Let's look on the bright side...the further they move away from the book...

Mrs Figg I could give you twenty pages on the depth and symbolism of Prometheus too, still wouldn't make me think it was a great film.
Same goes for Blade Runner for me.

"but don't really touch the human condition the way Spartacus did."- Halfwise

I'd agree with that.

The difference is that only you think Bladerunner wasnt revolutionary and innovative, most people know Prometheus was rubbish.

Interesting way to shovel two pages into an edit, Figgy.  

Blade Runner could become revolutionary partly because it was put on hold because of the writer's strike, so the set people just kept developing and created the modern sense of a gritty set.

As far as addressing the Human Condition goes, cinematically it was ahead of it's time. Sure, you could read the same stuff in science fiction going back to the 30's, but in cinema the philosophical points had always been addressed in a clean and obvious way (Metropolis, Forbidden Planet), not woven into the back fabric of a film. It was very much using Tolkien's method of not shoving allegory in your face, but hiding messages in the structure.

Blade Runner is a classic.

Promtheus is a  

I donk thnk there was green screen? when Blade Runner was made, so it makes me realize just how far ahead of its time the special effects were. For a film like Avatar green screen is more than fair enough, but for TH it kills the atmosphere, theres nothing like a real set, no amount of computer wizardry can completely take its place. I loved the artistry of the sets in the film Legend, a computer couldnt do that.

True, that's why I prefer hand drawn animation to CGI-Pixar is great, but it's so focussed on making a convincing world that it's obvious they are trying-I got to the cinema for escapism but I want realism at the same time.

AUJ and Prometheus failed at this-it was obvious they were making an illusion but it wasn't fun spotting it.

There an art sadly becoming lost of in camera effects- I recently rewatched Forbidden Planet and its still got some stunning visuals and its more than 50 years old-



Miniatures, matte paintings, fored persepctives, all sorts of tricks at play.

Pettytyrant101 wrote:Miniatures, matte paintings, fored persepctives, all sorts of tricks at play.

LOTR used all of those and more practical effects. Which is one of the reasons I like it so much.

Forbidden Planet has a wonderful atmosphere, magical and faerie, bit like The Tempest, from which it was inspired by.
Talking of faerie I watched a lovely old film called The Singing Ringing Tree the other day. I had to put away my cynicism because it was a bit corny and it would be easy to laugh at, but I remembered it from being a child, and the longer I watched the more my childhood innocence came back, I forgot to be cynical and just enjoyed it.

Which is one of the reasons I like it so much. -Eldo

And one of the reasons it feels much more believable than TH.
But its still not enough to save it from that script.  

I agree that effects don't trump scripts, but I don't feel the need to re-start the script debate again at just this minute.

What debate?- their writing sucks, the script sucked- end of debate  

Pettytyrant101 wrote:There an art sadly becoming lost of in camera effects- I recently rewatched Forbidden Planet and its still got some stunning visuals and its more than 50 years old-



Miniatures, matte paintings, fored persepctives, all sorts of tricks at play.

I forgot how good the effects were. I also forgot the wooden script and acting.   I think the concept and visuals were so stunning that people were willing to forgive the other faults.

The concept is good, a mix of classic ST (before there was such a thing) and Shakespeares the Tempest.
I find it hard to imagine a modern scifi blockbuster with a central premise being a monster conjured up by the Id.

Yeah the scripts a bit wooden, and so is some of the acting, and to a modern viewer there are  the odd dubious moment concerning the young daughter and members of the space ship crew. Especially as parts of the film and dialogue strongly imply she is only just supposed to have 'become a women'- the sexual interest shown in her is a bit, off, by modern standards (but then the same could be said of the Tempest where I think she is 14)

I like the way they made Prospero/Caliban one person.

Its full of good ideas, just need a bit more polish on some of the script which undermines the visual splendour by being a bit b-movie like.

I think the problem with using the best/newest technology is that it always seems to date all that much faster.

So while all the latest technology of the Hobbit will probably looked incredibly dated in not too long the more laborious and low tech model work and so on of the Lord of the Rings will probably stand up a whole lot better to scrutiny.

That's the dimension Peter Jackson is overlooking with all this new technology, the hfr and abundance of green screen and cgi.

I agree- Doctor Who is a good case in point- the worst effects the show ever had were in the 1980's when they used a lot of 'cutting edge' BBC micro graphics that these days a mobile phone would be able to do in the background whilst it does ten more important tasks- and it looks like it now- where as some of the model work, and some of the mattes and miniatures in the earlier series look much better.
Tech always dates a film.

Pettytyrant101 wrote: to a modern viewer there are  the odd dubious moment concerning the young daughter and members of the space ship crew. Especially as parts of the film and dialogue strongly imply she is only just supposed to have 'become a women'- the sexual interest shown in her is a bit, off, by modern standards (but then the same could be said of the Tempest where I think she is 14)

Oh the modern interest is still there, we just have a new modern little man inside our heads bitch-slapping our cranium and shouting "stop thinking about it you perv!"

Bluebottle wrote:I think the problem with using the best/newest technology is that it always seems to date all that much faster.

So while all the latest technology of the Hobbit will probably looked incredibly dated in not too long the more laborious and low tech model work and so on of the Lord of the Rings will probably stand up a whole lot better to scrutiny.

That's the dimension Peter Jackson is overlooking with all this new technology, the hfr and abundance of green screen and cgi.  

I think this is spot-on.  PJ has made some reasonable points about the limitation of model work, but he has (at least in interviews) brushed over the shortcomings of CGI effects.  Plus, while CGI offers more freedom, the last thing some directors need is the ability to put literally anything they want on screen.

He was a dwaef? Put him in an Elvish costume and he would look perfect.

I think Bree is dead. I cant access the website.  not that I wanted to post there, because I had decided to not go back and post while 'You Know Who' was about. Either that or he has banned me.

I've just had a look Figgs and yes It seems the Bree forum is down again some guff about DB error cannot select (I don't think it's my browser).  

I can't seem to access it either, though I haven't posted anything there since the last flame war. It's a shame what the place has become; it's how I first discovered this little community like two years ago before finally posting anything.

Guys, Bree has been down due to technical problems a number of times before, including just a couple of months ago. In all likelihood it will be back online within a week.