Teaser of 2014 TMNT CGI revealed to private audience! (No video inside)

[TurtleMaster4]

Originally Posted by Vegeta

The prequels have a lot more problems than the original trilogy. Terrible script, bad casting, bad acting, stupid cg, jar jar binks.plinket has logical points to why these movies have no real characters and nothing a person can latch onto like in the orginal trilogy. Empire strikes back was so good because lucas didnt write it. Im not a big fan of jj nor the star trek remake but I have hopes he'll make a better movie than lucas has since the 80s. Anyone who says the original trilogy has as many faults as the prequels knows nothing about film or story telling. Just because phantom menace made money doesn't mean people loved it when it came out because a lot of reviews and movie goers hated it.

I completely disagree, I'm guessing your from the OT generation, which is probably the main reason you like the first trilogy more, nostalgia, it's the opposite for me, i'm from the PT generation.

And the whole Plinkett thing is just annoying, so many times he says something that he doesn't like about the prequels, and then he says the exact oppisite on another part of the review. Don't say I don't know anything about story telling! The prequels have a more elaborate story than the OT, which is great, but at the same time, while it's elaberate, it still has the simple story drive the OT had. The Casting is not bad and the acting is awesome! Not to mention that CGI Makes star wars look much more realistic!

This Is my opinion, and to me, Plinkett is no more than a ranting fanboy. It's like judging a peice of art, I may think picosso's art is a master peice, and you may think it has too many blocks, but art is subjective.

This article right here completly sums up my feelings for star wars! http://nilbogsstorybookland.blogspot...-but.html#more

That said, let's get back on topic.

[ThePickleweed]

Originally Posted by TurtleMaster4

I completely disagree, I'm guessing your from the OT generation, which is probably the main reason you like the first trilogy more, nostalgia, it's the opposite for me, i'm from the PT generation.

And the whole Plinkett thing is just annoying, so many times he says something that he doesn't like about the prequels, and then he says the exact oppisite on another part of the review. Don't say I don't know anything about story telling! The prequels have a more elaborate story than the OT, which is great, but at the same time, while it's elaberate, it still has the simple story drive the OT had. The Casting is not bad and the acting is awesome! Not to mention that CGI Makes star wars look much more realistic!

This Is my opinion, and to me, Plinkett is no more than a ranting fanboy. It's like judging a peice of art, I may think picosso's art is a master peice, and you may think it has too many blocks, but art is subjective.

This article right here completly sums up my feelings for star wars! http://nilbogsstorybookland.blogspot...-but.html#more

That said, let's get back on topic.

i tried to take you seriously until you said the acting was good. and then you compound it by saying the CG makes it look better

im not a CG hater. matter of fact, i work in the field. but it was notoriously terrible, even for the time. and time hasnt been kind to it.

you can have your opinions, but your making it very difficult to actually take them seriously.

[ThePickleweed]

Originally Posted by Candy Kappa

fully CG turtles can work just as well as costumes, even better when the stunt actors are not hindered by the limits of the costume.

But it, as all things need. it need to be done right. As much it is popular to bash on the Star Wars prequels, they still have many many great examples how bad integrated CG can ruin a moment.

Such as General Grievous flipping out his light sabers and Obi-Wan not reacting because there is nothing there and nothing to signal the actor what is going on.

Just because something is going to be CG'd, it still need to be there in the filming process, something as simple as a guy wearing green spandex.

absolutely agreed. unfortunately "fix it in post" is a common mating call of directors.

that said, i think a jurassic park style approach would probably work well with something like this. depending on the capabilities of the suits, actual prosthetics for character scenes, full cg turtles for action. you dont want to encumber the stunt men with bulky suits, and you certainly dont want to be stuck trying to track on some turtle head to a guy doing 360 flips. you can scan the suits, and have direct reference for the textures and shaders. but its not gonna happen. its going to be full CG, just because thats the way it is these days. its cheaper, and offers full control of every shot. but if they can recreate a photo real tiger (which was amazing btw) then they can do mutant turtles. weve come a long way for cg characters.

[Testudo]

Originally Posted by ThePickleweed

you can have your opinions, but your making it very difficult to actually take them seriously.

Because they are different from yours? I really don't see anything wrong with the acting in the prequel trilogy (or casting, characters, etc). Most of the faults those movies have can be easily found in the originals as well. And rellying on the fallacious reasoning found on Plinkett's videos doesn't make your argument any more valid.

P.S: And I grew up with the original trilogy, so no need for nostalgia glasses.

[snake]