scale, meaning for aliens, not the humans.  I think the time, effort, and money they spent on that could have been spent on making the movie better rather than than pretty.  I think if you make something exclusively CGI like that you can easily lose sight of the most important thing... like storyline and acting. 

The expressions may be realistic, but they are not real and the audience knows that and can see that.  It doesn't have the same effect as real actors acting well.

Although avatar received praise, it did not receive praise for the acting.  I think after you got passed all the cool CGI in it, it was basically a churched up version Pocahantis (not sure how to spell that) or dances with wolves.  Mass Effect does not need that, except for the aliens, and the aliens can be done with makeup and touched up with CGI, though some would need more CGI than others.     

I think quality acting shines through and passes levels that  CGI alone cannot attain.  Take Star Trek, Kirk's, Spoc's, Scotty's, etc. acting ability made the movie, not the CGI.  The CGI was cool where it was needed, but the actors and storyline made that movie. 

[massranger]

@ tha_kill:
also when a movie is filmed scenes are shot several times, with same/similar dialogue, just movements, facial expressions, and small nuances that the actor him/herself change or add. The director and his/her staff pick one that they feel is the best, or fits the mood of the scene the best. The director can see a scene played out several different ways than he thought, he can decide it's actually better this way, which may not be the original way he envisioned it. When it's all CGI they do not have the same luxury.

For example, (and all these numbers are completley made up) after a movie is wrapped, the director may have 899 scenes to choose from when he only needs 99 scenes to put the movie together. The director is going to choose the best versions of each scene, and may end up with a completely different feeling movie than he originally anticipated. It kinda gives the director more freedom with his project without changing the actual context of screenplay, script, or storyline.

Modifié par massranger, 08 juillet 2010 - 07:28 .

[tha_kill]

i know , still they can do part CGI i didn't say they should do it all

mind if i ask why u excactly think avatar sucked? cose i did like it, i know the story sucks, but the world is most epic, did u set youre mind of blank (open)? when u watched the movie?

[massranger]

tha_kill wrote...

i know , still they can do part CGI i didn't say they should do it all
mind if i ask why u excactly think avatar sucked? cose i did like it, i know the story sucks, but the world is most epic, did u set youre mind of blank (open)? when u watched the movie?

 
Yeah, I totally wanted to watch it, went with a couple friends that totally wanted to see it.  Brought our wives.  All of us walked out a bit dissappointed except our wives, they liked it.  I think maybe that's why we didn't care for it, because we went in with expectations, and our wives didn't.  Watched it again at home, and I enjoyed it more than I did when I actually saw it in the theater, but still didn't care for it much. 

I think the story is a recycled story, done in the future, but it's still a recycled story.  Plus, I don't care for political messages sold in a movie, that is not portrayed as political.  There are movies that are made for it's polical message, that's fine you know ehat your getting into.  I don't like being blindsided in a sci-fi movie that is supposed to be entertaining, and then having to sit through a 3 hour movie with political undertones that you may or may not agree with.  I feel like when I see a movie like Star Trek, Iron Man, Spiderman, Avatar, etc., I go to get relief from stress from the day to day, and just be entertained, not to have a message shoved in my face.  Now if I go to see an accurate military movie, or one about the white house, or blood diamonds, I expect to have some views pushed in my face and that's alright.  But not one like Avatar.  Just my opinion.   

Modifié par massranger, 08 juillet 2010 - 07:59 .

[tha_kill]

massranger wrote...

tha_kill wrote...

i know , still they can do part CGI i didn't say they should do it all
mind if i ask why u excactly think avatar sucked? cose i did like it, i know the story sucks, but the world is most epic, did u set youre mind of blank (open)? when u watched the movie?

 
Yeah, I totally wanted to watch it, went with a couple friends that totally wanted to see it.  Brought our wives.  All of us walked out a bit dissappointed except our wives, they liked it.  I think maybe that's why we didn't care for it, because we went in with expectations, and our wives didn't.  Watched it again at home, and I enjoyed it more than I did when I actually saw it in the theater, but still didn't care for it much. 

I think the story is a recycled story, done in the future, but it's still a recycled story.  Plus, I don't care for political messages sold in a movie, that is not portrayed as political.  There are movies that are made for it's polical message, that's fine you know ehat your getting into.  I don't like being blindsided in a sci-fi movie that is supposed to be entertaining, and then having to sit through a 3 hour movie with political undertones that you may or may not agree with.  I feel like when I see a movie like Star Trek, Iron Man, Spiderman, Avatar, etc., I go to get relief from stress from the day to day, and just be entertained, not to have a message shoved in my face.  Now if I go to see an accurate military movie, or one about the white house, or blood diamonds, I expect to have some views pushed in my face and that's alright.  But not one like Avatar.  Just my opinion.   

fair enough, and youre right about the story it is indeed an standard story, but i do have to say there is an epic qoute on the mass effect site : "It's the avatar of video games except better written" and to that i totally agree! 

[massranger]

tha_kill wrote...

massranger wrote...

tha_kill wrote...

i know , still they can do part CGI i didn't say they should do it all
mind if i ask why u excactly think avatar sucked? cose i did like it, i know the story sucks, but the world is most epic, did u set youre mind of blank (open)? when u watched the movie?

 
Yeah, I totally wanted to watch it, went with a couple friends that totally wanted to see it.  Brought our wives.  All of us walked out a bit dissappointed except our wives, they liked it.  I think maybe that's why we didn't care for it, because we went in with expectations, and our wives didn't.  Watched it again at home, and I enjoyed it more than I did when I actually saw it in the theater, but still didn't care for it much. 

I think the story is a recycled story, done in the future, but it's still a recycled story.  Plus, I don't care for political messages sold in a movie, that is not portrayed as political.  There are movies that are made for it's polical message, that's fine you know ehat your getting into.  I don't like being blindsided in a sci-fi movie that is supposed to be entertaining, and then having to sit through a 3 hour movie with political undertones that you may or may not agree with.  I feel like when I see a movie like Star Trek, Iron Man, Spiderman, Avatar, etc., I go to get relief from stress from the day to day, and just be entertained, not to have a message shoved in my face.  Now if I go to see an accurate military movie, or one about the white house, or blood diamonds, I expect to have some views pushed in my face and that's alright.  But not one like Avatar.  Just my opinion.   

fair enough, and youre right about the story it is indeed an standard story, but i do have to say there is an epic qoute on the mass effect site : "It's the avatar of video games except better written" and to that i totally agree! 

Me too, I agree fully.  I actually think Avatar would have been better in a trilogy, or at least two movies.  Even though it was a long movie, it was rushed.  There were parts that dragged, but for the most part the story was rushed.  How long do you think it would take a normal person to jump sides and betray your peaple.  Longer than a few months, even if you disagree with what your people (humans) are doing.  Now take the normal person out of the situation, and put an American marine/soldier in that spot.  It wouldn't happen the way it did.  I would think that a marine/soldier's conviction going into something/mission would carry them past what Jake Sully ended up doing, regardless if they disagree or not.  If they spread it out over a longer period of time, i think it would be more believable.  Plus, I think the best character was the bad guy, he played military well, and I don't like how they portrayed "evil military."  I think they could have spread out over a couple movies and shown a gradual change in Jake Sully, and a gradual change in the bad guy, maybe greed taking over, not just the love for the destruction and killing of the blue people.  Just paints the whole military element in a bad light as opposed to greed taking over one person, which is much more feasible.    

Modifié par massranger, 08 juillet 2010 - 09:12 .

[Eternal Density]

Guys, you have the rest of the internet to complain about Avatar. (not that I disagree).

I wouldn't mind if the Mass Effect movie was like Avatar in technical terms, but different in the sense that it's actually a good story. (I almost said 'original' story, but I don't want it to be original, I want it to be Mass Effect )

[TheTWF]

It's a video game movie.

Fool me once... 

[massranger]

Eternal Density wrote...

Guys, you have the rest of the internet to complain about Avatar. (not that I disagree).
I wouldn't mind if the Mass Effect movie was like Avatar in technical terms, but different in the sense that it's actually a good story. (I almost said 'original' story, but I don't want it to be original, I want it to be Mass Effect )

Sorry, went off on a tangent about it after CGI was brought up for a ME movie.

[Dansayshi]

ME's story definately has potential, and if you've seen the Prince of Persia film... theirs definate hope for a game to film, film.



It has to be handled well though.... dont go ****ing it up by simply pumping it full of CGI and barely ANY character development at all like some of the others. Throwing random chars that are supposed to be mainplot ME chars such as Ashley, Aiden, Liara etc with no good introduction or background would be bad...

[gpcowdog]

I was talking with my brother about this. It seems like the popular idea is the First Contact War, but since it appears this will be about Shepard what if it covered the two months between the battle of the Citadel and the destruction of the Normandy? It seems like an event that could be covered within the length of a movie, and would expand on the story with something besides cleaning up the remaining Geth. Thoughts?

[tha_kill]

massranger wrote...

Eternal Density wrote...

Guys, you have the rest of the internet to complain about Avatar. (not that I disagree).
I wouldn't mind if the Mass Effect movie was like Avatar in technical terms, but different in the sense that it's actually a good story. (I almost said 'original' story, but I don't want it to be original, I want it to be Mass Effect )

Sorry, went off on a tangent about it after CGI was brought up for a ME movie.

apologies

[massranger]

gpcowdog wrote...

I was talking with my brother about this. It seems like the popular idea is the First Contact War, but since it appears this will be about Shepard what if it covered the two months between the battle of the Citadel and the destruction of the Normandy? It seems like an event that could be covered within the length of a movie, and would expand on the story with something besides cleaning up the remaining Geth. Thoughts?

No, that wouldn't work.  Remember Bioware made sure you could play ME2 without playing ME, I'm sure that they will make sure that movie can be enjoyed by ME fans, and people who might not ever have played the game.  If they start the Movie off with a big epic battle about where the main character saved the day, the audience who never played the game will be like,"What? I wanna see that."

[oneMESSEDupKID]

wouldn't it make sense if the movie was cast by the people who the charecters were based off of?

[kyle924]

3mi wrote...

Personally, as has been said by many others, I hope the movie is nothing to do with Shepard, or it quietly alludes to him/her as a sort of sub-plot, because I believe that by doing that they won't spoil the "multiple choice" aspect that's popular with us, the game players, and at the same time it'll be a brand new film that people who're new to the franchise will be able to watch too.
But that's just me.

IF that were true, what do you think they should do?

[tha_kill]

i agree it shouldn't be about shepard, everybody got an different experience with shepard and his crewmembers if they would do that it will be very hard to please everybody cose of all the experience's and different vieuw points

[Eradyn]

On one hand, yeah, if it's about Shepard it could potentially ruin others' "versions" of the game's reality. But...on the other hand...if it's about Shepard that means movie-CGI Garrus (if BW and Legendary Pictures are smart he'd be voiced by no other than Brandon Keener).



To be frank...I wholeheartedly support more Garrus. So...I'm only somewhat torn in this. XD

[UndercoverDoctor]

tha_kill wrote...

i agree it shouldn't be about shepard, everybody got an different experience with shepard and his crewmembers if they would do that it will be very hard to please everybody cose of all the experience's and different vieuw points

You really think they shoudn't use Shepard just because everyone had a different exeprience? That is just down right stupid.

[tha_kill]

and why if i might ask is that down right stupid?