All non-Nolan related film, tv, and streaming discussions.
Babe exists and works. Its sequel too.
I see nothing wrong with that clip, other than the aesthetic which goes in completely opposite direction with the color palette due to it being inspired by real african savana.
Serkis gets it, and he did it so beautifully in his terrific adaptation of Kipling, Favreau doesn't. But that's just me unfortunately and people apparently want this and Jungle. Eh, their loss.
Joined:
January 2016
Location: DE
yeah the animals creep me the fuck out
they're boringly unexpressive, but since they talk it gets uncanny
who thought this was a good idea?
Absolute gutter. Disney rightfully got what was coming, though they deserve worse. The movie doesn't even look "photorealistic", it's some halfbreed between photorealism and typical animation like The Incredibles 2.
m4st4 wrote: ↑July 11th, 2019, 5:59 pm
Babe exists and works. Its sequel too.
I see nothing wrong with that clip, other than the aesthetic which goes in completely opposite direction with the color palette due to it being inspired by real african savana.
Those movies are pre-CGI with actual animals. You can’t compare them.
What’s ironic is that this looks more dull, colorwise, than an actual nature documentary (on film)!
Joined:
January 2016
Location: DE
anikom15 wrote: ↑July 11th, 2019, 6:28 pm
m4st4 wrote: ↑July 11th, 2019, 5:59 pm
Babe exists and works. Its sequel too.
I see nothing wrong with that clip, other than the aesthetic which goes in completely opposite direction with the color palette due to it being inspired by real african savana.
Those movies are pre-CGI with actual animals. You can’t compare them.
That movie was also in 1995 and the first of its kind to use the mouth morphing technology and more forgiving back then. On top of that it was an original and interesting takes on a story to something like Toy Story where there it also involved human and the toys and animals can talk and hear one another. Since the CGI standard have been raised The Lion King takes to me was a wrong approach. It brought nothing new but making it worst. Without The Lion King name and brand this would be on par with the 2000 Dinosaur movie with the same approach.
Last edited by
LEXX on July 11th, 2019, 6:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Joined:
August 2011
Location: Poznan, Poland
LEXX wrote: ↑July 11th, 2019, 6:44 pm
anikom15 wrote: ↑July 11th, 2019, 6:28 pm
m4st4 wrote: ↑July 11th, 2019, 5:59 pm
Babe exists and works. Its sequel too.
I see nothing wrong with that clip, other than the aesthetic which goes in completely opposite direction with the color palette due to it being inspired by real african savana.
Those movies are pre-CGI with actual animals. You can’t compare them.
That movie was also in 1995 and the first of its kind to use the mouth morphing technology and more forgiving back then. On top of that it was an original and interesting takes on a story to something like Toy Story where there it also involved human and the toys and animals can talk and hear one another. Since the CGI standard have been raised The Lion King takes to me was a wrong approach. It brought nothing new but making it worst. Without The Lion King name and brand this would be on par with the 2000 Dinosaur movie with the same approach.
Dinosaur was considered an animated film too. This is bonkers.
Joined:
January 2016
Location: DE
Apparently "Can you feel the love tonight?" is sung in broad daylight
what is this movie
