Bakerman on 5/12/2009 at 12:54
Quote Posted by jtr7
:(:(:(
Really? :erm:
Quote Posted by MrMunkeepants
however, making the whole thing motion-capture CG (like Beowulf) is not something I want to see. even though it was well done, it still had an aura of "falseness" to it took away from the viewing experience.
Definitely agreed. Though I think in the case of Thief...
if it were done in pure CG, it would be more stylised, instead of trying to make everything look super-realistic (which will inevitably fail). I think that'd be acceptable. I wouldn't want pure live-action and traditional effects. I just love the more stylised look of animation. But I guess I need to go watch The Fountain ;).
Beleg Cúthalion on 5/12/2009 at 19:23
Veto, no pure CG for me, please, I'll take the super-realistic instead. :p 300 was fun, but the general (visual) artistic level of it was IMHO higher (i.e. more artificial) than the one of Thief. Plus, 300 wasn't meant to be taken too seriously, so they could work with CG backgrounds and slow motion.
If you have a look at the trailers for Prince of Persia and Spartacus: Blood and Sand, you can see what can become of "pure CG" movies.
The Shroud on 5/12/2009 at 20:11
Quote Posted by Echelon5
Also I think Dominus should totally paint some of the scenes from the script with his awesome style.;)
Seconded!
Bakerman on 6/12/2009 at 05:15
Quote Posted by Beleg Cúthalion
If you have a look at the trailers for Prince of Persia and Spartacus: Blood and Sand, you can see what can become of "pure CG" movies.
I don't think those are really very relevant to discussing the benefits of CG for a Thief movie... those movies aren't what they are because of CG. CG is just the only way directors have to express what they want the movie to be. In the case of Thief, CG would be used to express something entirely different.
EDIT: I'm such a shit-stirrer... I originally thought CG was the way to go, then realised that I'd enjoy live-action more... now hearing that people don't like the idea of CG I've convinced myself I need to defend it :p. And I really do believe it would be better than live-action! :p
Blue Sky on 6/12/2009 at 12:53
Mmm I definitely agree with a part live-action, part CGi backdrop style, as with 300 and Sin City and the rest of them. Not that it would look anything like those...but it would achieve something similar to the Rust Monkey style.
Quote Posted by jtr7
Just as Terry Gilliam's famous animations for Monty Python were made using cut-outs of his illustrations to save time (two weeks for his first set of animations, all by himself, with no prior animation experience)
This is just me being persnickety, but what about the animations he did for Do Not Adjust Your Set?
Namdrol on 6/12/2009 at 15:04
Something similar to Sin City was what I was thinking.
In fact that's actually the last but one film I saw at the cinema, with the last being Moon.
Beleg Cúthalion on 6/12/2009 at 20:20
Well, then another example, the AC2 lineage movies are probably more thievy and still look a little confined. They're not bad I guess and although I'm not familiar with Renaissance clothing and props, it doesn't look wrong to me, but still it looks like an image which cannot get out of its frame. It looks like CG, that's the problem.
Bakerman on 6/12/2009 at 21:24
Quote Posted by Beleg Cúthalion
Well, then another example, the AC2 lineage movies are probably more thievy and still look a little
confined. They're not bad I guess and although I'm not familiar with Renaissance clothing and props, it doesn't look wrong to me, but still it looks like an image which cannot get out of its frame. It looks like CG, that's the problem.
Fair enough, but I still want to say that's a problem with whoever did those movies, not with CG itself. It's like I could point out The Hunchback Of Notre Dame 2 as an example of why a Thief movie would never work as an animation - but there's a wild difference between what THOND2 (wow :p) was trying to achieve and what Daniel Thron was trying to achieve, and what a potential Thief director would be trying to achieve.
I guess I need to find examples of
good CG ;).
deadman on 9/12/2009 at 05:06
Good stuff; I can see how your faithful attention to the source keeps the rendition a deferential one :thumb: I'm admittedly coming to this late, but I do have a couple of comments.
Quote Posted by The Shroud
[CENTER]THRONE-ROOM GUARD
(mumbled, Cockney accent)
I don’t see why I should have to be
the one down here in the cold and
the dark and the damp.[/CENTER]
Regarding this, and other lines taken directly from in-game guard mutter, I'm not quite sure this would fit, especially given the guard's location. If anything, it'd be something muttered by a guard in the basement, not outside the throne room. Of course when he talks about the people "up there" he could be speaking metaphorically (as in, those above him on the social ladder), but I doubt he'd be that poetic, so I'd definitely think of something more contextual.
And my own thoughts on the 2D animation vs. live action are also unresolved. On the one hand I have such fond memories watching the cutscenes and feel the stylistic aesthetic could be quite successfully rendered in a 2D (even fluid Anime style) vehicle. Yet, the senses could be potentially even more immersed in a live-action City if done properly. There's so much that can be done with 3D animation these days (I'm one of those animators myself!), so there's yet another option.
I suppose we have to ask ourselves: what is the likelihood this would be picked up by someone with enough funding to do it justice? And what are the legal ramifications involved (this may be addressed elsewhere, I just read the first page of responses)? Does it require permission from the legal owner of the IP?
deadman
Echelon5 on 13/12/2009 at 04:13
Any chance of some more script?
