| World of KJ http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/ |
|
| Visual Effects Oscar In Consideration List http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=25919 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Jonathan [ Fri Dec 15, 2006 4:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Jesus why am I ALWAYS gone when they announce something? From that list: 1. Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest 2. Superman Returns 3. Poseidon 4. X-Men The Last Stand 5. Casino Royale 6. Eragon 7. Night at the Museum |
|
| Author: | xiayun [ Fri Dec 15, 2006 4:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I think Casino Royale can sneak in. They will want to show some appreciations for a film with 95% RT rating. |
|
| Author: | Christian [ Fri Dec 15, 2006 5:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I assume X3 will be submitting the Golden Gate Bridge sequence for the 15 minute clip. |
|
| Author: | Excel [ Fri Dec 15, 2006 5:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
superman reutns bullet in eye shot wins visual effect shot of the year from academy! |
|
| Author: | Jonathan [ Fri Dec 15, 2006 5:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
excel wrote: superman reutns bullet in eye shot wins visual effect shot of the year from academy! In your dreams. I really can't see POTC2 not winning, especially since the first lost to the Juggernaut Known As Return of the King. And Poseidon should get in thanks to the Water FX they so very much love. They've never had much appreciation for X-Men anyway. |
|
| Author: | The Dark Shape [ Fri Dec 15, 2006 6:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'd disagree with that. |
|
| Author: | neo_wolf [ Fri Dec 15, 2006 6:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The whole plane scene from superman was the best sfx scene i have seen all year. Supes Pirated 2 Night |
|
| Author: | Excel [ Fri Dec 15, 2006 9:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Awards Czar Jon wrote: excel wrote: superman reutns bullet in eye shot wins visual effect shot of the year from academy! In your dreams. it already happened. |
|
| Author: | Excel [ Fri Dec 15, 2006 9:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The Dark Shape wrote: I'd disagree with that. have you ever seen a human octopus? obviously not, so how da hell would you know if it looked real or not? have you ever seen a man? hell yes, so itd be instantly obvious if a flying man in a movie looked fake, hence why supermans were a much greater challenge( and far more impressive). |
|
| Author: | zingy [ Fri Dec 15, 2006 10:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
excel wrote: The Dark Shape wrote: I'd disagree with that. have you ever seen a human octopus? obviously not, so how da hell would you know if it looked real or not? have you ever seen a man? hell yes, so itd be instantly obvious if a flying man in a movie looked fake, hence why supermans were a much greater challenge( and far more impressive). We heard you the last 82 times you said that. |
|
| Author: | MikeQ. [ Fri Dec 15, 2006 11:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
excel wrote: The Dark Shape wrote: I'd disagree with that. have you ever seen a human octopus? obviously not, so how da hell would you know if it looked real or not? have you ever seen a man? hell yes, so itd be instantly obvious if a flying man in a movie looked fake, hence why supermans were a much greater challenge( and far more impressive). Technically, your comparison doesn't work. Yeah, we've never seen a human octopus, but we've also never seen a flying man, because just like there is no such thing as a human octopus, there is no such thing as a man who can fly. You can't keep the "human" and "octopus" together, and then separate the ability to fly from the man, and say "have you ever seen a man?" We've never seen a flying man, so technically there's no wrong way to make Superman fly. Heh. I just think your argument is a little silly. One is being perfectly reasonable if they believe that the human octopus was better conceptualized and created in terms of visual effects than the flying man. Peace, Mike. |
|
| Author: | Squee [ Fri Dec 15, 2006 11:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I don't know... wouldn't a flying man and a skydiver look kind of similar? |
|
| Author: | Excel [ Fri Dec 15, 2006 11:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Zingaling wrote: excel wrote: The Dark Shape wrote: I'd disagree with that. have you ever seen a human octopus? obviously not, so how da hell would you know if it looked real or not? have you ever seen a man? hell yes, so itd be instantly obvious if a flying man in a movie looked fake, hence why supermans were a much greater challenge( and far more impressive). We heard you the last 82 times you said that. oh so your just to dumb to understand it then? |
|
| Author: | zingy [ Fri Dec 15, 2006 11:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
excel wrote: Zingaling wrote: excel wrote: The Dark Shape wrote: I'd disagree with that. have you ever seen a human octopus? obviously not, so how da hell would you know if it looked real or not? have you ever seen a man? hell yes, so itd be instantly obvious if a flying man in a movie looked fake, hence why supermans were a much greater challenge( and far more impressive). We heard you the last 82 times you said that. oh so your just to dumb to understand it then? Insult me properly foooool, that made no sense. WE GET THE POINT. IT'S NOT A GOOD POINT, BUT WE GET IT. |
|
| Author: | Levy [ Sat Dec 16, 2006 5:25 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Pirates, Casino and Superman Obviously Casino doesn't deserve a Visual FX nod, but they often just nominate the movies they like the most. |
|
| Author: | MovieDude [ Sat Dec 16, 2006 5:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I don't know if it's fair to say Casino Royale doesn't deserve a nomination. Sure it wasn't as flashy as Supes, Pirates, or X3, but there was never a point where I didn't believe what I was watching on screen, and there was a lot of pretty impossible stuff. It's like Batman Begins last year - many didn't give it's effects credit, which was bullshit because there were a LOT of effects people just didn't realize weren't real. |
|
| Author: | Alex Y. [ Sat Dec 16, 2006 7:09 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Visual Effects Oscar In Consideration List |
Predicts: “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest†“X-Men The Last Stand†“Night at the Museum†With "Casino Royale", not "Superman Returns", as the spoiler. |
|
| Author: | Price [ Sat Dec 16, 2006 7:53 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Predicts: Pirates of the Caribbean: DMC Superman Returns Eragon (I think the director is a VFX artist himself, so he may have support for a nomination, but not the win) |
|
| Author: | roo [ Sun Dec 17, 2006 4:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
MovieDude is thinking along the right lines. People need to remember that not all effects are digital. Car wrecks, explosions, collapsing buildings are all practical, and that's where Casino probably has some support... I think I saw one obvious CG sequence (the airport pick up the cop car and throw it). It's still kind of a weird choice for this category. Poseidon's CG is awful but the practical effects are great, but I would chalk most of it up to great sets (which the film did have). That's not gonna happen... ILM is not getting two nominations probably. Pirates Supes X3 The sure thing is Pirates. It's brilliant and is the only film listed that seems to make any sort of advancement. Plus Pirates has a ton of models/practical/etc. effects which make it an all around package. Eragon is not happening... ILM and some Weta. ILM has Pirates, Weta has (partially) X3. Night at the Museum could still happen. The "why aren't they there" ie Matrix Sequels Award(tm) goes to Eastwoods film(s). Flags had the effects needed to at least be considered in the short-list. Don't know about Iwo Jima... could this be a signal that Eastwood's films don't have very broad technical support? Only time will tell... |
|
| Author: | android [ Wed Jan 10, 2007 12:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
“Night at the Museum†“Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest†“Superman Returns†|
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|