I would like you to read/watch
and comment on/discuss the presentation –Special
Effects.
You will find it at http://onlineclasspjwstk-malgorzataswierk.blogspot.com/2014/01/week-13-special-effects-in-films_6.html
Comment on it here.
Popular posts from this blog
The problem with ecological cars emission in UK Since the adoption of the European Emission Allowance Directive in the European Parliament, all car makers have tried to submit. Since 1992, the Euro I standard has been in force, which limited the emission of carbon monoxide to the atmosphere. The Euro VI standard currently applies, which limits the series of exhaust gases. These include: hydrocarbons, nitrogen and carbon oxides, and dust. The most significant change was brought by the Euro IV standard. For the first time it introduced the limitation of nitrogen oxides, which are responsible for the harmful compounds of smog. What is smog? Smog consists of sulfur oxides, nitrogen and carbon. In addition, solid substances such as suspended dust (PM). Dust suspend in atmospheric aerosols may be in liquid and solid form. These can be particles of sea salt, clouds from the Sahara and artificial compounds made by people. These compounds often come fr
- Get link
- Other Apps
James Veitch is a British comedian. In today’s Ted Talk James with characteristic for himself a sense of humor shows how he deals with spam emails and why responding to junk messages may be sometimes dangerous. Questions: What do you think about James’s way of dealing with spam? Why are junk messages legal, even though it sometimes may be a fraud? Dou you have a problem with spam? How do you deal with with it?
- Get link
- Other Apps
Comments
Also, there’s been a lot of improvement in the world of gaming in terms of creating realistic worlds: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aL9wsEFohTw.
I agree with you that good special effects should be unnoticeable. However, I think, it also depends on a movie and not every story needs them. When we are watching a since-fiction film we want to see as many special effects as possible. In this case I think that they should even „explode from the screen”.
Making an unnoticeable special effect is the goal of the film industry and we are getting closer and closer. If anyone saw the second part of Hobbit in the HFR technology knows what I’m talking about. It was really hard to distinguish computer generated animation from those made by traditional camera. Of course I know that the dragon was artificial but it looks very convincing.
And I don’t think that bad special effects makes a bad movie. I like watching movies that has something to pass on to the viewers, something more that tons of explosions and others special effects. I hope that they won’t stop making such movies.
Yes I pay attention to special effects especially if they are bad, and by bad I mean SE which are noticable.
The question is what author meant by "special effects" are color manipulation special effects to ? or only aliens and gigant robots count? In my opinion every film have some kind of SE some of them are bad some and unnecessary but in 90% they are helpful - we want to see better world with more blue sky and more green grass.
I find myself more focused on screenplay and acting than on special effects. I really like when all factors ( visuals, plot, acting ) are on high level. In my opinion Hollywood is focused too much on SFX (Special Effect acronym). Most of blockbusters I watch in cinema are made especially for 3D cinemas and effects must be breathtaking.
Do you agree that good special effects are those which are unnoticeable?
Nowadays it is hard not to notice any because movies are filled with these. So I can partly agree on that. Still some of good directors try not to overuse of them and results are very pleasing.
Do you think that a good movie should have special effects?
When screenplay is bad and acting is worse even the best special effects couldn't rescue such movie. In my opinion good example of bad plot and acting and outstanding SFX was James Cameron's Avatar which had great visuals.
Do you think that bad special effects could result in a film flopping?
I agree on that. Sometimes I like to watch movie with funny looking special effects for a bit of laughter. If something looks too unrealistic... Well, it can result in film flopping :)
- Aleksander Towcik
Well, if they are any good we shouldn't be able to notice any of them at all! But hey, when you do a movie about Sandra Bullock in THE space, what would You expect?
Do you agree that good special effects are those which are unnoticeable?
Well, obviously not...
Do you think that a good movie should have special effects?
Any move should have them. Why? It's XXI century! Why not?
Do you think that bad special effects could result in a film flopping?
Well, yeah. If you are about to do something - it better be really good! Otherwise you/movie might be really bad. We've seen some of them lately. On the other hand it can be something good to (sometimes) - when it's a parody of an other movie. But thats a totally different thing.
Yes, but I think there's more and more CGI than other kind of "special effects".
2. Do you agree that good special effects are those which are unnoticeable?
Yes, 100% agree. One should follow the story and not think about backstage stuff.
3. Do you think that a good movie should have special effects?
No, I don't agree with this opinion. There are many excellent movies without special effects. As I wrote above - it's all about good story.
4. Do you think that bad special effects could result in a film flopping?
Sure! Just compare dragon from newest Hobbit movie and dragon from The Witcher movie :) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyDk3JwnpmM#t=6m
So yes, I do pay attention to special effects in movies. It's a great technology which allows to overcome some limits in the industry of moviemaking and in some cases they are supposed to be there. Obviously there are directors who simply abuse these things, to cover up for a weak and uninvolving storyline, but that's to be expected. As a canonical male I enjoy big explosions, gun fights and stuntman actions and I am not ashamed of it :P
That said there are a lot of movies, old and new, that I watched and that did not have one single “fast-action” scene and I really enjoyed watching them. So, to sum up, a movie can be good or bad, regardless of the presence or absence of special effects. It's the general feel of the movie that matters.
It depends on type of movie. But generally yes I do. It is quite important in movies with lots of action.
2.Do you agree that good special effects are those which are unnoticeable?
I know that poor special effects are those which are visible straight away :) so yes I agree.
3.Do you think that a good movie should have special effects?
Not necessarily. Like I said if movie contain only action, action, action then yes but if it is more ambitious type like biography or drama then there is no need to put special effects everywhere
4.Do you think that bad special effects could result in a film flopping?
Bad special effect definitely result in quality loss.
Not really, I know that they are there, but I focus more on the movie. Of course there are times where special effects are so bad that you just can't unsee them.
2. Do you agree that good special effects are those which are unnoticeable?
Not really. Let's take a look at Avatar. Everyone knew that it will be amazing because of special effects and at first it was.
3. Do you think that a good movie should have special effects?
Not really, not every movie needs special effects.
4. Do you think that bad special effects could result in a film flopping?
Not always. Sometimes bad special effects can make movie funny. Few examples are "Manos: The Hands of Fate" and "Beware children at play"