Holy shit this is some freaking amazing stop motion animation
http://www.neilgaiman.com/mediafiles...line/sneak.mov
I can not wait to see the finished product.
Printable View
Holy shit this is some freaking amazing stop motion animation
http://www.neilgaiman.com/mediafiles...line/sneak.mov
I can not wait to see the finished product.
Damn, that really does look fucking good.
The book was good stuff as pretty much all Gaiman stuff is. Hopefully this time they can stay true to his work (unlike Stardust).
It's almost too slick. It might actually be losing something vital in being so precise.
I can't stay awake during Neil Gaiman movies. :(
I know the feeling, and it pisses me off because his books are so damned good.Quote:
Originally Posted by YellerDog
I love everything he writes.
I think the main problem is the mental images created by his words are endlessly more interesting than whatever the movies can come up with visually.
edit: or on an audio/visual level, I mean to say. You can damn near smell what he's describing on page sometimes.
This has been in production for a long ass time. I was starting to think it had been canceled.
Henry Selick is a very talented animator. James and the Giant Peach is very underrated, I think.
Something about this clip bothers me a little, though. I think the way it's touched up with computers lessens the stop motion feel. At first glance I almost mistook it for CGI. It's still beautiful looking but I might have to get used to it.
I heard They Might Be Giants will do the soundtrack, which is pretty cool. Randy Newman did James and he's one of my favorites, as well, so he has a good track record in the audio department.
I enjoy Selick generally, but "Monkeybone" hurts my brain.
This definately feels like it could have been a much easier thing to do with CGI. There's a lot of really slick movement, but they're going overboard with it.
On the other hand, I wish Aardman wasn't stepping into CG. :(
edit: I think I prefer my stop-motion to have kind of a Luddite-quality to it. I don't mind motion-control cameras and such, but once it loses that handmade aspect and approches CG, the soul just falls right out. The fingerprints on Wallace and Gromit's models impress me more than the smoothest, cleanest stop motion ever will.
Interview with Selick
Set pics by Latino Review - an example of a pic ...
http://www.latinoreview.com/images/u...154%20copy.jpg
Featurettes:
Henry Selick and Neil Gaiman Bring Coraline to Life
Crafting the World of Coraline
The Story of Coraline
Meet the Inhabitants of Coraline's World
Coraline in the Higher Dimensions
This is looking fantastic I have to say.
Yeah its his regular stop motion, but filmed in 3D which is why the film looks like its all CG. He said he did use very little, but its mainly stop motion and 3D cinematography.
This doesn't make sense. It's filmed stereoscopically, but you haven't seen it in 3D, so basically you're saying that if I film something, and there happens to be another camera filming next to it, the film from the one camera will look more like a computer image. It doesn't work like that. The 2D version of the film isn't affected by the fact that it was filmed stereoscopically.Quote:
Originally Posted by Advocate
This looks insane, I love stop motion.
Did you watch the last featurette?Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
Did you?
I bet no.
Cause if you did they explain that this film will be shown in 3-D. Thanks for watching.
That still doesn't make it look CG though.
I think Advocate might have watched a featurette or something. I am not sure.
New pics of Coraline.
Awesome.
Loving those designs.
Yes I did, and I somehow don't think you understand the words I'm saying or the distinction between computer generated cgi (i.e. 3D redering) and stereoscopic filming (i.e. the kind of 3D done here). The latter has no ability to look any different than normal filming when only the left eye or right eye film is being shown.Quote:
Originally Posted by Advocate
"Filmed in 3D" means two cameras running next to each other. When you play back one for the right eye and one for the left eye, that makes it look 3D, but it doesn't change how either film real looks individually. I don't know how to explain that any better, but just take my word for it and stop being a dick.
I almost bought this book today, but apparently it's $13. Since when are paperbacks priced like graphic novels?
You were getting ripped off. I'm pretty sure I paid like 6 - 7 bucks for it through amazon.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChaoofNee
Blegh. Movie tie-in edition. I can't rightfully say I read the book first and complain about changes like a snooty bastard if I have the movie tie-in edition!
Thanks for the quick reply.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
Hey this is out today homos.
Damn I gotta see this cartoon!
I'm pissed cause I really want to see this tonight but no one will go with me.
I want to go see this this weekend. In 3D if possible
No theaters by me are showing it in 3D, which is the suck. I really wanted to see it in 3D too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
Also, John, all of my friends are being bitches as well and not wanting to see it. Fuck my friends and their lack of appreciation for this stuff.
Fuck 'em. See it by yourself. I'll wait around to see a movie with friends, but if none of them want to see it, I'm seeing it one way or the other.
Seeing this in 3D tomorrow night, the polarized glasses they give you though will almost undoubtedly give me a headache. I have the opposite problem, everywhere around me is only playing it in multiple D's, I want my movie in regular D.
I'm going to go see it with UK Narayan maybe!
I really want to check it out sometime in the next week or so but I'm sure none of my friends have any interest in seeing it at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shin Johnpv
Well. You know what you call friends who don't do fun things with you are called? Elkino? Is that what they're called? They're not called friends, that is for certain.
it's too bad you didn't move to colorado, maybe your good friend Finchie would go see it with you. it's too bad, really it's too bad.
This was really, really good. I was a fool for doubting!
you were! but not anymore!
Saw it in 3D tonight, we loved it!
This shit is unreal. See this nao.
Saw it in 3D. Holy shit, that was one crazy acid trip! I mean, holy shit!
Chalk this up as must-see.
(Honestly, I can't even describe what I saw. So I won't try. Just...holy shit!)
so if I drop acid before the movie it will be horrifying then?
You're talking like Despair now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chux
How do you figure? I saw it with my fiance.
The movie itself is dropping acid. I imagine if you dropped acid on top of that it would cancel out the movie acid. You'd be all like "why am I watching C-Span in 3-D?".Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowutopia
I didn't really dig this too much. I realize it's a "for all ages" thing, but the story was very simple, and at times arbitrary. I think of something like Pan's Labyrinth, that while very different in tone, still created an original fairy tale with some meat to it. There's quite a few shots done specifically for the 3D effect, without which would seem oddly chosen, and the 3D effect itself was really inconsistent. Here and there screen elements would do something interesting with it, but I considered it a victory if scene was just in focus, so often were things blurry. On top of that, the glasses were horribly designed and uncomfortable; everyone in my party of 7 came out of the theatre with a red score across our nose where they rested.
Granted, the visuals and animation were all very nice, although some of the coolest scenes seemed to be computer done and not stop-motion. The garden design was frickin unreal, and the ridiculous Scotties were a particular fav. I think if the dialogue was given a layer of subtlety it would go a long way in diminishing my other qualms with the movie (well, not the gimmicky 3D). As it is, you're sitting watching something astonishing visually, so meticulously designed, and then listening to characters say the absolute most basic thing they can to carry the story on.
It was all stop-mo, Fury.
The only thing I didn't like was the 'video game'-ness of the third act.
You mean the hunt for the eyes? I thought it was pretty good, in fact, the reason they tried so hard with the earlier "happy" segments was to contrast them with their horrifying counterparts later. I thought it was rather clever.
It wasn't the tasks themselves, it was the way they were presented, what with the 'navi-balls' giving hints and such, and the 'item spotter vision'. Felt like kind of a narrative cop-out.
Minor complaint, though, I loved the movie! The 3D glasses weren't bad at all, even though they were just there for depth-of-field most of the time. Made for a pretty movie.
Fury, I think you're theater may have been malfunctioning. The 3D was perfect in mine. All in focus. All very convincing. I don't think I can go back to paying $10 a ticket for 2D movies any more now that bluray is out. It's not for the "wave shit in your face 3D trick" gags. I just love how great 3D movies look. The depth is amazing.
But this would have been a trip even in 2D.
Anyway, yeah. Total video game 3rd act. Powerup item, timer, fetch quest, and all that. But everything was just so crazy and creative that I really didn't care.
I think the thick fog in that banana slug scene was computer generated. I don't think that would be possible with stop-motion. And even though the whole movie had less characteristic stop-motion stuttering in all motions, the fog looked even smoother still.Quote:
Originally Posted by YellerDog
And I don't think there is any way they could have done the world falling apart visuals without a computer.
But I'll give it 99% stop motion. It looked amazing.
3d glasses give me headaches.
I dunno... there's definitely compositing, but I think there's a lot of tricky slight-of-hand going on. People were thinking the mice were CG, and that just ain't the case.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheebs
I intend to see this sometime during the week. $3 cheapo theater, ho! Nothing within 30 minutes had 3D so forget that.
You said we without mentioning anybody else first. Despair usually does that when he talks about him and D Jr.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chux
I failed at the funny.
I should hopefully be seeing this on Tuesday, I CAN NOT wait for it.
The mice definitely had a different quality to them then other characters/props, but I never thought they were CG. Their motion seemed to use less frames though, seemingly intentional, for a slightly disturbing, mechanical feeling.
So amazing visuals aside, it's a good movie? Because Nightmare Before Christmas is a boring crappy movie, and I was writing this off as the same.
Yeah, the movie is great. The visuals are what make it one-of-a-kind, but the story was much better than NightmareBC. Way more of a connection to the characters. The plot was crazy/creepy/trippy aside from the animation as well.Composting, defiantly. The scene with the scotties in the theater for certain. I just don't think you could animate that many things on each frame without a train wreck. I guess they animated a dozen or so at a time and then layered it all together. But they're still fundamentally stop-motion. I gotta' give 'em props for resisting full CG for that many background characters.Quote:
Originally Posted by YellerDog
Funny, I'd say it was impossible for me to make a connection with these characters. They simply had nothing to say and didn't develop in any way. NBC is definitely more engaging.
I'd still recommend seeing it for the visuals, but I'd say aside from that it's disappointing.
This > NBC. Coraline's crooked smile is totally endearing.
One of the houses that I saw today (While looking for one with my fiance) had a small door in the wall.
We laughed.
This movie was awesome. I definitely liked the story more than Nightmare Before Christmas or Corpse Bride, and it has more memorable and creative scenes. They spaced out the really dramatic 3d effects instead of overdosing on them which was a good decision.
Should be seeing this with Finch, next week. 3D! Can't wait.
I'm going to see this in 3d tonight woot.
This was some damn good shit. Animation was really really good, just loved the look and feel of the film.
Did you watch through the credits? Seeing the 'thread' shot with all the rig work it took to produce it was fucking incredible.
ohhhhh man No I didn't cause my friends I was with were like Dude we need to go to Best Buy we can't just watch credits. Fuck I'll have to go see it again.
I loved this movie as well. More so than Nightmare and Corpse Bride. And I really liked both of those movies too.
Dakota Fanning did a great job and the movie had a cool little lesson for any of the young kids in the audience who saw it. Some of the images in the film were genuinely unsettling, but they didn't feel gimmicky or anything.
OMG, and how about the MUSIC?! Fucking awesome.
The movie was real slow in spots but honestly it was wonderful. One of the trippiest/creepiest things I have seen in a long time, way better than NMBC and Corpse Bride.
The colors in the Other World were flat out amazing.
It was funny because 3d gives me headaches but a) I thought it'd be fun, and more importantly, b) I assumed my girl wanted to see it in 3d. So we're sitting down in the theater and it's time to put the glasses and and she's like "Ugh, 3d gives me headaches, I wish we could see it in 2d." I was like OMG we need to fuckin' communicate!
HOWEVER I'm super glad we saw it in 3d, and it didn't give me a headache. There are a few super-pop-out-of-the-screen moments that sucked but mostly it's just awesome. When the tube in the little door expands all the way down...I can't imagine that not being in 3d. That never got old.
Anyway go see it, it's rad. It's like a super sinister Alice in Wonderland and it's great.
I finally got to see Coraline today, in full 3D to boot, and wasn't that impressed. It wasn't bad, definitely ok, but the story was a bit flat and the side characters were little more than cardboard cutouts to provide an extra scene in Other World. The search through the house at the end was good but the follow-up in the real world was little more than padding against a far less interesting threat. It wasn't a bad way to spend an afternoon, but I don't need to see it again.
James
Coraline: 3/5
A friend of mine posed a good question: who exactly is this movie for? I think it is way too scary and creepy for little kids, and it is not entertaining enough for older people like me, so I guess its best for people in the middle of that age range. In the theater we went to we heard a little voice behind us, I think he must of been five years old. He said "I think this is going to give me nightmares!", we all laughed loudly. This was a pretty smart kid. The scene with the ghosts and the near naked old ladies made us really question if little kids should be seeing this.
This movie reminded me of the corpse bride and mirror mask: style over substance. It looked amazing, but the story was pretty thin. Plus it didn't really have any likable characters. Coraline was whiny bitch and her parents were even worse. My favorite character was the fake father, he was pretty likable, and I really liked the little song he sang.
The 3D looked really good though.
My gf and I caught this Saturday night in 3D. The movie was amazing, the 3D less so. It was pretty blurry, like it always is when you take a normal movie and shoehorn the 3D effect in. It never looks as good as when a movie is shot from scratch just for 3D.
Otherwise, stop-motion animation was very well-done (a little choppy here and there, but still very good), the story was great (I loved how creepy it got), and the character design was downright brilliant, especially when the Other Mother got all freaky looking near the end.
And oh man, that old lady's tits...lol.
Anyone see the trailer for 9 that played before this? That movie looks great as well.
Ummmm it was shot for 3D, Dole. Youse a blind hustler.
I just assumed they didn't, 'cause the 3D was blurry and shitty.
Go see Terminator 2: 3D at Universal Studios to see what real 3D should look lke. Anyone impressed by Coraline's 3D doesn't know shit.
I suspect you have some sort of inner ear disorder.
When I'm talking about the 3D being blurry and breaking up, I mean the stuff where they're sticking things into the screen, like when the Other Mother reaches for Coraline or the sewing needle pokes out, shit like that. That looked like crap. When they're just standing there the 3D effect was fine.
You really do need to get your ass to Universal Studios and check out T2: 3D. The audience was completely freaking out every time something poked out of the screen and into their faces. The effect was flawless.
Dude, I lived like an hour out of Orlando. I've seen it. Many many times.
Good lad.
You need to see it more, then get your picture taken with Doc Brown.
JUMPING JIGGAWATTS!
They closed BttF!
Fuck. I never got to see that.
Great Scott!
Dole if you wear specific prescription contacts or glasses the 3D effect will look fucked up like that. The same thing was happening to Chaoofnee.
As for style over substance, it's an adaptation of a Neil Gaiman book (one that he's reportedly pretty fond of) so if you go into the movie knowing that you can set your expectations accordingly. It's like a modern day fairy tale, but not like the pussified versions they tell now. It's like a throwback to Grimm fairy tales where people die horribly and the imagery is less than pleasant.
It may have been the theater. I saw this the first time at a theater in Jersey and the 3D was perfect, no blurriness, no jitters, smooth and just awesome. I saw it again on Thursday at the AMC on 42 street, and that shit was fucked up. Every time the camera panned there were jitters in the 3D. I'm guessing either their focus wasn't set up right, or the 2 lenses were just ever so slightly out of sync with each other.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dolemite
I wear contacts, and my gf wears glasses. Hmm.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrialSword
Still, T2: 3D didn't do that to me at all.
Yeah, we saw it at the AMC on 42 street, too. Your explaination sounds a bit more plausable to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shin Johnpv
That was Pan's Labyrinth. This (Coraline) is precisely style-over-substance. Fun to watch, dulling to think about. Even traditional fairy tales have some sense of character developement, important decisions, or morality lessons. All the characters here came out the same as they went in, and the antagonist was pretty-much "just because". I realize fairy tales often have such elements, but they're typically working on a symbolic level, something I couldn't really glean from Coraline.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrialSword
It certainly seems to have that sort of depth, and all the macabre trappings of a Grimm story, but I feel like they came up with some neat notions (alternate world with buttons sewn into the eyes) and a visualization strategy, without actually making any of it matter. Maybe a simple, practically functional narrative with cool visuals is enough, gathering from the overall response here. However, I think people are extrapolating a lot of the movie's "charm" from particular visual elements (say, Coraline's deliberately crooked smile) that the writing never earned.
I disagree. I think Coraline learned something at the end of the movie. And I think it's something that kids in the audience could get and relate to (appreciate your parents/the grass isn't greener on the other side/yadda yadda).
Quote:
Originally Posted by YellerDog
Click for full size
We still have it here... lulz.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dolemite
グレートスコットQuote:
Originally Posted by bbobb
That would honestly be my guess then. Plus one of the guys I saw it with is a stereoscopic compositor (that's the big fancy title for the people who put this shit together) at Blue Sky, and he even walked out of the theater going "their shit wasn't aligned right". Did you guys see it in theater #17?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dolemite
Yeah, I think this is just the typical "THIS IS THE BEST THING EVER!!!!" response so common with movie goers these days. Awesome today, forgotten or (possibly) shitted on tomorrow. As for me, I would definitely see this again, but you just have to keep in mind what this is: a tech demo, a really pretty experiment with a paper thin plot. Kind of like Speed Racer (a movie I gave a similar score to).Quote:
Originally Posted by FuryFox
SPEED RACER WAS ROBBED AT THE OSCARS.
Yup, it was indeed several escalator rides up, in theater #17. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Shin Johnpv
See fuck that place, they need to get their shit in order.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dolemite
The movie was pretty good, the animation was downright nuts at parts (the effects like the world freezing and Coraline walking around the world in particular). The 3D was really cool in parts too. It really went nuts from the spider web sequence and any part where Coraline is walking into a room with the camera right in front of her (like into the theater and the that wild orchard). Less "shit coming out of the screen" and more depth of field effects.
If I'm not mistaken that musical number by the dad sounded just like They Might Be Giants.
That's because it was They Might Be Giants.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rumpy
I saw this the other day. I can understand where the people that don't like the movie are coming from. I guess if you're retarded or maybe just really boring, you'll judge a character only on the dialogue, and not the things that matter, like a crooked smile, or a timid boy that rides a loud bicycle, or tangible disappointment from a normally uncaring mother.
The only thing that was not completely wonderful was the fucking "You've found two buttons, congratulations! But be caaareful, the witch is tricky. Use the Z button to target her when throwing the cat!.
Kind of disappointing that the rest of the music they did for the movie got cut. I like TMBG.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shin Johnpv
Coraline! Look for the hand of Jesse James in the freakshow!Quote:
Originally Posted by Finch
THERE WAS MORE?!!?!?!Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
DAMN RIGHT IT WAS.Quote:
Originally Posted by YellerDog
Who doesn't?Quote:
Originally Posted by Frogacuda
Nazis?
John Goodman as Pops Racer is a grillion times better than some dead guy as whispery Bad Mann.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChaoofNee
