Aug 02, 2010, 04:27 AM // 04:27
|
#1
|
Forge Runner
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: WHERE DO YOU THINK
Profession: W/
|
Inception
Omgwtfbbq <-- Meh mind
Discuss
|
|
|
Aug 03, 2010, 03:15 AM // 03:15
|
#2
|
Furnace Stoker
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: California
Guild: 15 over 50 [Rare]
Profession: W/Mo
|
This movie is better than sex!! Discuss!! lol
|
|
|
Aug 03, 2010, 06:16 AM // 06:16
|
#3
|
Wilds Pathfinder
Join Date: Dec 2008
Guild: Lord of purple
Profession: E/
|
a movie hasnt blown my mind like that since "The Game" in 1997 (which btw I highly recommend to anyone who hasnt seen it, has michael douglas and sean penn in it if you try to find it)
|
|
|
Aug 04, 2010, 01:19 PM // 13:19
|
#4
|
Jungle Guide
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: 55° 57' 0" N / 3° 12' 0" W
Profession: N/Me
|
Nolan fanboys I'm sure will pretend to love it even though it's all been done before and probably better (would it be as good a film without the special effects?). Not a big fan of blockbuster type films myself anyway, I prefer horrors. Inception, I'll wait till it's on tv.
Last edited by Zebideedee; Aug 04, 2010 at 01:24 PM // 13:24..
|
|
|
Aug 04, 2010, 04:44 PM // 16:44
|
#5
|
Jungle Guide
|
Fanboys? People can like a movie without being a fan of something in particular. That's like saying they people who like this movie must be time dilation fanboys, or multiple reality fanboys, or cargo van fanboys, or architecture fanboys, or elevator fanboys or skiing fanboys...
Pure stupidity.
People like this movie because it makes you think, people like the movie because it has lots of explosions, people like the movie because it's a relatively uncommon theme, people like the movie because of the special effects. Many many reasons to like it and just as many to dislike.
Would it be as good a film without the special effects? If you have the budget and the expertise, why the hell wouldn't you use them? Special effects are neat and moviegoers enjoy them. Especially if they are well done and enchance the movie itself.
How about all the FPS's that make a huge deal about physics for explosions and so on? Would they be as good without them? Eyecandy is something that people enjoy. Even guild wars has special effects. Do you play your games at lowest video quality because it's just as good without them?
Personally, I really enjoyed the movie. I enjoyed the ending as it made you think and come to your own conclusions as to how it ended. I really enjoyed that. I also enjoyed the special effects, and explosions. And now that you pointed out who Nolan was (I had to do a search) I'm going to go watch Memento again. That was another well done movie that made you think and second guess yourself.
|
|
|
Aug 07, 2010, 12:32 AM // 00:32
|
#6
|
Jungle Guide
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: 55° 57' 0" N / 3° 12' 0" W
Profession: N/Me
|
I wasn't calling anyone who has posted here a fanboy. Although with that attitude...
Quote:
Would it be as good a film without the special effects? If you have the budget and the expertise, why the hell wouldn't you use them? Special effects are neat and moviegoers enjoy them. Especially if they are well done and enchance the movie itself.
|
Doesn't answer the question!
Quote:
How about all the FPS's that make a huge deal about physics for explosions and so on? Would they be as good without them? Eyecandy is something that people enjoy. Even guild wars has special effects. Do you play your games at lowest video quality because it's just as good without them?
|
I'm, addicted to ME2 atm and I love eye candy, but games are all about eye candy, so thats unfair! Not a big fan of throw enough special effects at a film to make it a blockbuster is all.
Last edited by Zebideedee; Aug 07, 2010 at 12:36 AM // 00:36..
|
|
|
Aug 08, 2010, 09:01 PM // 21:01
|
#7
|
Jungle Guide
|
Would the original star wars have been a good a film without those special effects?
I mean come on. The answer? No. It would have looked awfully silly trying to describe time dilation without action slowing to a crawl/non-movement. It would have been awfully hard to describe/show the control over the environment without letting...the girl...forgot name bend the dream world around them like they did.
Star Wars would have been awfully silly looking with Han Solo holding the blaster under the table and just yelling loudly "PEWPEW".
Special effects are a part of movies. The movies with the bigger budgets can make more spectacular special effects. Sometimes special effects can lift a movie above it's position. They can make a TERRIBLE movie at least visually appealing and thus bearable enough to not walk out on the movie.
Take Avatar: The Last Airbender for example. Horrible acting, really bad storyline, laughable "Love interest", and overall really terrible, but the special effects were extremely well done. So well done that I actually sat through the entire movie without walking out because I wanted to see the next special effect.
M. Night Shyamalan should be ashamed of himself for that movie, but the special effects studios should enjoy the victory.
Quote:
I'm, addicted to ME2 atm and I love eye candy, but games are all about eye candy, so thats unfair! Not a big fan of throw enough special effects at a film to make it a blockbuster is all.
|
And movies are also about eye candy. They are also about story. They are more about story than eye candy, but nothing says they can't have both. Same with games. They are all about the eye candy, but if there's a good story, we like the game all the more.
Last edited by Kumu Honua; Aug 08, 2010 at 09:05 PM // 21:05..
|
|
|
Aug 09, 2010, 01:09 PM // 13:09
|
#8
|
Wilds Pathfinder
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pie-land
Guild: Warlords Of The Underworld [WoTU]
Profession: Mo/
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zebideedee
(would it be as good a film without the special effects?)
|
Apart from Kumu Honua justifying the usage of special effects, no one is yet to "discuss" that the movie was great because of the effects put in place.
Firstly, OP calls it a BBQ in his mind (sounds awesome btw lol). Then two other posts showed general like towards the film and even compared it to another great movie which didn't have great special effects.
As he said, it complimented the storyline rather than tried to show off their new expensive cameras. The slow motion was relative and helped build the atmosphere of time in dream states running at different speeds, creating such a mind spasm it made you feel like your brain had to be on its' toes and aware of everything that was going on. This was the great thing about it. The twist at the end of the film was a given and kind of hinted at throughout the entire film. But that was because of Nolan's style of sucking the viewers in and watching every detail.
The story was greatly written. The idea that Leo was plagued with his own Inception made the ending even better.
Oh, did people not understand that part? Lols.
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2010, 06:35 AM // 06:35
|
#9
|
Major-General Awesome
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Aussie Trolling Crew HQ - Event Organiser and IRC Tiger
Guild: Ex Talionis [Law], Trinity of the Ascended [ToA] ̖̊̋̌̍̎̊̋&#
Profession: W/
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zebideedee
Nolan fanboys I'm sure will pretend to love it even though it's all been done before and probably better (would it be as good a film without the special effects?). Not a big fan of blockbuster type films myself anyway, I prefer horrors. Inception, I'll wait till it's on tv.
|
People like you make me laugh. Inception is a movie that'll be ruined by TV. Enjoy watching a shit version of an amazing film.
__________________
I came when I heard you'd beaten the ELITE FOUR.
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 08:53 PM // 20:53.
|