Too CGI-ish!

[Agentsands77]

Given what was changed, it worked great as a movie, I loved it. however, I prefer it over Moores Graphic Novel because it was so slimmed down, and I thought the ending was alot better, but kept the same heart.

There's nothing of the same heart in the film. Like it or not, Alan Moore's graphic novel is about anarchy, something that is never even touched in the film adaptation.

Might as well make it animated then. And whats so innovative about that?

Nah, you don't know what I mean. There were plenty of scenes in the film that resemble the approach I describe - Hartigan leaving prison, for one, or the "negative kiss" on the rooftop in the opening scene. And it wouldn't be the same as making it animated, because these would be actors, with actor's performances - something an animated film can never live up to.

Well, concidering how minimalist the original art was, it sounds like your prajecting a bit here. Detail and framing wise, it was sharper and as edged as any frames from the comic.

No. The movie looks glossy, and the violence is done in such a way that it's devoid of any of the impact it has in the film (just look how fake it is when Marv breaks the door down, or when he's hit by that car).

Hey, it sounds like a bad opinion, but it's yours none the less.

I remember quite a few "SIN CITY fan" reviews on AICN and elsewhere on the web that complained of the same thing when the movie debuted.

 

[Mr. Socko]

The only really crappy CG part in Sin City IMO was the cop cars in HGB.

The CG in 300 does look very glossy, but I think it looks better than Sin City and Sky Capt'n.

 

[Agentsands77]

The CG in 300 does look very glossy, but I think it looks better than Sin City and Sky Capt'n.

It's a thousand times better and more detailed than either of those films.

 

[Mike059jig]

I think to get this movie right you actually need CGI....and The Dark Dawn look from the trailer looks excellent

 

[Agentsands77]

I think to get this movie right you actually need CGI....

Of course. And some moments are absolutely gorgeous.

But some of it looks a little too fake, and a little too oddly-toned. I do think they could have gone for a more natural look in places, a little more earthy. LORD OF THE RINGS was able to manage that, even with its abundance of CGI in moments.

 

[Catman]

The CGI was great, but I didn't care for all the grain! As a professional camera operator, grain is my enemy!

 

[Quiest Tonpapa]

I liked the CGI blood. The sideway slo-mo shots of the Spartans killing Persian after Persian was sweet. My one beef is that so much CG blood was spattered, and yet nothing was left on the ground.

 

[Matt.S99]

yeah the slow mo was awesome!this is by far the best movie ive seen in a long time,it wasnt too cgi-ish,i thought it looked perfect,id go see it again

 

[Cinemaman]

Was there too much of slow-mo scenes?

 

[Nivek]

Was there too much of slow-mo scenes?

Not in my opinion. It wasn't as reminiscent of Matrix, it wasn't all slow motion, it was more like framing the shot by slowing down the action at key times. The blood would float in the air, almost like splashing water. except its blood. It works, thats all I can tell you.

 

[ultimatefan]

I think the too CGI argument doesn´t ring true to this as much as this doesn´t ring true to Sin City: this isn´t meant to look "real", it´s stylized on purpose, it´s meant to look like a piece of art.

 

[Mr. Socko]

The CGI was great, but I didn't care for all the grain! As a professional camera operator, grain is my enemy!

OMG, I was wondering if it was just my theater 'cause at times the picture looked real grainy and all!

 

[Catman]

Yeah, the movie is just grainy. I have no idea why. I guess they thought it looked cool or something.

 

[Master Chief]

The CG gave the movie a surreal dream quality, especially during the battles, I loved it. The grain didn't bother me that much either, haha, but I didn't really notice it. I was so lost in it.

 

[drunkhomer]

dont ppl understand the style of the cg was to create an artistic style, which in my opinion toook my breathe away, sooo i kinda find it a little bit weird how ppl complain

 

[Crooklyn]

If this film isn't nominated for cinematography...

 

[Catman]

It won't, my friend.

 

[Mr. Credible]

i don't get how there needed to be cgi backgrounds throughout this movie... i mean, i get that it's different and gets people talking and whatev... but why? maybe it's cheaper, but i doubt it, given that there were only really 3 sets in the whole movie.

 

[Crooklyn]

^ Snyder mentioned that there really was no place to film the scenery found in the book. And with the measly 60 million they had, no chance of affording it even if they could find such a place.

 

[ILikeYourCoat]

I don't know if this has been discussed or not, but does anyone feel that its too much CGI? It worked in Sin City but here it just looks too much.

I think the dialogue had too many vowels in it. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

 

[the a1ant]

I liked the CGI blood. The sideway slo-mo shots of the Spartans killing Persian after Persian was sweet. My one beef is that so much CG blood was spattered, and yet nothing was left on the ground.

Yeah, that was kinda weird. Especially no blood on the 300, either. I'm glad it wasn't a blood fest though. The CGI blood was very artistic in a sense.

Yeah, the movie is just grainy. I have no idea why. I guess they thought it looked cool or something.

I loved the grain. up: