This is something I've always hated about Hollywood from a design perspective and it's that they always need to go the live action root no matter what and it makes things shit. I think it's because they clearly believe it's a marketing strategy to treat actors like they're product placements and have them there 'in the flesh' for some reason.
The problem with this is if all they're doing is standing in front of a green screen the whole movie with zero interaction and creativity it's going to look like shit no matter what they do. It's the same thing with Ariel, I'm still annoyed at this shot I saw of her looking up and sitting on a rock or something and the actress clearly looks like she's just in a studio with a mermaid outfit on which isn't at all convincing.
Much better to go pure 3D and make use of motion capture, but that would require actual investment on part of Hollywood in proper 3D artists and motion capture tech as opposed to whatever lowballed half-arsed sweatshop workers they've got doing the CGI now. Need I mention rings of power and the latest star wars films?
I'm still annoyed at this shot I saw of her looking up and sitting on a rock or something and the actress clearly looks like she's just in a studio with a mermaid outfit on which isn't at all convincing.
Even the best actress couldn't salvage that crap and Hollywood doesn't exactly have the best personnel these days, just from the shots alone they were trying to show off I was unimpressed.
Not really. The actor's mental image of the scene can be very different than the special effects that gets drawn around him. Which can be different from what the writer wrote and what the director wanted.
Actually, this would make good material for that tire swing comic.
This is something I've always hated about Hollywood from a design perspective and it's that they always need to go the live action root no matter what and it makes things shit. I think it's because they clearly believe it's a marketing strategy to treat actors like they're product placements and have them there 'in the flesh' for some reason.
The problem with this is if all they're doing is standing in front of a green screen the whole movie with zero interaction and creativity it's going to look like shit no matter what they do. It's the same thing with Ariel, I'm still annoyed at this shot I saw of her looking up and sitting on a rock or something and the actress clearly looks like she's just in a studio with a mermaid outfit on which isn't at all convincing.
Much better to go pure 3D and make use of motion capture, but that would require actual investment on part of Hollywood in proper 3D artists and motion capture tech as opposed to whatever lowballed half-arsed sweatshop workers they've got doing the CGI now. Need I mention rings of power and the latest star wars films?
I feel like good acting could solve this.
Even the best actress couldn't salvage that crap and Hollywood doesn't exactly have the best personnel these days, just from the shots alone they were trying to show off I was unimpressed.
Not really. The actor's mental image of the scene can be very different than the special effects that gets drawn around him. Which can be different from what the writer wrote and what the director wanted.
Actually, this would make good material for that tire swing comic.