Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland

[Apollo]

i wonder why there aren't any Card people in the courtyard. I always thought they were the ones that set up the games and did everything.

 

[Octoberist]

In my opinion, the film looks awful. The CGI world looks unimpressive and flat, as if there's no depth whatsoever other than the few feet between the actors and a green screen. Not to mention a storyline that looks unenjoyable with lame use of 3D. I'll be skipping this.

It's one of those cases where I honestly can say that WETA or ILM would have done a better job with the greenscreen work and animation. I'm with you..everything looks so flat.

 

[I'm Old Greg]

yeah it does look flat...you can tell there just standing in a room in front of a green screen

 

[I'm Old Greg]

doublepost

 

[Apollo]

but...but...but....but!! The 3d will make it look,...well...3d!

 

[xwolverine2]

yeah it does look flat...you can tell there just standing in a room in front of a green screen

i have to agree that it looks pretty flat...
just like a matte painting background.

the lighting is also terrible on the actors...
even in that pic the sun is shining from the right yet the light shines from the left on her.

and the cg looks cartoony... but then again what can one expect considering there's a talking rabbit cat and cards.

 

[Apollo]

^ well there could be a large structure on her right, which is blocking the light from hitting her left side.

 

[xwolverine2]

 

[I'm Old Greg]

i was gonna say that about the lighting its off.
the background has this soft haze lighting and the actor has just lighting...doesn't match. shes not blending in at all.

 

[Doc Ock]

The lighting and CGI look fine to me...

 

[jmc]

Miss Hathaway, on the extremely off chance you and I meet and get married can you please look like this on our wedding day? t: :heart:

 

[terry78]

Miss Hathaway, on the extremely off chance you and I meet and get married can you please look like this on our wedding day? t: :heart:

We all know you'd just draw yourself a wife if it never came down to that, man. Geez.

 

[Dark Victory]

yeah it does look flat...you can tell there just standing in a room in front of a green screen

Really, because I'm almost positive they filmed this on location...

I was just using that as an example of how unimpressed I am. Unlike Avatar, where the alien world truly felt alive, this just looks flat and lame.

To quote xwolverine2, it just looks like they're just standing behind at matte painting. The lighting looks completely off, too.

 

[dark_b]

i have to agree that it looks pretty flat...
just like a matte painting background.

the lighting is also terrible on the actors...
even in that pic the sun is shining from the right yet the light shines from the left on her.

and the cg looks cartoony... but then again what can one expect considering there's a talking rabbit cat and cards.

she is in the shadow. and then they made a ''bounce'' on her left. you see that a lot of times in normal movies on real location.

about that it looks flat. 300 looked like it was filmed in a studio. movies that are stylized always look like that IMO.belive me i will not defend this movie but its not different then sin city or 300 IMO.


Burton is in the save zone with hes best friend J.he is in a position in hollywood where he could greenlight some original fantasy movies. and yet he is doing remakes and sequels to some old disney stories. pathetic IMO

 

[dark_b]

Really, because I'm almost positive they filmed this on location...

I was just using that as an example of how unimpressed I am. Unlike Avatar, where the alien world truly felt alive, this just looks flat and lame.

To quote xwolverine2, it just looks like they're just standing behind at matte painting. The lighting looks completely off, too.

he he

 

[TheComicbookKid]

she is in the shadow. and then they made a ''bounce'' on her left. you see that a lot of times in normal movies on real location.

You can't really know she's in the shadow without seeing how high the wall is and nothing in the background closer to the wall is darkened. The fact she's supposed to tower over everyone else sort of leads to the idea there should be a strong light somewhere on the right side of her body.

 

[Doc Ock]

she is in the shadow. and then they made a ''bounce'' on her left. you see that a lot of times in normal movies on real location.

about that it looks flat. 300 looked like it was filmed in a studio. movies that are stylized always look like that IMO.belive me i will not defend this movie but its not different then sin city or 300 IMO.


Burton is in the save zone with hes best friend J.he is in a position in hollywood where he could greenlight some original fantasy movies. and yet he is doing remakes and sequels to some old disney stories. pathetic IMO

I don't know about pathetic, this may sound odd, but I think he is BORED....and decides to do these remakes for fun regardless of what anyone thinks.

 

[xwolverine2]

she is in the shadow. and then they made a ''bounce'' on her left. you see that a lot of times in normal movies on real location.

not sure how you came to that conclusion(cause there's also a random point light shining on her right arm) but fine lets say thats true... what about the second anne hathaway pic i posted... the sun is clearly behind her yet theres no backlighting.... lol

sin city and 300 were both trying to mimic every frame of a comic book...
not sure whats the reasoning behind this one.. i guess they thought the matte painting background and gaussian blur filters would make it look fantasy/cartoony like (cartoons use matte painting backgrounds too)

 

[I'm Old Greg]

 

[dark_b]

http://www.iesb.net/index.php?optio...-to-wonderland&catid=44:interviews&Itemid=172



Q: Why did you decide to shoot it in 2-D and then convert it?
Tim: With all the techniques we were using, there was no point in shooting it in 3-D, when there's nothing to shoot. We used so many different techniques. We didn't go motion capture, but we had live action, we had animation and we had virtual sets. I looked at the conversion we did for Nightmare Before Christmas, and I looked at things that were shot in 3-D and shot in 2-D conversion, and it's like anything. With all of these tools, you can see good 3-D and bad 3-D, and good conversions and bad conversions. We always knew it was going to be in 3-D, so we did all the proper planning so that, when we got to that stage and we finally got the elements together, it was just another piece of the technology. In fact, that was probably some of the easier technology than the other elements that we were dealing with.

 

[Norman Bates]

I love how many are willing to condemn Burton based on still pictures on things such as how they should be lit, etc.

The lighting is correct for those saying it isn't. The light is coming from the left side and we know this because its somewhat blown out in the top left hand corner. Alice is somewhat brighter on the left than the right. Plus, who's to say what the context is of the shot? None of us know.

Burton is experienced enough to know how to talk to his cinematographer and get basic lighting correct. Let's give him a little more credit than that. He knows more about movie-making than any of us here.

 

[I'm Old Greg]

i'm basing it also on Wonka, it as just meh
this is just looking meh to me also, but i hope its good. Crispin Glover is in it

 

[TheComicbookKid]

The lighting is correct for those saying it isn't. The light is coming from the left side and we know this because its somewhat blown out in the top left hand corner. Alice is somewhat brighter on the left than the right. Plus, who's to say what the context is of the shot? None of us know.

Um. This could be an early image before the lighting was fully corrected.


But look at that column to the left on the castle next to Alice's head. The light is striking it on the right side.

 

[Octoberist]

all and all, the greenscreen stuff just looks flat and one of the reasons is the lighting of the actors. I don't think many people are arguing that the movie itself will suck but the level of CGI is pretty average for a movie like this.

but i do like the designs.

 

[dark_b]

Um. This could be an early image before the lighting was fully corrected.


But look at that column to the left on the castle next to Alice's head. The light is striking it on the right side.

unfinished shots dont have teh wrong angle of lighting.