New
May 20, 3:41 PM
#51
Reply to Akuya
@JaniSIr
Just cause a movement is smoother doesn't mean it better. What kind of an argument is that?
Whether motion in animation is fluid and smooth vs choppy and rough is a stylistic or practical choice, not a matter of one being better than the other. A good example of this is spider-verse, they animated a lot of the movie on 2s, intentionally lowering the frame rate to give it more of a crisp and graphic feel, making it feel more like a comic book. And they do this to great effect.
And while 60fps animation can look great. It looks great when done intentionally. Taking something made at 24fps can interpolating to 60 has the opposite effect of seeing "more details in the movement." Take any interpolated animation clip on youtube and take a look at some of the individual frames. It completely ruins any sense of good, readable, and accurate movement. You can see what a terrible replacement an ai is for a real in between animator who actually understand how animation works.
And think about this,
every animation studio could increase all there animations to 60fps with little to no effort, they could,
BUT THEY DON'T
Just cause a movement is smoother doesn't mean it better. What kind of an argument is that?
Whether motion in animation is fluid and smooth vs choppy and rough is a stylistic or practical choice, not a matter of one being better than the other. A good example of this is spider-verse, they animated a lot of the movie on 2s, intentionally lowering the frame rate to give it more of a crisp and graphic feel, making it feel more like a comic book. And they do this to great effect.
And while 60fps animation can look great. It looks great when done intentionally. Taking something made at 24fps can interpolating to 60 has the opposite effect of seeing "more details in the movement." Take any interpolated animation clip on youtube and take a look at some of the individual frames. It completely ruins any sense of good, readable, and accurate movement. You can see what a terrible replacement an ai is for a real in between animator who actually understand how animation works.
And think about this,
every animation studio could increase all there animations to 60fps with little to no effort, they could,
BUT THEY DON'T
@Akuya Of course it's better, 60 is a bigger number than 24... Spider-verse is one movie where I can confidently say that they made the objectively bad choice, because getting your audience nauseous is something you just never do. Interpolation is obviously not perfect, but since it has become a selling feature in TVs it became much better. But what can you do if interpolated is all you can get... There is really no good reason not to make everything 60fps or more. |
May 20, 4:28 PM
#52
Reply to JaniSIr
@Akuya Of course it's better, 60 is a bigger number than 24...
Spider-verse is one movie where I can confidently say that they made the objectively bad choice, because getting your audience nauseous is something you just never do.
Interpolation is obviously not perfect, but since it has become a selling feature in TVs it became much better. But what can you do if interpolated is all you can get...
There is really no good reason not to make everything 60fps or more.
Spider-verse is one movie where I can confidently say that they made the objectively bad choice, because getting your audience nauseous is something you just never do.
Interpolation is obviously not perfect, but since it has become a selling feature in TVs it became much better. But what can you do if interpolated is all you can get...
There is really no good reason not to make everything 60fps or more.
JaniSIr said: Of course it's better, 60 is a bigger number than 24 I'm sorry, but this is the dumbest thing you've said in this thread so far... JaniSIr said: Spider-verse is one movie where I can confidently say that they made the objectively bad choice, because getting your audience nauseous is something you just never do The fact that you personally didn't like Spider-verse's style doesn't make it objectively bad JaniSIr said: There is really no good reason not to make everything 60fps or more There actually is, 60fps works well with certain filming/animation styles, but not so well with others There's also a lil thing called variety, you can have innovation without completely dismanteling what came before Making everything the same is the dullest, most mundane, boring thing one could do Also just realized i read this wrong JaniSIr said: but finding creative ways to hide the errors in the movie by making everything harder to follow is sort of not where the industry should be going. Thought you were saying bout finding creative ways to hide potential errors that come with 60fps, but you instead seem to be saying having creative problem solving skills is bad? |
What debating with DigiCat is like according to APolygons2 That's why I thought a discussion would be pointless. It doesn't feel like a debate. It feels like I'm playing chess and somehow lose to an uno reverse card after loosing all my monopoly money lol |
May 20, 7:01 PM
#53
I think it's ugly but at least I understand why it's ugly the problem arises when I would like to show someone something of which only a 60 fps interpolated garbage video of it exists, and because they're not braindead they also think it's ugly, but they don't know why it's ugly they just think that's how it is |
May 20, 9:47 PM
#54
Naobito Zenin is the best Jujutsu Kaisen character |
May 21, 10:23 AM
#55
AI is just an epic fail imo. It will solve absolutely nothing tbh... |
May 21, 3:03 PM
#56
Reply to DigiCat
JaniSIr said:
Of course it's better, 60 is a bigger number than 24
Of course it's better, 60 is a bigger number than 24
I'm sorry, but this is the dumbest thing you've said in this thread so far...
JaniSIr said:
Spider-verse is one movie where I can confidently say that they made the objectively bad choice, because getting your audience nauseous is something you just never do
Spider-verse is one movie where I can confidently say that they made the objectively bad choice, because getting your audience nauseous is something you just never do
The fact that you personally didn't like Spider-verse's style doesn't make it objectively bad
JaniSIr said:
There is really no good reason not to make everything 60fps or more
There is really no good reason not to make everything 60fps or more
There actually is, 60fps works well with certain filming/animation styles, but not so well with others
There's also a lil thing called variety, you can have innovation without completely dismanteling what came before
Making everything the same is the dullest, most mundane, boring thing one could do
Also just realized i read this wrong
JaniSIr said:
but finding creative ways to hide the errors in the movie by making everything harder to follow is sort of not where the industry should be going.
but finding creative ways to hide the errors in the movie by making everything harder to follow is sort of not where the industry should be going.
Thought you were saying bout finding creative ways to hide potential errors that come with 60fps, but you instead seem to be saying having creative problem solving skills is bad?
It was a reference to this. FanofAction said: @Akuya People think a higher number always = better. There's a reason things are still filmed at 24 fps. A simple search will tell you that. It was supposed to be a straw man, but like it's not actually wrong. Big FPS is great. We talked like 60fps were a lot, but 4k HDR 120 would be ideal. Since film is a non-interactive medium, it will reach diminishing returns long before games, where 360hz (or higher) monitors are a perfectly reasonable purchase. DigiCat said: The fact that you personally didn't like Spider-verse's style doesn't make it objectively bad That wasn't a matter of liking, but actually feeling nauseous. DigiCat said: There's also a lil thing called variety, you can have innovation without completely dismanteling what came before Making everything the same is the dullest, most mundane, boring thing one could do Improving visual fidelity doesn't really have a downside. Live action movies just point a camera at the actors anyway, there is no real stylistic choice to talk about... DigiCat said: Thought you were saying bout finding creative ways to hide potential errors that come with 60fps, but you instead seem to be saying having creative problem solving skills is bad? I mean that they should just not make those stupid errors, like if they do a fight scene they should do a proper choreography, instead of the camera man swinging the camera like the sword, and then putting the film through a blender so that the audience has no chance to see what's happening. Like if you have a good choreography, wouldn't you want to showcase it with high fidelity? Few cuts, steady camera and high fps even. 24fps technically does cover up some mistakes, but that's because the action is just inherently harder to follow. It's sort of like "cleaning" a bird poop from your windshield by covering it with mud. |
May 21, 3:08 PM
#57
I think AI is just an epic fail. I cannot see a greater epic fail than it. |
May 21, 3:47 PM
#58
Reply to DesuMaiden
I think AI is just an epic fail. I cannot see a greater epic fail than it.
@DesuMaiden Epic fail? Did I time travel back to 2010? |
May 21, 3:47 PM
#59
Reply to JaniSIr
It was a reference to this.
FanofAction said:
@Akuya People think a higher number always = better. There's a reason things are still filmed at 24 fps. A simple search will tell you that.
@Akuya People think a higher number always = better. There's a reason things are still filmed at 24 fps. A simple search will tell you that.
It was supposed to be a straw man, but like it's not actually wrong.
Big FPS is great.
We talked like 60fps were a lot, but 4k HDR 120 would be ideal.
Since film is a non-interactive medium, it will reach diminishing returns long before games, where 360hz (or higher) monitors are a perfectly reasonable purchase.
DigiCat said:
The fact that you personally didn't like Spider-verse's style doesn't make it objectively bad
The fact that you personally didn't like Spider-verse's style doesn't make it objectively bad
That wasn't a matter of liking, but actually feeling nauseous.
DigiCat said:
There's also a lil thing called variety, you can have innovation without completely dismanteling what came before
Making everything the same is the dullest, most mundane, boring thing one could do
There's also a lil thing called variety, you can have innovation without completely dismanteling what came before
Making everything the same is the dullest, most mundane, boring thing one could do
Improving visual fidelity doesn't really have a downside.
Live action movies just point a camera at the actors anyway, there is no real stylistic choice to talk about...
DigiCat said:
Thought you were saying bout finding creative ways to hide potential errors that come with 60fps, but you instead seem to be saying having creative problem solving skills is bad?
Thought you were saying bout finding creative ways to hide potential errors that come with 60fps, but you instead seem to be saying having creative problem solving skills is bad?
I mean that they should just not make those stupid errors, like if they do a fight scene they should do a proper choreography, instead of the camera man swinging the camera like the sword, and then putting the film through a blender so that the audience has no chance to see what's happening.
Like if you have a good choreography, wouldn't you want to showcase it with high fidelity? Few cuts, steady camera and high fps even.
24fps technically does cover up some mistakes, but that's because the action is just inherently harder to follow. It's sort of like "cleaning" a bird poop from your windshield by covering it with mud.
JaniSIr said: That wasn't a matter of liking, but actually feeling nauseous And yet you ignore the fact others have said that interpolated 60fps made them nauseous, made their heads spin, but 60fps is still superior cuz it's a bigger number... JaniSIr said: Improving visual fidelity doesn't really have a downside No it doesn't, but having higher frame rate isn't always an imprvement JaniSIr said: Live action movies just point a camera at the actors anyway, there is no real stylistic choice to talk about... You really should pay more attention when watching movies if you want to debate about them... |
What debating with DigiCat is like according to APolygons2 That's why I thought a discussion would be pointless. It doesn't feel like a debate. It feels like I'm playing chess and somehow lose to an uno reverse card after loosing all my monopoly money lol |
May 21, 4:20 PM
#60
Reply to JaniSIr
@Akuya Of course it's better, 60 is a bigger number than 24...
Spider-verse is one movie where I can confidently say that they made the objectively bad choice, because getting your audience nauseous is something you just never do.
Interpolation is obviously not perfect, but since it has become a selling feature in TVs it became much better. But what can you do if interpolated is all you can get...
There is really no good reason not to make everything 60fps or more.
Spider-verse is one movie where I can confidently say that they made the objectively bad choice, because getting your audience nauseous is something you just never do.
Interpolation is obviously not perfect, but since it has become a selling feature in TVs it became much better. But what can you do if interpolated is all you can get...
There is really no good reason not to make everything 60fps or more.
@JaniSIr So you read my arguments, replied to only one, saying that spiderverse made you nauseous, a completely personal issue, and a complaint that I have not heard one single time before. And respond back saying "BiGgEr NuMbEr BeTtEr!" ffs Please don't waste my time. |
May 21, 5:24 PM
#61
Reply to DigiCat
JaniSIr said:
That wasn't a matter of liking, but actually feeling nauseous
That wasn't a matter of liking, but actually feeling nauseous
And yet you ignore the fact others have said that interpolated 60fps made them nauseous, made their heads spin, but 60fps is still superior cuz it's a bigger number...
JaniSIr said:
Improving visual fidelity doesn't really have a downside
Improving visual fidelity doesn't really have a downside
No it doesn't, but having higher frame rate isn't always an imprvement
JaniSIr said:
Live action movies just point a camera at the actors anyway, there is no real stylistic choice to talk about...
Live action movies just point a camera at the actors anyway, there is no real stylistic choice to talk about...
You really should pay more attention when watching movies if you want to debate about them...
@DigiCat Well yes, big number is better for obvious reasons. As far as interpolation, it's probably bad quality, somebody mentioned SVP, and that's full of artifacts, and there are way better ones built into TVs. And like there was one movie I watched once with SVP where they used bad fps and shaky camera to indicate that the character had a concussion, where my room mates commented how bad it looks, as SVP just couldn't handle that. Well, the failures of that program aside, I hope that stylistic choice explains why normal scenes should not be at a choppy 24fps. Oh and how do people exist in real life, where the thing they see is analog... |
May 22, 12:42 AM
#62
Reply to JaniSIr
@DigiCat Well yes, big number is better for obvious reasons. As far as interpolation, it's probably bad quality, somebody mentioned SVP, and that's full of artifacts, and there are way better ones built into TVs.
And like there was one movie I watched once with SVP where they used bad fps and shaky camera to indicate that the character had a concussion, where my room mates commented how bad it looks, as SVP just couldn't handle that.
Well, the failures of that program aside, I hope that stylistic choice explains why normal scenes should not be at a choppy 24fps.
Oh and how do people exist in real life, where the thing they see is analog...
And like there was one movie I watched once with SVP where they used bad fps and shaky camera to indicate that the character had a concussion, where my room mates commented how bad it looks, as SVP just couldn't handle that.
Well, the failures of that program aside, I hope that stylistic choice explains why normal scenes should not be at a choppy 24fps.
Oh and how do people exist in real life, where the thing they see is analog...
@JaniSIr Seriously, before trying so hard to sound knowlegeble on the matter, try and make a movie, try and find actors who can act, look the part, and are skilled in everything the characters are, and try and make everything they do look good with the camera angles and frame rate you want, see how many takes and how much budget it'll take you to get there, when you have acomplished that, then you can complain all you want about the laziness of using trick shots and lowering detail to get around potemtial errors |
What debating with DigiCat is like according to APolygons2 That's why I thought a discussion would be pointless. It doesn't feel like a debate. It feels like I'm playing chess and somehow lose to an uno reverse card after loosing all my monopoly money lol |
May 22, 12:54 AM
#63
But higher numbers = better right? See the Atari Jaguar. It's 64 bits so it's obviously better than most consoles ever made. (It actually had two 32 bit custom processors and one 16 bit 68k but was marketed as 64 bit due to the 64 bit internal bus used by the custom processors) |
MEA·MENTVLA·INGENS·EST |
May 22, 2:01 AM
#64
Reply to DigiCat
@JaniSIr Seriously, before trying so hard to sound knowlegeble on the matter, try and make a movie, try and find actors who can act, look the part, and are skilled in everything the characters are, and try and make everything they do look good with the camera angles and frame rate you want, see how many takes and how much budget it'll take you to get there, when you have acomplished that, then you can complain all you want about the laziness of using trick shots and lowering detail to get around potemtial errors
@DigiCat Much of modern movie's budget goes to overpaid actors, and excessive CGI, that doesn't even look good. In the fence example, if they didn't insist on milking the Taken franchise for a 4th time, they could have hired an actor who actually can jump a fence, and then sell the movie with its original plot and good fight scenes. But of course that won't happen, because Hollywood is all out of creativity. You can make good movies on a really low budget, the real world sets the stage for free, it's not like video games where making a large and detailed world takes a lot of effort. |
May 22, 2:03 AM
#65
Reply to Theo1899
But higher numbers = better right?
See the Atari Jaguar. It's 64 bits so it's obviously better than most consoles ever made.
(It actually had two 32 bit custom processors and one 16 bit 68k but was marketed as 64 bit due to the 64 bit internal bus used by the custom processors)
See the Atari Jaguar. It's 64 bits so it's obviously better than most consoles ever made.
(It actually had two 32 bit custom processors and one 16 bit 68k but was marketed as 64 bit due to the 64 bit internal bus used by the custom processors)
@Theo1899 That's sort of just deceptive marketing... If it were a proper 64 bit console that would have been an upgrade, because 64 bit allows for more than 4gb of memory usage. |
May 22, 2:37 AM
#66
The popularity of it to me is proof that 99% of the shounen only lovers who keep arguing what show has the best animation, have literally 0 fucking clue what they are talking about. |
Also available at: YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCK8spdL1M_J-z0vO2C7jPLw Second Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@AshPolygonsDo/videos Why You Should Watch Akudama Drive: https://youtu.be/Yw0r52wRjgA A Love Letter To Anime「AMV」: https://youtu.be/YQyqxFM2m9Q My referral code to a website/app that gives you free money (a few cents a day) by using a few megabytes of your internet for file sharing. We both get a bonus if you use my link: https://r.honeygain.me/ARSHIA7942 |
May 22, 2:37 AM
#67
Reply to JaniSIr
@DigiCat Much of modern movie's budget goes to overpaid actors, and excessive CGI, that doesn't even look good.
In the fence example, if they didn't insist on milking the Taken franchise for a 4th time, they could have hired an actor who actually can jump a fence, and then sell the movie with its original plot and good fight scenes. But of course that won't happen, because Hollywood is all out of creativity.
You can make good movies on a really low budget, the real world sets the stage for free, it's not like video games where making a large and detailed world takes a lot of effort.
In the fence example, if they didn't insist on milking the Taken franchise for a 4th time, they could have hired an actor who actually can jump a fence, and then sell the movie with its original plot and good fight scenes. But of course that won't happen, because Hollywood is all out of creativity.
You can make good movies on a really low budget, the real world sets the stage for free, it's not like video games where making a large and detailed world takes a lot of effort.
JaniSIr said: they could have hired an actor who actually can jump a fence Ok, but would that actor have been able to embodie the character as well as Liam Neeson did? Not to say recasting never happens, but it's generally only used as a last resort or when there's reboots, and even then it's one of the hardest things to pull off, cuz you aren't only taking into account the actors abilities, but the audiences expectations JaniSIr said: But of course that won't happen, because Hollywood is all out of creativity And what the heck does recasting have to do with creativity? JaniSIr said: You can make good movies on a really low budget, the real world sets the stage for free, it's not like video games where making a large and detailed world takes a lot of effort This is very turue, but you seem to not realize low budget doesn't mean low effort |
What debating with DigiCat is like according to APolygons2 That's why I thought a discussion would be pointless. It doesn't feel like a debate. It feels like I'm playing chess and somehow lose to an uno reverse card after loosing all my monopoly money lol |
May 22, 3:07 AM
#68
I wish 60fps were more common, as it looks freaking amazing. |
May 22, 4:10 AM
#69
Reply to DigiCat
JaniSIr said:
they could have hired an actor who actually can jump a fence
they could have hired an actor who actually can jump a fence
Ok, but would that actor have been able to embodie the character as well as Liam Neeson did?
Not to say recasting never happens, but it's generally only used as a last resort or when there's reboots, and even then it's one of the hardest things to pull off, cuz you aren't only taking into account the actors abilities, but the audiences expectations
JaniSIr said:
But of course that won't happen, because Hollywood is all out of creativity
But of course that won't happen, because Hollywood is all out of creativity
And what the heck does recasting have to do with creativity?
JaniSIr said:
You can make good movies on a really low budget, the real world sets the stage for free, it's not like video games where making a large and detailed world takes a lot of effort
You can make good movies on a really low budget, the real world sets the stage for free, it's not like video games where making a large and detailed world takes a lot of effort
This is very turue, but you seem to not realize low budget doesn't mean low effort
@DigiCat So like here's the thing, Liam Neeson was a perfect choice for the first movie, and by the 4th not only the writers ran out of any original idea, he got too old for the role, so arguably the whole movie was a mistake, and I would assume that's reflected in their finance records for they made no 5th one. They clearly banked on the franchise and the actor's name to carry the movie, but just ended up with an example case of milking it to death. And the "one guy beats up an army for no reason" is still a popular genre, like John Wick 4 was a success because there the action was still good, even if the bulletproof suits kind of made it really silly at certain points. And yes, effort is something that's lacking in choreography department but especially among the writers... This was a long tangent, but basically with a different plot reason to beat people up and an actor that can still do it well, the action would immediately look good with a still camera in 60fps. |
May 22, 4:14 AM
#70
Yeah I hate all those 60fps anime openings on youtube. |
May 22, 4:56 AM
#71
Reply to JaniSIr
@DigiCat So like here's the thing, Liam Neeson was a perfect choice for the first movie, and by the 4th not only the writers ran out of any original idea, he got too old for the role, so arguably the whole movie was a mistake, and I would assume that's reflected in their finance records for they made no 5th one. They clearly banked on the franchise and the actor's name to carry the movie, but just ended up with an example case of milking it to death. And the "one guy beats up an army for no reason" is still a popular genre, like John Wick 4 was a success because there the action was still good, even if the bulletproof suits kind of made it really silly at certain points. And yes, effort is something that's lacking in choreography department but especially among the writers... This was a long tangent, but basically with a different plot reason to beat people up and an actor that can still do it well, the action would immediately look good with a still camera in 60fps.
@JaniSIr While i do agree the writing in hollywood movies has declined over the years, you still have a very simplistic view on how movies are made You say action will immediately look good in 60fps with the right choreograpgy, writing, and actors, but realistically, how many actors (regardless of age and gender) can pull off an action scene like you mention without cuts and stunt doubles? Narrow it down even further if you want only top quality acting Not everyone is good at everything, different people will have different streangths and weaknesses |
What debating with DigiCat is like according to APolygons2 That's why I thought a discussion would be pointless. It doesn't feel like a debate. It feels like I'm playing chess and somehow lose to an uno reverse card after loosing all my monopoly money lol |
May 22, 5:19 AM
#72
Frame interpolation is done through plugins like Twixtor. - Unless you mean slow-mo via Topaz Video AI? It's not meant to be used with anime clips especially fight scenes but people use it way too much + adding motion blur and it gives such ugly digital artifacts. |
May 22, 5:24 AM
#73
Reply to FanofAction
@Akuya People think a higher number always = better. There's a reason things are still filmed at 24 fps. A simple search will tell you that.
@FanofAction Not all anime is animated at true 24fps, that's just the format. Majority are still on 2:1 or 3:1 that's why majority of these interpolated videos look rubbish - because they don't make the 2:1 (12fps) and 3:1 (8fps) into 1s (true 24fps) before they become 60fps |
May 22, 3:02 PM
#74
Reply to DigiCat
@JaniSIr While i do agree the writing in hollywood movies has declined over the years, you still have a very simplistic view on how movies are made
You say action will immediately look good in 60fps with the right choreograpgy, writing, and actors, but realistically, how many actors (regardless of age and gender) can pull off an action scene like you mention without cuts and stunt doubles? Narrow it down even further if you want only top quality acting
Not everyone is good at everything, different people will have different streangths and weaknesses
You say action will immediately look good in 60fps with the right choreograpgy, writing, and actors, but realistically, how many actors (regardless of age and gender) can pull off an action scene like you mention without cuts and stunt doubles? Narrow it down even further if you want only top quality acting
Not everyone is good at everything, different people will have different streangths and weaknesses
@DigiCat I mean Tom Cruise does the stunts himself, so it's not without example. And for how overpaid actors are, they sort of should be better at their job. |
May 22, 4:32 PM
#75
Reply to JaniSIr
@DigiCat I mean Tom Cruise does the stunts himself, so it's not without example.
And for how overpaid actors are, they sort of should be better at their job.
And for how overpaid actors are, they sort of should be better at their job.
@JaniSIr Yes, and how many Tom Cruise's are there? And now this might be my personal opinion, but i think his stunt work is better than his acting JaniSIr said: And for how overpaid actors are, they sort of should be better at their job I feel like the more this argument goes on the more your brain flatlines... |
What debating with DigiCat is like according to APolygons2 That's why I thought a discussion would be pointless. It doesn't feel like a debate. It feels like I'm playing chess and somehow lose to an uno reverse card after loosing all my monopoly money lol |
May 22, 5:05 PM
#76
All the morons in this thread speaking without any knowledge about art or animation should read "The illusion of life" by two of the most famous disney animators. |
May 22, 5:14 PM
#77
Reply to DigiCat
@JaniSIr Yes, and how many Tom Cruise's are there?
And now this might be my personal opinion, but i think his stunt work is better than his acting
I feel like the more this argument goes on the more your brain flatlines...
And now this might be my personal opinion, but i think his stunt work is better than his acting
JaniSIr said:
And for how overpaid actors are, they sort of should be better at their job
And for how overpaid actors are, they sort of should be better at their job
I feel like the more this argument goes on the more your brain flatlines...
@DigiCat He is like okay. I won't skip a movie just because he is in it. I would excuse using stunt doubles for dangerous stuff, but a fist fight should be reasonable expectation. |
May 23, 1:14 AM
#78
Reply to JaniSIr
@DigiCat He is like okay. I won't skip a movie just because he is in it.
I would excuse using stunt doubles for dangerous stuff, but a fist fight should be reasonable expectation.
I would excuse using stunt doubles for dangerous stuff, but a fist fight should be reasonable expectation.
@JaniSIr I'm not sure how common it is to use stubt doubles for a simple fist fight, more complicated hand to hand combat sure But fist fights can also go wrong, does Dolph Lundgren punching Sylvester Stallone in the chest so hard his heart almost exploded ring any bells? (and this was on Stallone's request) Although a lot of actors do want to do their own stunts when possible, production companies don't always have the funds to pay the extorcionate amounts of insurence it'll take to cover an A list actor, yes those Tom Cruise stunts are expencive AF, and production companies only pay for it cuz they trust in his ability to draw in an audience without getting hurt in the process (and notice these are all massive blockbusters) |
DigiCatMay 23, 1:18 AM
What debating with DigiCat is like according to APolygons2 That's why I thought a discussion would be pointless. It doesn't feel like a debate. It feels like I'm playing chess and somehow lose to an uno reverse card after loosing all my monopoly money lol |
May 23, 3:44 AM
#79
Reply to DigiCat
@JaniSIr I'm not sure how common it is to use stubt doubles for a simple fist fight, more complicated hand to hand combat sure
But fist fights can also go wrong, does Dolph Lundgren punching Sylvester Stallone in the chest so hard his heart almost exploded ring any bells? (and this was on Stallone's request)
Although a lot of actors do want to do their own stunts when possible, production companies don't always have the funds to pay the extorcionate amounts of insurence it'll take to cover an A list actor, yes those Tom Cruise stunts are expencive AF, and production companies only pay for it cuz they trust in his ability to draw in an audience without getting hurt in the process (and notice these are all massive blockbusters)
But fist fights can also go wrong, does Dolph Lundgren punching Sylvester Stallone in the chest so hard his heart almost exploded ring any bells? (and this was on Stallone's request)
Although a lot of actors do want to do their own stunts when possible, production companies don't always have the funds to pay the extorcionate amounts of insurence it'll take to cover an A list actor, yes those Tom Cruise stunts are expencive AF, and production companies only pay for it cuz they trust in his ability to draw in an audience without getting hurt in the process (and notice these are all massive blockbusters)
@DigiCat How many actors are as strong as Dolph Lundgren, and how many would actually would want to get punched by such a person? >< |
May 23, 5:04 AM
#80
Reply to JaniSIr
@DigiCat How many actors are as strong as Dolph Lundgren, and how many would actually would want to get punched by such a person? ><
@JaniSIr The point isn't that it was Dolph Lungren doing the punching, it's that things can go wrong, of course this doesn't mean actors should be kept in bubbles and never do anything remotely risky, but weighing the pros and cons of a situation is common sense I mean would you let Adam Sandler leap off a building the same way you'd let Tom Cruise? |
What debating with DigiCat is like according to APolygons2 That's why I thought a discussion would be pointless. It doesn't feel like a debate. It feels like I'm playing chess and somehow lose to an uno reverse card after loosing all my monopoly money lol |
May 23, 8:05 AM
#81
Reply to DigiCat
@JaniSIr The point isn't that it was Dolph Lungren doing the punching, it's that things can go wrong, of course this doesn't mean actors should be kept in bubbles and never do anything remotely risky, but weighing the pros and cons of a situation is common sense
I mean would you let Adam Sandler leap off a building the same way you'd let Tom Cruise?
I mean would you let Adam Sandler leap off a building the same way you'd let Tom Cruise?
@DigiCat Non issue really, because I don't think he'd take anything but comedies that are not funny. |
May 23, 9:14 AM
#82
Reply to JaniSIr
@DigiCat Non issue really, because I don't think he'd take anything but comedies that are not funny.
@JaniSIr You know i was only using him as an example, replace him witha any actor who'd take on action roles but might not be as skilled with stunts as Tom Cruise... |
What debating with DigiCat is like according to APolygons2 That's why I thought a discussion would be pointless. It doesn't feel like a debate. It feels like I'm playing chess and somehow lose to an uno reverse card after loosing all my monopoly money lol |
May 23, 12:12 PM
#83
AI is just epic fail. Anyone, saying otherwise, is delusional or stupid. |
More topics from this board
» Does complexity made an anime better? And what is your favourite complex animeniknasr - May 30 |
29 |
by NickIsaac
»»
3 minutes ago |
|
» do you judge different animes differently ?ame - 12 hours ago |
30 |
by NickIsaac
»»
6 minutes ago |
|
Poll: » r/Anime vs MyAnimelist. ( 1 2 )Makoto_Yuri - Apr 21, 2022 |
87 |
by SpiderMiles3523
»»
10 minutes ago |
|
» Write your takes in anime and I'll prove you're incorrect, part 2.Gashadokur0 - May 28 |
35 |
by Gashadokur0
»»
37 minutes ago |
|
» Would you watch AI anime?solacez - 11 hours ago |
24 |
by APolygons2
»»
41 minutes ago |