Leave a comment

box_in_the_box July 26 2009, 22:14:55 UTC
At this point, I seriously wonder if Tim Burton just runs his movie through a run-macro program:

PERIOD SETTING AND/OR BASED ON PREEXISTING WORK, Y/N = REGARDLESS, FILTER THROUGH SPOOKY GOTHIC VISUALS + DRUG-INDUCED ANIMATION
CAST = JOHNNY DEPP + DISTURBINGLY PALE WAIF, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY FIT ON NOT, + LISA MARIE HAHAHAHA SORRY HELENA BONHAM CARTER
SOUNDTRACK = DANNY ELFMAN DOING THE MERRY-GO-ROUND-FROM-HELL MUSIC YET AGAIN

Reply

kali921 July 26 2009, 22:49:46 UTC
That's...above your usual capslock quota. I'm impressed.

Reply

box_in_the_box July 26 2009, 22:56:17 UTC
It was meant to convey automated macro-speak rather than rage. :)

Reply

kali921 July 27 2009, 00:15:18 UTC
Helena Bonham Carter looks like a ball-jointed doll in that trailer. And not in the good way, either.

Reply

box_in_the_box July 27 2009, 00:16:41 UTC
Burton ... kinda does that to his Women Of Choice, doesn't he?

Reply

kali921 July 27 2009, 00:27:35 UTC
...Point. But she looks particularly balljointian here - and worse, the CGI makes her alien forehead look like it's full of Jell-O. That shit is moving.

Reply

box_in_the_box July 27 2009, 00:29:12 UTC
CGI has basically unleashed Burton to make real people into what he's probably wanted to make them look like all along.

Reply

kali921 July 27 2009, 00:31:02 UTC
To be fair to the industry the world over and all, hasn't CGI done that to ALL directors and visual effects people?

Reply

box_in_the_box July 27 2009, 00:34:55 UTC
Yes, which is kind of my point - when the technology grows advanced enough that it allows you to literally imprint your own imagination directly onto the screen, with almost nothing lost in translation, then the resultant fault lies not in the stars CGI, but in the selves of those who use it.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up