But they ARE real. John Carpenter, in addition to being a great director, is also a closet mad scientist. He created those creatures, and there were supposed to be more scenes with them in the movie, but they ran amok and had to be destroyed before they ate the cast and crew.Originally Posted by Despair
Shows what you know, dummy.
It's not the same. With real effects and props, at least the actor has something to play off of, and at least it actually looks like it's in the room with them, and not pasted in.Sure, since CGI is still not flawless, in many scenes they can look less than stellar, but as long as you can ACCEPT them and believe into the fantasy moment director/crew tries to create, you would be ok.
Believe me, I do think CG has its place and can be an amazing tool for enhancing a movie. But there should be a balance. If it's possible to do something with make-up and coustumes, they should go that route. If it's not possible, THEN use CG.
Agreed 100%.Originally Posted by elfneedsfood


Reply With Quote

, Bah, well, we'll still have enough fightscenes to go around either way I'm sure.
, and the aforementioned "sand" lines, any scene with Jar-Jar) but the first trilogy had some equally corny lines and scenes and as a whole those turned out quite well.


Bookmarks