it doesnt even look like a normal animated movie? it looks awful?This looks so awful.
Polar Express 2004
![]()
I'd say some definite improvements in tech have been made.
JAK®;19187906 said:It all depends on how much Speilberg and Jackson trust the animators to embellish the movement.
In good hands, perhaps... But that's not the same as the right hands.I'm glad that my beloved Tintin is in such good hands. I can't wait.
I seem to remember Avatar mostly being publicized as a "performance capture" movie and don't remember the WETA animators being mentioned that much. Hopefully, the situation here is similar and Spielberg is using the talents of the animators to make the mocap look better.
In good hands, perhaps... But that's not the same as the right hands.![]()
Didn't Herge say that Spielberg was the only person that could bring justice to a Tintin film before he died?
Yes. He was also scheduled to meet with Spielberg to discuss a film but died before it could happen.
It's the big contradiction of motion-capture films. The textures ARE photorealistic. But as soon as they are applied to the stylised, cartoonish models it becomes hard to see. In this movie it's the best I have seen yet, but it still looks like an animated movie. I don't think you can ever get past that no matter how far the technology goes.the more i see the pics the less i understand how people can think things like the clothes look photorealistic
however the more i look at them the more i appreciate the look - its a cgi film with great textures