|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 28, 2023 1:35:32 GMT -5
Well…. CGI humans I don’t think really came about until around/after Jurassic Park/Terminator 2…. I think what I miss most is how Donner would have made Zod’s speech atop the Washington monument a memorable epic one… rather than the downsized small scale speech in Houston. How was Zod supposed to stand atop the Washington monument? The top is pointy not a flat surface. Also no one would be able to even SEE Zod at that height. Maybe Lester realized this? He could have thought: not enough items to make fun of with this scene, so let's rewrite it to make it HILARIOUS in East Houston!!! (sarcasm alert)
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 27, 2023 9:45:42 GMT -5
I don’t know about punching, but I would definitely give the super stink eye if that happened.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 27, 2023 9:43:09 GMT -5
Meh! CGI wasn't necessary to show that scene then. I would have been fine with artistic looking fx even if not 100 percent convincing.... I have to admit- I never thought the STM Krypton miniatures and Hoover Dam miniatures (even under Medding) looked perfect--- though, with all due respect- in the behind the scenes footage with people walking around them, they look astounding. (I just didn't think they shot that well,though probably the best that was possible at the time. Perfect example being the Golden Gate miniature that looks AMAZING in seeing the size of it in photos and with real people, but I wasn't overwhelmed oddly seeing it on the big screen theatrically despite the rest of the whole movie experience being an A+!). CGI would have been necessary. Terrence Stamp Sarah Douglas and Jack O'Halloran may have been able to hang out in the Oval Office and chew bubble gum but more extreme enterprise such as actively "ruling the world" would have required CGI (villains). Well…. CGI humans I don’t think really came about until around/after Jurassic Park/Terminator 2…. I think what I miss most is how Donner would have made Zod’s speech atop the Washington monument a memorable epic one… rather than the downsized small scale speech in Houston.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 27, 2023 9:37:34 GMT -5
I remember when ‘South Park’ was a big thing on Comedy Central without f bombs- then when the ‘r’ rated movie came out with f bombs- it oddly wasn’t that much funnier.
I find it most out of place and annoying with dc animated cartoons- if it were Heavy Metal that would be one thing, but…
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 27, 2023 3:40:29 GMT -5
If you were FORCED to put an F bomb into each Superman movie. Where would you put it? For me if would make perfect sense for Superman to say fuuck while looking at Lower Manhattan. He’s been on the superhero job for some time at that point and he’s admiring the city he’s saved many times. He’s reflecting and enjoying the fruits of his labor and rightly says this city is fuucking beautiful. Ok, fine. Assuming I'm FORCED to- In STM- when Supes accidentally drops her during the flying ballet, I guess Lois could have let the F bomb drop... before she starts 'singing' to Supes. In SII- when Lex realizes that the villains are serious about going to kill him at the DP (momentarily) In SIII- I guess.... when Loreli is about to seduce 'dark Superman'? Or a bartender could say the F bomb when Supes seems out of control? In SIV- when Lacy is dropped into outer space (inexplicably)...
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 27, 2023 3:34:39 GMT -5
I'm not saying it's right to hit a woman. What I'm saying is that anyone would understand Clark punching Lois if she friend-zoned Clark's booty the moment he came of the of the molecular chamber. Lois: I don't know what to say. Clark: Just say you love me. Lois: Well actually I think we should just be friends. You see I never really loved you I was only in love with Superman. Clark: POW! I'LL KNOCK YOUR LIGHTS OUT! Well...... I always hated the exchange between Lois and Clark even on first view of SII right after the depowering as directed by Lester. The performances (and the way it was shot/edited didn't help) seemed very 'off'... we know that Reeve and Kidder didn't really get along, but Donner was able to make us believe that they loved one another in STM... didn't really feel that in this scene. It was clear to me that sentimentality just isn't in Lester's DNA. This rewritten exchange is a bit misogynistic, but it seems to have more plausibility than the theatrical scene as it was in the theatres! lol
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 26, 2023 18:08:36 GMT -5
The Reeve Superman movies were rated PG. In the United States that means you’re allowed one F word in the movie. Where would you put the F word? I would have had it in Superman 4. When he’s looking at Manhattan “The citys beautiful. The whole world is fuucking beautiful.” If it were possible, I still wouldn't have any of the main characters say it- it distracts. I find it EXTREMELY distracting on the superhero cartoons by WB (except for Harley Quinn, which is entire farce)--- and on "Titans". Similarly, as funny as the moment might have been- I HATED when Data swore on "Generations"- it punched a hole in the believability of the universe for me, for the sake of a quick laugh. (I find it also distracts when swearing on the newer Trek tv shows)- feels more like pandering.) If it was part of the world to begin with- like, say, Robocop- then people should be swearing all the time. For a superhero universe- it needs to be sparing and I will admit SOMETIMES it works and doesn't pop the bubble. Wolverine swearing in the X-men series somehow feels right. The other characters? Not so much.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 26, 2023 18:03:48 GMT -5
The power scale was always a bit odd in the Superman films.... but it had to be a challenge. Too little and it's not really Superman. Too much and where's the tension? (One reason I hated the turning back the time power in STM, even though emotionally it worked great though I hope it never gets brought back.) I thought Superman’s power level was odd in Superman 4. Look at how Superman is holding up the Statue of Liberty he’s holding it by the very tip and like he’s not even trying. He doesn’t even look like he’s holding it up, he looks like he’s just touching it. He’s holding it up with such ease that he should have whacked Nuclear man with the statue like a baseball bat when he tried to claw him. The power scale is definitely all over the place. Look at SII- when Supes lifts the tower- but is easily knocked over by a manhole cover. ( ) One of those things where it's 'good not to think TOO deeply' about for a Superman movie.... (or the comics for that matter).
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 26, 2023 18:00:16 GMT -5
It also seems that the filming of the CGI villains going around the world (to rule it) and destroying key monuments was pushed back as well. Probably also because the CGI villains were not as big names and it was important to concentrate on Brando and Hackman. It is, at least, impressive that the script was prescient enough to know that CGI was going to be invented Meh! CGI wasn't necessary to show that scene then. I would have been fine with artistic looking fx even if not 100 percent convincing.... I have to admit- I never thought the STM Krypton miniatures and Hoover Dam miniatures (even under Medding) looked perfect--- though, with all due respect- in the behind the scenes footage with people walking around them, they look astounding. (I just didn't think they shot that well,though probably the best that was possible at the time. Perfect example being the Golden Gate miniature that looks AMAZING in seeing the size of it in photos and with real people, but I wasn't overwhelmed oddly seeing it on the big screen theatrically despite the rest of the whole movie experience being an A+!).
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 26, 2023 17:55:38 GMT -5
Eh.... In an ideal world, SIV would have had the budget originally afforded it- but even as is, it has a LOT more going for it than the fully-budgeted Lester SIII. But, we each have our preferences, as you mentioned- (and I agree) On another note- you didn't care for Three Musketeers? (Or not as much as Four?)- Can you elaborate? I thought Three was fantastic- Lester's redeeming feature, and parts of Four were great- but the flow wasn't smooth storywise as Three- with humor at mistimed spots that stopped the story in its tracks (much like how I didn't like his approach in SII during the Metro battle). I do wonder- was the editor to blame for SII for not standing up to Lester and excising the worst parts for SII? I find even fans who adore Lester's work, don't really point to the Metro battle gags as the best part of SII. Donner's toilet jokes may have appeared with the Lex and Otis parts, but I didn't see a trace of humor during the Metro battle. And the humor with the villains/Lex came from the contrast primarily of both playing their parts 'straight'- and not a wink, like Lester's rewrites did. (Non being more childlike rather than a beast, Zod as less scary but more constantly annoyed- rolling his eyes, etc.) This is probably something that belongs in the Non Supes Lester/Donner films thread but i would put the 3 & 4 Muskys much lower down in Lester's overall repertoire behind Petulia, The Knack, On The Way To The Forum, The Bed Sitting Room and How I Won The War ....but above The Beatles flicks........ But I too, love the Muskys with 4 being above 3.....some absolutely epic stuff(especially and deliberately in 4)....and quite a cinematic acheivement considering both were filmed at the same time in the non CG era. Strip out the CG from The Matrix 2&3 or the original Lord Of The Rings trilogy.....and they won't look pretty! Also, the Muskys represented Lester's first time foray into mainsteam commercial cinema.......most avant guard, "art house" cinema directors of the 50s and 60s stayed away from the temptations of Hollywood.....and deliberately so.....but Lester was ultimately American(unlike Truffeaut,Goddard,Fellini and the rest)....so that may have had something to do with the pull/attraction to make something that could have a "mass consumer" appeal , especially in the U.S. From the American perpsective,think of the likes of Terrence Mallick(who's 1978 masterpiece- Days Of Heaven - unfortunately got buried by the commercial power of STM) or David Lynch and to some extent Scorsese himself.....and you have some idea of the kind of crowd that Lester was a part of. Oblique,ambigouse,challenging the form of the cinematic medium itself, non linear narratives and opaque subject matters were the common denominators of all the aformentioned directors....even if they all still had their own distinct styles. Hal Ashby,Friedkin,Cimino and Kubrick are 4 others who were either a part of that group or heavily influenced by it. As I said before,young George Lucas was also cut from that same cinematic cloth.....the result being THX 1138....IMHO - it's a very rich film if you dig below the surface. But as I said, will attempt to go further in the other thread. With regards to the humor in the Metro battle...the ice cream and rollerskate stuff was improvised in(for better or worse).....they were not part of the original script as revised by Lester's team. I can only say that on the theatrical viewings I had in 1981 and 1982, the audience sucked it up. Anyways,outside of Empire from the year before, what else was there, in 1981, to compete with the Metro climax of SII? The fight in the Greek chateaux in For Your Eyes Only(uhg!)? The fight with Ray Harryhousen's stop motion Kraken in Clash Of The Titans? Even the stuff with the Nazis getting their faces melted off in the climax of Raiders, was fantastic because of the horror , as opposed to the scale(it was a actually a pretty small scale finale all told). There was the Picadilly Circus riot in the final part of American Warewolf In London(that was actually shot on location).But still does not compare to the scale of SII's climax. I could go on.....the fighting in the mist in Excalibur....or the climactic race in Chariots Of Fire? How about the car chase over the bridge in Escape From New York? hey....I love all those films.....but SII was simply on another level,from a technical and acting perspective(actually the acting in Chariots Of Fire is pretty darn good!). So when you look at it from a "whole-listic" vantage point, SII's novel climax, even with all those eccentricities(ice cream ect), still resonated with audiences, by virtue of the fact that it had never been seen before. On Edit: Lester was on the set of Reds(shot at the same time as Supe II) - says he watched Diane Keaton perform multiple takes of simply throwing a paper into a waste basket......lamenting time and money lost for Warren Beatty.......Lester says he wanted more spontaneity from his actors on SII. There's no question that different countries can respond differently to material. I can only comment on the small sampling I had working at the bay area big screen theatre that had two big screens for SII that summer (that particular theatre had a set of demographics apparently that got heavyweights like Speilberg and Ford to appear at preview screenings to my suprise). NOBODY laughed during those Lester bits of 'comedy' when the villains started blowing things down. Three screenings a day, I worked in the center area (the snack bar, that was central to one super-large screen with no doors at the time, and two smaller ones with doors)- so I was privvy to the cheers and silence for many of the screenings we had. It's not every theatre in the country nor the planet.... but- even if the planet loved it- I DESPISED it. It wasn't in the revised script, but Lester's improvisation/insistence to shoot/include it- that neither furthered the plot nor the characters that mattered.... but darn if it's not similar in tone to the beginning of his SIII! But- just because I hate those Lester bits to the depths of my soul- doesn't mean others aren't allowed to love those bits. On the other hand--- note that I rarely have any real hatred towards Lester's work on SIII- maybe because he's doing this own thing and not ruining someone else's (though some might say improving) work. In any case- it is what it is.... hopefully we hear Lester's side of the story before I die, (and I am open to it!!!) but.... not holding my breath.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 26, 2023 11:22:51 GMT -5
Was it ever addressed that the footage of Superman and Lois’ date in the Fortress was unaccounted for when Thau was cataloging footage? It’s so strange of them to have all that Lester material in there when there could have been Donner alternates. In the original script, Mank devised a kitchen, a movie screening area(for watching old Lara, Jorel and Kalel stuff) and what is called "an upper nook of the fortress" section where Lois and Clark are tucked up together. We never got to see any of those areas in the Fortress during STM. Either they were never made in the original shoot or they were made.....but Donner never got round to actually rehearsing and lensing those actual scenes. One has to remember that the fortress actually doubled for Krypton during some of the destruction(of Krypton) scenes. I vaguely recall that (sadly) the Supes/Lois scenes were pushed back for shooting later, as Hackman and Brando's scenes were the priority--- and it was presumed that (since they weren't 'names' at that time)- Kidder and Reeve's footage could be shot anytime- so, (and I'm extremely bummed about it)- Donner apparently never got a chance to shoot it on the schedule. That's why it seems: #1: We have the (extremely rushed and shot first)- Brando/Reeve scenes.... I would have liked to have seen the other takes, as I HIGHLY distrust Thau's choices in editing, based on the final outcome of the RDC. Earliest shots, either Thau edited it fine- and possibly Donner would have reshot- or- they were fine, but Thau edited it poorly. (I would have gone with the latter, but they never made the other shots available for anyone to view). #2: We have ZERO closeup shots (and only long shots of Margot's double?)- of Lois's reactions during the "depowering" scenes. #3: The only Donner-shot sequence with Kidder and Reeve is the 'final confrontation' with Hackman present (and right at the entrance of the FOS- again, with Hackman) ..... and the excellent scene with Kidder and Reeve where Supes destroys the FOS. While it's still hair-pulling annoying that we never got a chance to see all the other Donner footage- (raw or not) in the vaults.... and it's equally annoying that Oliver Stone Alexander movie got multiple dvd recuts while SII only got one (and definitely needed another one)..... I guess with blu ray & dvd sales being what they are/were- maybe we should consider ourselves lucky just to have what we have, but STILL.... * Edit: I'm actually glad that Lester did at least shoot the souffle scene that Mank wrote- even if it wasn't really shot correctly to play the joke as intended. But- again- did it have to look SO cheap? Only the souffle? No other ingredients on the table? I know Lester was known for shooting fast and cheap like Ed Wood, but....
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 26, 2023 11:10:07 GMT -5
True on Donner toilet humor! But..... I never objected to the Lester humor per se, (Three Musketeers is great, SII not so much) but the horrific timing and overriding original material that was already better/set in motion. It's all opinions ofcourse,but I prefer SII to the 3 and 4 Muskys. But it is very interesting that Lester excised all the toilet humor from those Donner segments. Having gone through most of Lester's work.....that Chris Lloyd pissing himself scene in Butch & Sundance is the one toilet humor type joke in all his films. There is a very quick scene in The 3 Muskys where a cleaning lady pours a pile of s**t out of a window on some unsuspecting fella below.....so that's another one. As for Sydney J Furie's interpretation of toilet humor......well, SIV was s**t! Eh.... In an ideal world, SIV would have had the budget originally afforded it- but even as is, it has a LOT more going for it than the fully-budgeted Lester SIII. But, we each have our preferences, as you mentioned- (and I agree) On another note- you didn't care for Three Musketeers? (Or not as much as Four?)- Can you elaborate? I thought Three was fantastic- Lester's redeeming feature, and parts of Four were great- but the flow wasn't smooth storywise as Three- with humor at mistimed spots that stopped the story in its tracks (much like how I didn't like his approach in SII during the Metro battle). I do wonder- was the editor to blame for SII for not standing up to Lester and excising the worst parts for SII? I find even fans who adore Lester's work, don't really point to the Metro battle gags as the best part of SII. Donner's toilet jokes may have appeared with the Lex and Otis parts, but I didn't see a trace of humor during the Metro battle. And the humor with the villains/Lex came from the contrast primarily of both playing their parts 'straight'- and not a wink, like Lester's rewrites did. (Non being more childlike rather than a beast, Zod as less scary but more constantly annoyed- rolling his eyes, etc.)
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 26, 2023 0:08:14 GMT -5
lol! I suspect Lester was suggesting this, but got overridden by Reeve. (Kidding, kidding!) Last time I checked, wasn't it Donner who had poor ol' Danny Glover strapped to a toilet in LW2! Also , what is it with Donner and toilet humor in general.....Tesmacher's remarks in the fortress.....Fogelstein's bedwetting antics, Otis missing his opportunity for a piss and Richard Prior sitting on a fart balloon in The Toy. Lester could have learnt a lot about toilet humor from Donner! On edit: Lester did have ol' Doc Brown himself, Chris Lloyd, piss himself ,in a water tank , in Butch & The Sundance Kid! True on Donner toilet humor! But..... I never objected to the Lester humor per se, (Three Musketeers is great, SII not so much) but the horrific timing and overriding original material that was already better/set in motion.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 25, 2023 23:11:03 GMT -5
What about the Clark that faced Supey in the junkyard! Was he at least partiallly depowered? He seemed to get out of breath throwing a couple of tyres. He struggled to overpower the compressor. He was groggy after the car magnet fell on his head. He could not even fly! Still kicked ol' evil Supe's booty in the end though. I think Reeve Superman was always relatively weak except in SIV. In S1-3, Supes probably only had the strength of 20 men tops. in SIII he had trouble lifting a few tires, but in SII he had trouble stopping a bus and only caught an antenna. And in STM he had to grit his teeth to push over a few boulders. Then all of a sudden in SIV Superman can lift the statue of liberty and move the moon. The power scale was always a bit odd in the Superman films.... but it had to be a challenge. Too little and it's not really Superman. Too much and where's the tension? (One reason I hated the turning back the time power in STM, even though emotionally it worked great though I hope it never gets brought back.)
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 25, 2023 23:01:27 GMT -5
They could have dubbed a line of Ron saying "we only have coke". Also Lois wasn't ordering a healthy meal. A cheeseburger with EVERYTHING on it and an order of fries. That side salad doesn't make it suddenly healthy. You gotta remember bud...... The diner scene as filmed by Donner was originally intended to be appended to that raunchy sex scene at the fortress that Mank wrote (pretty much in the same clumsy manner that he instilled in the James Bond flicks):
So Lois was knackered after all that carnal activity...hence the cheeseburger and coke! Margot Kidder mentioned this scene in either the Newsweek or Time magazine article- I am curious how Donner would have done this--- I assume it was going to be done in a very pg-13 style- like Reeve's "Somewhere in Time". I did think (and hope) that Donner had shot more of the Lois/Supes scenes in the FOS and would have seen more at the FOS by him, but... oh well. (Still, I want to see the rest of what's in the vaults!)
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 25, 2023 22:58:03 GMT -5
The theatrical also has the contradiction…. But not the worst sun of the theatrical cut. The worst sun was actually in STM. It killed everyone on Krypton Sin, sun, what's the difference?
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 25, 2023 22:57:04 GMT -5
Lois was trying to get Clark to sit elsewhere but his foolish pride got handed to him in the form of that beating. That sense of ignorance is present with the character, like when he saw no repercussions in stating in an interview that he couldn’t see through lead. It’s honestly a good way to make a flawless hero vulnerable. It can come off as petty how he gets revenge at the end, but Pepper Martin did a good job at making Rocky a sketchy guy right from the start and he gets what he deserves when he tries to hit Clark again just for calling him “garbage.” Rocky also wasn’t very kind making fun of Clark’s glasses. To me, the 'lighter' revenge scene would have been more welcome, had it followed (as scripted) the darker Metro battle section for relief. I'd read that originally it was a couple of guys that beat up Clark, but I wonder how one comes back from that level of darkness if done that 'real'. I'm sure that Donner had gone back and forth on how dark to make this scene. The bits of performance with Kidder and Reeve during the humiliation - plus Donner's inserts of the diner customer's reactions.... are gold. I did feel initially that the diner revenge scene, though, undermined the earlier scene... even if directed by Donner. But- if things had gone as planned, with the beats of darkness with the original Metro battle and the tragedy of the impossible romance put out there- then it would have been a nice way to bring it back to a lighter energy.... without going TOO light.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 25, 2023 22:47:29 GMT -5
Rocly did offer a solution in the first place , to Lois's assertion about the seat: "There's another, sweetheart". Lois and Clark then proceed to sit somewhere else. Sorted. Exactly. Rocky told Clark that his seat was the toilet in the restroom. Clark and Lois could have eaten their meal in there. lol! I suspect Lester was suggesting this, but got overridden by Reeve. (Kidding, kidding!)
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 25, 2023 22:45:27 GMT -5
Just saw this from the WB site- I remember the original having issues (or was it Making of Superman 2?) for the US.... but it's fun to revisit regardless in 1080... www.youtube.com/watch?v=vUBR4MAgejg
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 25, 2023 10:22:30 GMT -5
The theatrical also has the contradiction…. But not the worst sun of the theatrical cut.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 24, 2023 8:31:42 GMT -5
Mixed on the ‘Superman’s revenge’ scene myself.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 18, 2023 23:53:22 GMT -5
Everyone has their preferences, and I definitely feel like: 'if you pay the ticket price'= then you definitely have a right to complain! (hence=my continued complaining about Lester) Saw the Flash again today and actually liked it much better- but... Here is the thing- Some parts (particulary the first two acts) are VERY well done- BOTH the action scenes (especially in light of all the superhero movies that have preceded it)- and the dramatic scenes have had a strong visual flair to it (especially liked a number of 'one-er' extended money shots that enhanced the story but also were just greatly choreographed shots--- and---- whatever the thoughts might be for the star- he's GREAT in the dual role of both Barry Allens. My disappointment on the first view is primarily with how the third act action sequence is--- it's a key part, and it's functional, but I think the first two acts were stronger- but then it goes back to the personal aspect of the story - and delivers. I do wish I had gone into the movie 'cold'- and thought far higher on it. Seeing trailers and the rave reviews I think made me expect it to be even better- but it is very good, I just wish that it was a little more polished with the Keaton and Calle scenes since they were the main three. Also, I think (perhaps unfairly) any new superhero epic film subconsciously gets (fairly or no) compared to all other epic suphero films- and there's been a lot. For sure, I want the extended cut--- but I don't think we'll ever get one.
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 18, 2023 14:24:16 GMT -5
James Gunn seems to nail exactly what's going on wrong with the superhero movie trend--- and a TON of great other info I have not seen elsewhere in this interview. I do wonder, though.... with Gunn raving about Flash, and Flash bombing box office wise.... will it give WB cold feet about going full force into Gunn's DCU plan? www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2RX1JzJvho
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 18, 2023 12:46:33 GMT -5
It's very good, but not as polished so as to be in my top ten superhero films.... but still, very good.
It's not a spoiler to mention there's cameos, a good number... but- the neatest ones seem also done in a way that feels a bit chaotic and all over the place.
(UPDATE: On second viewing, actually it's fine- but an oddity comes in comparing the experience with every other superhero film and all the superhero films up to now.... but a bit unfair. The material does tell the story effectively and powerfully at times- but it might be the speed of the rate of 'special' superhero films coming out that the other ones are still fresh in the mind whenever ANY sequence is the slightest bit similar to another superhero film.)
I've read and heard about a ton of deleted cameos and scenes that hopefully show up on the blu ray.
On the flip side..... extremely sad about the bad box office. With this disappointment following Shazam 2 and Ant-Man 3--- I've mentioned my worry and wonder if the general public is not rushing to see superhero films anymore as a special event.
Also.... coming from an era where Star Wars' first release had a one-year anniversary in the theatres- it's odd to see even a giant box office movie like Avatar 2 already leave the theatres.
The two best (in recent times) superhero movie experiences at the theatre I had were Endgame and No Way Home.... no small part with the large audience in anticipation to see it, and it was an event.
Is that kind of a thing of the past now?
|
|
|
Post by crazy_asian_man on Jun 14, 2023 18:38:51 GMT -5
Would he have been able to create CGI villains back in 1980? Probably didn't have the technology until 1993. If they could make a CGI dinosaur I don't think a CGI Terrance Stamp Sarah Douglas and Jack O'Halloran would have been too difficult either. Bigger question is, how do you convincingly portray "ruling the world" with just a 20 second sequence of key monuments being destroyed? How does the mere act destroying key monuments equate to "ruling" the world? Hmn.... cgi humans still weren't too convincing for awhile, if I recall right, around that time. Recently saw a bts on Avatar 2 that talked about facial mo-cap being even more sophisticated--- what I would love (If I were a rich man) is to see the actors do facial mo-cap so that we'd get a lot of the nuances of closeups during the Metro battle. There's seconds in the slivers of the Donner cut/extended cut with the rage between Superman and Non in the extended FOS bit. Love to have seen how it would have been had we had the full sequence under Donner for the Metro battle in the first place. But- again, I guess we're lucky we even got a few seconds, given the situation. Oh well...
|
|