Quote:
Originally Posted by zamler
Calling the stereoscopic 3D technology "camera gimmicks" is laughable, an entirely new way of filming was used, right down the cameras themselves as they are a new invention in their own right, and were co-designed and invented by Cameron. In fact the tech has impressed such directors as Spielberg and he will be using it for his films in the future.
|
Well Stanley Kubrick worked with NASA to develop the cameras to use in the low-light scenes in
Barry Lyndon and you don't hear very much about that anymore. I wouldn't say it was a gimmick, it got Kubrick what he needed to make the movie he wanted. But what he wanted was to show the scene the way it really looked, not some fabricated digital fantasy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zamler
If you are not interested in ground breaking stereoscopic 3D, or visuals that push the envelope beyond what has been done before and just want to engage in a compelling story, read a book.
|
Actually, I'm not interested. I love movies, I love fantasy, sci-fi, horror, all kinds of movies. Maybe I'm just too old, but CGI, no matter how "advanced" it is will always look fake to me. I'd honestly rather see a guy in a rubber suit, it will always look more real. I think too many directors start out with good intentions of using digital effects to tell the story, then get too bogged down in post production and the effects take over. And the rest of them are just lazy. Technology should a tool, not the result.