Comments

3 responses to “7 Finalists for Visual Effects Consideration Announced”

1. 

   Nathan Donarum

   January 6, 2010

   District 9 definitely used its CGI effectively, to the point where it blended seamlessly with the live action. I just think that Cameron hit a breakthrough with the motion capture technology he used, and it showed. One thing I noticed very clearly in Avatar was the fact that when the Na’vi touched each other, or even touched a human, there was weight to it (if that makes sense). When their noses touched in that one scene, there was a pressure there like there is when a person touches another person. I’ve never seen CGI able to accomplish that with such believability. For as well done as Gollum was, for example (the shining example, I think), that was something that still felt slightly off.

   I think it’s a definitely a tough choice, but I personally side with Avatar by a point or two. Though I do understand the argument for District 9. I was just re-watching it on DVD and it’s more impressive than I remember.

   Loading…

   Reply
2. 

   Peter J Patrick

   January 6, 2010

   I would nominate Avatar, District 9 and Star Trek as well but I would give the award to District 9 which in its simplicity is more realistic. Question is will they award the most technology or the best? If the answer is teh msot, Avatar wins hands down. If it’s the best, District 9 has a rooting chance.

   Loading…

   Reply
3. 

   Nathan Donarum

   January 6, 2010

   Avatar, District 9 and Star Trek would be my personal picks, with Avatar winning hands down.

   I didn’t see Harry Potter, but I never found the visuals in the other movies to be overly impressive. They get the job done, but that’s about it.
   Terminator Salvation was alright, but nothing stood out as overly exciting.
   Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen was just way. Too. Much. It was just overly big and overly loud without any reason to it. Sure, there was a lot of detail to the transformers, but it was just too much. It got to the point where it was like the effects designers were putting more pieces of metal and junk onto the robots just to make it look “cooler”, without a real purpose.
   People kept praising the visuals in 2012, but I didn’t find them to be extremely great. Some of them were, but other times it just looked bad, like sometimes witht he plane and the cars, the way they moved. The actual destruction looked mostly good, but it wasn’t as smooth or believable as I expected, given all the praise I read.

   District 9’s visual effects were amazingly well done. On a budget of only $30 million, they made the aliens look and feel real, and all of the weapons felt believable. I was in awe the whole time I watched it.

   I enjoyed Star Trek’s visuals because it was the first time that the visual effects in a Star Trek movie really caught up with the idea of the series: giant space ships exploring outer space. The size and weight of the ships felt real. Not to mention the few scenes that were really remarkable, like the space jumping. It was expected to be a visual effects-heavy movie, but the effects never felt burdensome (like in Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen).

   Whether you liked or disliked Avatar, it’s very difficult to imagine not respecting the visuals. I don’t know what James Cameron did, but I’ve never seen motion capture that good, and Pandora never felt like a CGI creation. Most of the movie is CGI, and it didn’t feel that way. Not to mention it’s the first time I’ve ever seen 3D that I actually liked. Avatar deserves the award. Period.

   Loading…

   Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.