PDA

View Full Version : Ghost warrior?



n0s4ra2
10-15-2004, 07:55 PM
Has anyone received their copy yet I noticed the site states it shipping now.
I have received all of my newtek bundled training except for ghost warrior and. I am getting. Anxious awaiting it. :)
The trailers look so cool.
Has anyone seen it yet? And your thoughts?

hazmat777
10-15-2004, 10:46 PM
I enjoyed it very much. The first thing I think most viewers feel is that they just want it to keep going.

Looking forward towards the future of Kaze!

Mikeface
10-16-2004, 11:28 AM
The animation is fantastic, the direction is OK, but the story and sound FX are sorely lacking.

I'm glad I got it to see what can be done in Lightwave, but I don't particularly like it as a film.

hazmat777
10-17-2004, 01:11 AM
Looking at Kaze as a "finished" film is missing the point of the entire project.

It was a "proof of concept" project with higher goals that ARE coming true. I think that gives all of our "dreamed about it" 3 minute projects something to strive towards and hope for.

hazmat777
10-17-2004, 01:24 AM
Let's give all those three minute projects out there a hand of applause! We know all the striving and hope they've put into themselves so let's hear it! :D

Sorry, got carried away... :o

cresshead
10-17-2004, 04:56 AM
i bought the book and the dvd a while back..though the film is not "my cup of tea"
the quality of the model's, render and fur fx are stunning..and please remember this was all created by one chap and 2 pc's..

the story is not my first choice but what it set's out the achieve it does very well..and at a level with ghost in the shell 2 if not higher in some regards

remember this is done with lightwave 7.5/8beta and digital fusion...not a giant studio with 30-40 artists.

pretty darn amazing if you ask me.

steve g

ericsmith
10-17-2004, 03:55 PM
This conversation has already happened a half a dozen times on various forums, but I'll reiterate here.

The problem with taking into account the fact that this project was done by one person instead of a huge studio is that the DVD costs us consumers just as much as a $100 million dollar hollywood blockbuster. If some guy built a go-cart in his garage, and then expected people to buy it for the same price as a porsche, just because he did it all by himself, it just wouldn't fly.

I hate sounding so negative about this project. I bought it sincerely hoping that it would be another stepping stone in the revolution of cg entertainment. I was very dissappointed when I saw that it wasn't.

If there's one thing I've learned over the past few years working on a feature length animated film, it's this: There is no tolerance for second-rate quality. Every piece, from the story concept through production, needs to be top notch. Taking shortcuts on any aspect will bring the entire project down. There's plenty of room for innovation, and finding tools to make the workflow more streamlined and efficient. It's inevetable that a few more years from now, it will be normal for small groups to produce greater results that what huge teams did a few years ago. But there will never be any room for compromising quality.

Eric

Titus
10-17-2004, 06:38 PM
Some years ago, just after A bug's life was released, I bought a CG home video called something like Bugs. This animation was done for a single "artist", the work was terrible but also an inspiration for me, because was someone doing something different than flying logos or dancing diapers. I leave the art to the pros and its million dollar budgets, even this doesn't make a good work (shark tale).

I saw part of Ghost Warrior at SIGGRAPH and gladly will buy the DVD just to support independent projects.

jin choung
10-18-2004, 02:37 AM
preface: i haven't seen kaze yet.

eric smith's points are valid.

that is why independent film making in general is not only a rip off for the film going consumer but ultimately doomed to failure.

why in the world would i watch a cut-rate low budget cheapy like shaun of the dead when i can get a slick hollywood production like the remake of 'dawn of the dead'? the picture and sound quality alone are generations ahead...

heck, why would i watch george romero's original dawn of the dead cheapy when i can watch the modern budgeted and much more technically polished remake?

evil dead? forget about it. it's a glorified student film. reservoir dogs? eck... it reeeeeks of low budget... it's got a handful of locations at most. where are the hundreds of high quality canadian locations that i'm used to seeing? rushmore? not ONE single bullet time shot... i [email protected]#$ you not! memento - not a SINGLE scorpion kick from trinity....

even lucas realizes that we're not getting our money's worth in money shots from his films and he's going back to add them in... whether the film needed it or not. now that's a mark of a guy who's got his priorities straight.

[THIS WAS NOT AT ALL ERIC'S ARGUMENT.... i just took it to a logical extreme to make a point later]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

eric's ACTUAL argument is indeed valid. cheap and one man is NOT a virtue or a redeeming value in and of itself.

you can be cheap and be bad. (!!!)

[some of the worst movies ever made are badly made independent 'human drama' films.

at least in a bad hollywood action film, you DO get your booms and bangs and whoa, that blowed up real good and high quality bionic titty jobs!

bad drama is just useless.]

so yes, no quarter need be or SHOULD be given simply from cost or conditions of production. as eric said, it costs the same money (if not more) and takes the same chunk out of my life span.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONDITION OF PRODUCTION IS NO EXCUSE OR ARBITER OF ACTUAL QUALITY!!!

lots of people say things like 'yah, but you don't understand the time constraint they were under' or 'yah, we didn't have enough people on that'.

that may in fact be true and such consideration should definitely be taken into account to whether people involved were culpable of fing up the job.

BUT IT DOES NOT ENTER INTO HOW GOOD OR BAD SOMETHING IS! the thing itself (whether it is a book, a movie, an fx shot, what have you) stands alone without context.

and people should be big enough to be able to say, "yah, that shot was [email protected]#$%... we DIDN'T have the manpower to do it right but that doesn't mitigate the fact that yah, it's [email protected]#$$...."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

and now for the point that depends on the logical extreme up top:

if you can't outdo hollywood, there's no point in trying. you'll only look like a sad wannabe.

if you can't outdo pixar, you shouldn't try. you'll only be treated with condescension.

and while limitations in production quality are not virtues of themselves, they do afford the opportunity to be a DIFFERENT KIND OF VOICE in the mainstream pop consciousness.

if you're cheap and independent, you can say what major hollywood works can't. if you're cheap and independent, you can show what major hollywood works won't.

you don't have 80mil but you also don't have to make it back. you don't have to appeal to the widest possible demographic. you don't have to have 'focus group testing'. you can be who the [email protected]#$ you want and say whatever the [email protected]#$ you want.

you can dare to be OFFENSIVE in this nobody rock the boat, lowest common denominator, consumerist happy land.

and you can derive your primary value not from one of mere cost but in uniqueness of vision, voice, message.

it is true of all media and in this case, it is true in how expensive the media is:

the works that best exploit the limitations of the medium ends up being the best example of that medium.

so if you try to make ben hur with cardboard sets and untextured low poly models, you can't help but look bad.

but if you can conceive of an idea that is not only fit to your scale but also unique in point of view and style... well then, at that point, you've got something that hollywood cannot take away from, no matter how many millions they throw at it.

in other words, make something that you would make EXACTLY LIKE THAT no matter how many millions you had to throw at it and not simply a 'poor man's pixar'.

jin

hazmat777
10-18-2004, 03:43 AM
Well, in my humble view, I think the point was to show that one person can get his point across, with his own story, to interest people who would invest in a higher budget project. If said animator then can also get some writing in the advance budget agreement that says the creator has final say about the higher budget version then: mission accomplished. That is exactly what has happened with Kaze. Times three or four. Go Timothy!

jin choung
10-18-2004, 03:59 AM
but then of course, a work of art in itself is vastly different from a PROPOSAL or proof of concept for another one.

merely an issue of definition then.

jin

Matt
10-18-2004, 07:06 AM
why in the world would i watch a cut-rate low budget cheapy like shaun of the dead when i can get a slick hollywood production like the remake of 'dawn of the dead'?

Awww come on Jin! Shaun of the Dead was hilarious (kinda lost it towards the end though).

You listed the exact reason films like SOTD should exist - 'slick hollywood production' sometimes it's a little too slick!

Having said that, I saw Dawn of the Dead last night, and I was pleasantly surprised! Best bit: look-a-like pot shots at the zombies from the roof! Just brilliant, if I was in that situation, I'd have thought of that game!!! :) Worst bit: the 'zombie baby' - cheap, cheap, cheap!

Going off topic here but also saw 'The Butterfly Effect' over the weekend too, again, actually surprised how much I liked it!

BeeVee
10-18-2004, 09:20 AM
For me Shaun of the Dead is excellent too. I haven't seen the remake of Dawn of the Dead, but anything from Simon Pegg, Nick Frost and Edgar Wright is worth my money. I even bought two copies of the DVD! :)

B

The_Eye
10-18-2004, 09:31 AM
This whole Kaze thing is SUCH a touchy subject and I'm not sure why. What a mess on some other forums and newsgroups! The big source of fighting has been Tim's "ordeal" in making the animation. Somehow if you point out any flaws in the flick you're pooping on his "vision" and his $5000 Alaskan adventure. I don't believe that makes any sense. Who among us doesn't suffer in some way to do what we're doing (or trying to do) with 3D?
The earlier point by ericsmith is valid. It seems like since you're paying full price you should get a full value movie but you don't. If you look at it like that, it fails.
If you look at the price as charity, or somehow affirming Tim's struggle was worth something then it's worth the price and subsequently, you'll be angry with the ericsmiths and anyone else not satisfied with Kaze.

Personally, I didn't like Kaze BUT I can respect the pains Tim went through to make it. IF it was to my liking (even as a "rough" for something bigger which some say it is) I might have bought multiple copies in support of his "vision".

Is Tim's ordeal inspirational? Yes. Does it show you can make an animation on your own with limited resources? Yes. Do those things overshadow and negate any critical review of his animation? They shouldn't but in most of the postings I've seen, it does. I don't think that's right, but it's an important thing to consider whenever you read postings on this subject. You have to ask which side of the issue is the author on? Critical reviewer or Alaskan ordeal supporter.

Nemoid
10-18-2004, 02:11 PM
I saw kaze and i have to say it's a good work considering it has been made
from one person from scripting to rendering.

images were beautiful anc characters too. :)

it's noticeable that Tim created them thinking alot to their personalities and
inner reasons to behave. from the directing POV i found some sequences in all honesty slow, when there wasn't fighting scenes.

Maybe timing and rithm in these scenes were a bit too slow than necessary, but these could also be simply choices made from the author.
Another thing i noticed is that Tim used alot of glow and motion blur, a bit too much for my personal taste.
But i think he loves that style just because he talks very well of these
effects in Essential books.

Your posts, especially Jin's posts make me think to a good book i read in latest days and its rebel without a crew by
Robert Rodriguez ( El Mariachi's, Desperado Four rooms From dusk till dawn, Spy Kids ) in wich he talks extensively about a very small movie production - El Mariachi - to be sold as a good movie, apparently not so cheap, but actually very low butget.

He did differently from Hollywood indeed,(hollywood even spends alot of money, way more than necessery in most cases and not all movies are good for that reason)
but with good ideas he did really good after alot of pain to make and edit the movieand now he is a respected director with good movies in his career.

IMO this is what Tim attempted doing with kaze. maybe his storytelling is very personal and so not all people like it , maybe it has some little flaws here and there, but he did it all by himself and i can bet the next project will be waay better
being that another solo artist movie or a small group movie, directed from Tim.


if u become good at all the processes involved into making a movie u will become unstoppable, because u are the master of your world.

This is the point Tim wanted to demonstrate.
So for me Tim is surely at a good point in that path.

It's possible to do a good product without wasting alot of money ,hundreds of specialized persons and all things this environnment involves especially regarding one person's crativity wich is in many cases inhibited at a certain level.


Maybe other artists could have achieved an even superior quality in storytelling and directing than Tim did, but i appreciated his attempt to show us that it can be done.

Big Jay
10-18-2004, 02:46 PM
I disagree with Jin. Quality wise I don't mind high or low budget long as it is able to tell a good story. Look at Alien, Bladerunner, 1st Matrix, Blade 1, indiana jones all low budgets, even at the very bottom with evil dead 1, El Mariachi etc there were good stories and decent quality.

A good team of artists, writers and producers can do amazing things with any budget. look at TV shows, they pull off alot of good stories without huge budgets.

The problem is when people expect to see lord of the rings quality animation when the shorts are made with less money than a 15 second comercial.

TV quality doesn't translate to the big screen, look at X-Files movie, it seemed like a long episode. Shorts for the web will not translate to the TV or screen since they are again another layer lower.

I don't think shorts are a waste of time since they aren't pixar quality, they aren't ment to be. Accept them for what they are and acknowledge the great ones and encourage the bad ones to get better because they usually do.

jin choung
10-18-2004, 02:54 PM
ummmm,

evidently nobody gets sarcasm here.

in the low budget film discussion, i mentioned some of my FAVORITE films.

the argument is that you don't have the money, don't try to take on hollywood ON ITS OWN TERMS.

make something different.

and those low budget films are great NOT because they cost so little but because of their unique vision.

jin

hazmat777
10-18-2004, 03:17 PM
Getting off topic but, anybody seen Equinox? My favorite low-budget movie next to Evil Dead (original). Dennis Muren started it as a college? project and then sold it to someone else who finished later.

Matt
10-18-2004, 04:10 PM
ummmm,

evidently nobody gets sarcasm here.

in the low budget film discussion, i mentioned some of my FAVORITE films.

the argument is that you don't have the money, don't try to take on hollywood ON ITS OWN TERMS.

make something different.

and those low budget films are great NOT because they cost so little but because of their unique vision.

jin

Oh, sorry Jin, didn't pick up on the sarcasm, must have been an off day!

Big Jay
10-18-2004, 04:19 PM
wow I am loosing it. Should of realized

jin choung
10-18-2004, 04:29 PM
no problemo....

just don't want to be misunderstood! rushmore and memento are like some of my fav films ever!

:)

jin

Gui Lo
10-18-2004, 10:07 PM
Got the sarcasm and had to agree Jin.

Also, I think the storyline in all endeavors needs to be king. If the story is told well then any shortfalls can be forgiven.

I disagree with the pricing argument. A blockbuster movie studio can afford to sell the DVD cheaper than a niche market DVD. Most Hollywood films tend to make their money from the merchandize and this area is out of reach for most indie films so they must rely on the films retail price .

Also the cinema tickets in my local are the same for high budget hollywood films as they are for Hong Kong out of focus, badly lit extravaganzas.


Gui Lo

Edbittner
10-19-2004, 03:58 AM
Guys........
I generally buy DVDs for the supliment. So, that being said, it looks worth it to me.
E.

The_Eye
10-19-2004, 06:39 AM
I thought I got the sarcasm Jin, but when nobody else did I started questioning myself. Dumb.

Well the pricing argument, for me, forces the standard of critical review to the level of a major animated work. At that standard, Kaze falls short. As Jin says, "don't try to take on hollywood ON ITS OWN TERMS. make something different."
Another thing, I feel it falls short in is story. I agree with Gui Lo when he says, "If the story is told well then any shortfalls can be forgiven"; but I think you need a good story to tell. I didn't get a sense of that in the flick, but then maybe I'm too dumb to see the "vision" (or I need to watch it like 100x as Tim says people do who write him).

There are other guys making one man projects. I'm not quite sure why this one is becoming the standard bearer for the cause, but in any case, the cause is a good one. No doubt we'll be seeing many more one man projects over the next few years and many of the artists may point back to this as an incentive for them.

kurv
10-21-2004, 11:43 AM
Hey folks, just came across this thread looking for others here... I know this is a sensitive topic :) and I am not trying to come in here to fight with the folks who did not like Kaze… I feel that everyone should be able to have there opinion, that’s cool :) But I also feel that some of the folks who were disappointed bought the film with the wrong expectations of what Kaze is… Kaze was not to be a feature quality film short. I could list several other short films that have not taken such criticism and I do not think they were close to feature quality on CG, sound or FX either…

Why do Kaze
I think if you researched the film and Tim’s vision behind it you “might” get a different view on this… maybe not, and your certainly entitled to your opinion on this :). The fact that were even talking about it is a good thing and if Kaze only inspires that then that’s a good thing as well.

Some of you are missing the point of why Tim did this. He had an idea fro a film that a few studios in Hollywood wanted to do but they wanted to inflate the budget and when Tim said that he could do the feature for much less... they shot the film down saying it was impossible to do for less and brushed Tim off. This is why Tim set out to do Kaze on the extreme budget.

Tim's vision from day one has always been to "try" to inspire other people to make great art. With Kaze it was to prove a point and Tim set out with a goal of 6 months in mind and a 5000 budget. If someone came to you and asked you to make a film in 6 months without hiring other people what would you be able to do... money aside?

I am not saying that Kaze is this amazing piece of work that other short films should be measured up to, and I don’t think Tim has ever said it was perfect... Tim himself point out flaws and has said that he knows it is very far from feature quality. That was not the point.

Cheap = Bad?
IMHO to say making a cheap film means making a bad film is really just a play on logistics of what’s possible… What I mean is, if you told Pixar that instead of funding them 100 million on the Incredibles you were going to give them 140 million and could they make it better, they would say hell yes…

The point was to show what "could" be done by one person one a very small budget and very limited time (for a 23 minute animation). I think when you look at it from that stand point Kaze is amazing…

Tim’s true vision
If you think Tim is out there say “look what I did” you would be sadly mistaken… Tim is the kind of person that would give up a lot try to inspire you or help you to make your dream project a reality. The people writing articles on Tim are the result of marketing, not Tim seeking out publicity… That’s KURV’s job in this.

We priced the film at $17.95 trying to make it cheap enough to buy and for Tim to make some money to fund other Kaze projects… and KURV has to make a little back as well. Again IMO I did not think 17.95 was a lot considering new DVD’s cost 19.95 – 24.94 these days… granted I wait till there out on previously viewed and buy them then ;) but we were not setting out to try and get rich. We were trying to make it accessible to anyone who wanted a copy. I have seen other short films of 3 - 5 minutes selling for 12.95… :/

Please also remember I personally have never seen Tim reply with an angry comment to anyone in regards to criticizing Kaze… The heated comments come from fans of the film and while I think everyone has there opinion and there right to express it I hope they do not come across rude and we certainly do not encourage them. Please do not hold that against the film or Tim though…

If you never "try" to change things then nothing will ever change. :D...

Thanks for listening :)

kurv
10-21-2004, 11:45 AM
Sorry, the origional post here was the wait for Kaze...

Kaze was on backorder for a while... it is back in stock now and were currently shipping. If you were waiting and did not get an email about the backorder I am very sorry, we tried to send emails to everyone.

Thanks for your patience and support!

handron
10-22-2004, 12:18 PM
The original post mentioned the “wait” but also asked for opinions as well. I think that too many are confusing inspirational, intentions, integrity, quality, etc., with story. Kaze I’m sure will inspire some. Tim’s intention are well understood. Unfortunately, under most circumstances it’s not how you get there that counts but the final result. The question was about our thoughts on “Kaze”.

Brad Bird had said “Story is King” and that Pixar would have to let him maintain the direction of his story if he were to work for them. Tim is a wonderful animator and can use Lightwave very well but some were meant to be coaches and others players. His storytelling skills just need more time to develop. Brad Bird also proved quality isn’t an issue with good storytelling. Look at “The Iron Giant”. Compare the 2D stylized artwork against someone like Disney or Dreamworks. It was a wonderful movie because the story was told wonderfully.

It’s been stated that we should look behind the film and Tim’s vision to possibly get a different view on this. I don’t see why I have to get to know the filmmaker to like the movie or have an opinion of it. The basic question is whether or not it was a good movie/story. I have the highest praises for what Tim did, but it doesn’t make me like the film any greater. I don’t think any of the negative responses are an attack on Tim but only on the final result itself.

P.S. Give your self a special treat for making it through my post. :D

Titus
10-22-2004, 12:38 PM
You compare Tim's storytelling with Pixar. I'm sure in Pixar more than one person is in charge of telling the story, actually I bet there's a whole department only for this.

I have seen the earliest Pixar short films, those before Andy & Wally B. (they aren't available to the public). I believe they are good storytellers, because in the work they made in the animation school, or weven as teenagers they knew how to tell a story.

But clearly Tim isn't any of the directors at Pixar.

handron
10-22-2004, 01:00 PM
Sorry for the misunderstanding. I wasn't trying to make a direct comparison to Pixar. If anything it was to Brad Bird who "works" for Pixar. He also worked for other studios as well. Pixar was just one of them. I was stressing the principle involved. The principle being that nothing can overtake good storytelling. I have read very good books written by "one" person and crappy books written by "one" person. That goes to show that one person can write a good/excellent story. :)

The_Eye
10-22-2004, 01:05 PM
Boy, it didn't take long for someone to come along with the "it's just one guy argument", completely ignoring your point of "Story is King" and any other comment raised along the lines of JUST THE MOVIE.

As I said before, if you're caught up in the whole Alaskan adventure, you can't discuss JUST THE MOVIE. It's some weird cult of personality thing, I guess.

There are other one-man shows out there. What about Terrence Walker's Avalon (I think that was it) from a couple of years ago? There's that Barbarian's Tale. There are some done with Max that don't require a well-one-guy-did-this-all-by-himself asterik in order to appreciate.

Titus
10-22-2004, 01:14 PM
I think it's still unfair the comparison. How many one-man-studio are creating something right now? (doesn't matter how crappy). Of course I know there are good and bad artists, an example of this is Tomek Baginski and his Oscar winning short The Cathedral, or the guy of F8.

I'm confident Tim will improve with every project (and maybe next time find a script writter).

cresshead
10-22-2004, 01:18 PM
just to take this slightly off on a tangent...

regards:
I have seen the earliest Pixar short films, those before Andy & Wally B. (they aren't available to the public).


actually i bought the video tiny toy stories which has all the shorts made by pixar and most noteworthy is "nik Knack" which has been butcherd by the P.C police when they included it in finding nemo film and dvd release with changes to the 2 girl characters..they must have re rendered it..or at least those bits as the characters concerend had a breast augmentation from a e cup down to "a minus" cup....

Hmmm..some progress huh?

The_Eye
10-22-2004, 01:23 PM
Titus, the point wasn't 'well it's not as good as anything Pixar has made'. The point was "Story is King" and as handron pointed out, there are plenty of examples of one man creating a great story. Crack open a few books and see for yourself.

Titus
10-22-2004, 01:23 PM
The shorts I'm talking about aren't those in the videos, they are a very early tests.

Yes, only the people involved with CG catched the model changes in knick knack, :D .

paulrus
10-22-2004, 01:40 PM
The Eye sure sounds a heck of a lot like Zarathrustra.
Just an observation...

Nemoid
10-26-2004, 06:18 AM
There are alot of artists that can do a one man 3D short, some of them do this, some of them don't, it's a matter of choices.

Tim is one of them, and just demonstrated that no incredible amounts of money are needed to make a decent work, that the real power is at our disposal, and that the real things wich drive a movie are story, feelings , athmosphere, rithm, creativity.

I am sure that if someone ask him what would he change in Kaze, he would reply that now he probably would make different choices, but that he had a deadline to respect, so he took all decision that he considered the best in those precise moments, putting in the movie his 100% effort and let's not talk about the problems he encountered.

This is really the point.

Are there artists that can do better than Tim? probably yes.Same level of quality at least for sure.

But since no one stops those artists to make similar choices if they want, i believe that Tim wanted mainly to be inspirational for all of us, not to seem a supergod just because he made a short all alone.

More than that he wanted to make us sure that we actually can be like him, and like other animation masters just like a Miyazaki like he uses to stress all the time. :)

kurv
10-26-2004, 08:47 AM
Story is a very subjective thing... I personally did not like Toy Story and thought the story of Finding Nemo was a 7 on a 10 scale.

I like Tims story, is it a 10... no, but I like it a lot and the majority of the people who bough the film love it...

Thats enough for me...

jevinstudios
10-26-2004, 09:09 AM
Well, no story, feature, visual F/X, sound editing, cinematics, etc. will always pleaz everyone. I, for one, am looking forward to receiving my copy of Ghost Warrior (I ordered it a couple of dayz ago!).

I'm really excited to see what Tim has done with LW, and the final product he's generated. Personally, story rating or sound effects editing aside, I think the enormity of the undertaking this artist has accomplished deserves praise and respect from all in this community. He has shown us that with a couple of workstations, LightWave and a helluva lot of creativity, drive and determination, an animated feature can be made. Hats off to this dude!

Can't wait to watch the movie, and maybe learn a few things from Tim in the process.....

Kevin Soderlund
Jevin Studios

handron
10-26-2004, 10:19 AM
Kurv: It's refreshing to see someone with a vested interest not shove thier opinion upon others. You have maintained a very civil tone that I appreciate. No slimey "it whops, it chops, it slices, it dices" salesman pitch. :) You made your points and then let it be. Thank you.

I hope to clarify my position. Just because the film didn't fit my taste didn't mean I thought it was horrible. As I said before, I took the original posters question "your thoughts?" to mean the same as if I walked into a theater. I pay, I see a film, and afterward I evaluate whether or not I would recommend it to a friend or was it worth the ticket fee. Sometimes I say wait for a bargain show, wait for the rental, don't bother, or I say it's a must see.

I'm done as well. :D Thanks all for information.

kurv
10-26-2004, 10:57 AM
Kurv: It's refreshing to see someone with a vested interest not shove thier opinion upon others. You have maintained a very civil tone that I appreciate. No slimey "it whops, it chops, it slices, it dices" salesman pitch. :) You made your points and then let it be. Thank you.

I hope to clarify my position. Just because the film didn't fit my taste didn't mean I thought it was horrible. As I said before, I took the original posters question "your thoughts?" to mean the same as if I walked into a theater. I pay, I see a film, and afterward I evaluate whether or not I would recommend it to a friend or was it worth the ticket fee. Sometimes I say wait for a bargain show, wait for the rental, don't bother, or I say it's a must see.

I'm done as well. :D Thanks all for information.

Thank you!!

That's the point right.. just to give honest opinions and not try to beat someone into following your train of thought.

kurv -

jevinstudios
10-27-2004, 06:55 PM
Well, I got my copy of Ghost Warrior today, and must admit that I was thoroughly impressed. Tim Albee did an extraordinary job in creating this short film! The beauty unfolds in carefully choreographed action and cinematography, with lushly textured characters and nicely done facial animation. I thought the musical score was impressive as well. Throw in mysterious lighting and a creative use of Sasquatch for the fur, and you have a very nice piece of work. The editing and polished camera moves were a plus. Nice job!!

archiea
10-28-2004, 12:41 AM
Spoken as a consumer,not a connoisseur....

i.e. I need a 16megapixel camera to get my money's worth as opposed to a 12...

Yes we are entitled to each of our opinions, jin, but by your logic, lets colorize ALL black and white films so that the audiences can get their money's worth... Oh and lets toss out theater all together, because I never bought those cardboard sets anyway.

I did see kaze.

and there wee areas that I thought needed work, like many films.

I do object to the sales pitch that it cost $5000 as it doesn't account for food, fuel, and necessities for the 6 months of the production to sustain both Tim and the production.

More to the point, criticising the price of the DVD is a bit moot as nobody is TELLING you to buy it. And considering the cost, I say it should have been $9 or $12.. But I;d rather give $35 of my money going to an indepoendant artist that a coorporation..

here's a good example.. I visited a pottery artist in Calistoga, CA where his pottery is easily 2X times the cost of stuff in Pier1. Personaly I think his stuff is 10x better than the Pier1 stuff, but some people may disagree. I know I can get much more variety by going to macy's and getting a dish set there, but there is a certain sense of pride of going to a craftsman and selecting or requesting your piece.

Technically speaking, did I get my money's worth? that up to personal opinion...

Does Ghostwarrior compare to Pixar or Disney? No. The animation alone from those studios is far superior. Storytelling, Pixar has everyone beat.

However, just finishing a project is a minor miracle. Also I dig Tim's attitude toward his production. He set out for a goal, and achieved it with varying degrees of success. THIS si the reason why I gought the DVD and feel I got my money's worth.. The inspiration and the philosophy behind the film. The movie was a bonus on top of that.

I recall working in some studions were if you us e the word "painterly" you basically just insulted someone's mother. "real real real, make it more real" I also worked for a studio a while back that believed that a current 2.5 production (3D characters, 2.5d backgrounds) was "inferior" to a 3D because, well, it wasn't "true" 3D.

What the hell is "true 3D" anyway?

I guess with Jin's thinking, the audience wouldn't have gotten their money's worth with 2.5D backgrounds.

I just think its pitiful that we have attached what is essentially a technical yardstick to define what is successful artistically...

I recall in 2D it was framerates,, where japanese anime was seen as 'inferior" since it had less inbetween frames than the american counterpart. Meanwhile, any consideration of Anime's origins (comics) was overlooked and the judgment was reduced to comparing the temporal resolution. So while the Batman cartoon had more frames, compare the action sequences and even "acting" to anime counterparts like Bubblegum crash, AD police or Cowboy Bebop and see which is better.. Hecjk just watch the old "battle of the planets" DVD and see where the US distribution added the robot interstituals to the original japanese anime. At least thee you can compare it back to back...

Take iRobot. It would have been a far more interesting film if it took a more intellectual route. Instead you have the requisite love interest in the form of a hot scientist (yeah, right) and the carbon copy not-by-the-rules cop (will smith) with the gruff boss, whoeven takes his badge away, if I remember, how cliche is that. Lets not forget the chase scene in the tunnel with the physics defying spinning car and playstation camera work. I'll watch Bullit again any day over that... some other mentions are Ronin and even the recent Borne Surpremecy as far as great contemporary car chases. Then you throw in the now trademarked will-smith-flying-through-the-air-slow-mo-with-guns-blazing shot here and there and the audience gets their money;s worth...

I mean, jin, you thought this movie was "great", imean.. OK, evberyone is entittled to their opinion, but ... jeez...

I'm curios, as funny as team america was, do you think people got their money;s worth since they used models and puppets that looked fake? Heck were people cheated watching the Dark Crystal because you never panned down to see Jen or Kira's feet? We did see a naked Skeksis!!! (sp?)


Make it more real!!



preface: i haven't seen kaze yet.

eric smith's points are valid.

that is why independent film making in general is not only a rip off for the film going consumer but ultimately doomed to failure.

why in the world would i watch a cut-rate low budget cheapy like shaun of the dead when i can get a slick hollywood production like the remake of 'dawn of the dead'? the picture and sound quality alone are generations ahead...

heck, why would i watch george romero's original dawn of the dead cheapy when i can watch the modern budgeted and much more technically polished remake?

evil dead? forget about it. it's a glorified student film. reservoir dogs? eck... it reeeeeks of low budget... it's got a handful of locations at most. where are the hundreds of high quality canadian locations that i'm used to seeing? rushmore? not ONE single bullet time shot... i [email protected]#$ you not! memento - not a SINGLE scorpion kick from trinity....

even lucas realizes that we're not getting our money's worth in money shots from his films and he's going back to add them in... whether the film needed it or not. now that's a mark of a guy who's got his priorities straight.

[THIS WAS NOT AT ALL ERIC'S ARGUMENT.... i just took it to a logical extreme to make a point later]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

eric's ACTUAL argument is indeed valid. cheap and one man is NOT a virtue or a redeeming value in and of itself.

you can be cheap and be bad. (!!!)

[some of the worst movies ever made are badly made independent 'human drama' films.

at least in a bad hollywood action film, you DO get your booms and bangs and whoa, that blowed up real good and high quality bionic titty jobs!

bad drama is just useless.]

so yes, no quarter need be or SHOULD be given simply from cost or conditions of production. as eric said, it costs the same money (if not more) and takes the same chunk out of my life span.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONDITION OF PRODUCTION IS NO EXCUSE OR ARBITER OF ACTUAL QUALITY!!!

lots of people say things like 'yah, but you don't understand the time constraint they were under' or 'yah, we didn't have enough people on that'.

that may in fact be true and such consideration should definitely be taken into account to whether people involved were culpable of fing up the job.

BUT IT DOES NOT ENTER INTO HOW GOOD OR BAD SOMETHING IS! the thing itself (whether it is a book, a movie, an fx shot, what have you) stands alone without context.

and people should be big enough to be able to say, "yah, that shot was [email protected]#$%... we DIDN'T have the manpower to do it right but that doesn't mitigate the fact that yah, it's [email protected]#$$...."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

and now for the point that depends on the logical extreme up top:

if you can't outdo hollywood, there's no point in trying. you'll only look like a sad wannabe.

if you can't outdo pixar, you shouldn't try. you'll only be treated with condescension.

and while limitations in production quality are not virtues of themselves, they do afford the opportunity to be a DIFFERENT KIND OF VOICE in the mainstream pop consciousness.

if you're cheap and independent, you can say what major hollywood works can't. if you're cheap and independent, you can show what major hollywood works won't.

you don't have 80mil but you also don't have to make it back. you don't have to appeal to the widest possible demographic. you don't have to have 'focus group testing'. you can be who the [email protected]#$ you want and say whatever the [email protected]#$ you want.

you can dare to be OFFENSIVE in this nobody rock the boat, lowest common denominator, consumerist happy land.

and you can derive your primary value not from one of mere cost but in uniqueness of vision, voice, message.

it is true of all media and in this case, it is true in how expensive the media is:

the works that best exploit the limitations of the medium ends up being the best example of that medium.

so if you try to make ben hur with cardboard sets and untextured low poly models, you can't help but look bad.

but if you can conceive of an idea that is not only fit to your scale but also unique in point of view and style... well then, at that point, you've got something that hollywood cannot take away from, no matter how many millions they throw at it.

in other words, make something that you would make EXACTLY LIKE THAT no matter how many millions you had to throw at it and not simply a 'poor man's pixar'.

jin
:D

jin choung
10-28-2004, 02:37 AM
archiea,

welcome to the conversation. welcome also to the ever growing club of people who don't understand sarcasm.

this is either a lacking of clarity on my part or the part of the readers... the jury is still out on that one. perhaps we should make a poll....

anyhoo, go back a few threads and catch up. i don't actually say ANY of the things that you think i say.

and yep, i did think irobot was great. no account for taste eh?

team america was fantastic if for nothing else than its courage.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

if you went back a few thread -, the POINT, i think, of many here was again re-articulated in concentrated form by me.

i will do so AGAIN:

THE PRODUCT STANDS ON ITS OWN - cost, conditions of production, sacrifices made - DO NOT/ CANNOT/MUST NOT MITIGATE EVALUATION OF THE WORK ITSELF.

that is ALL that most of us here have been saying.

sure, consideration and admiration for the experience of creation can be considered for its own sake and makes for really interesting story. this does not (should not) alter anyone's rating of the film itself.

it stands on its own.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

again, i haven't seen kaze (would like to though). i know tim. worked with him at the same company for a while. was privvy to his plans before he started production. he hooked me up with his headhunters even.

tim is a great guy and i've got nothing but nice things to say about him.

and i DO admire the pluck, courage and initiative he put up to get it from page to screen.

let no one misunderstand: nothing i have said takes anything away from his accomplishment or him - nor were they intended to.

the ONLY thing that we were saying is that if you rate a film from 0-10, the COST of production does NOT factor into consideration.

that is fairly self evident, uncontroversial and i would dare say something that tim might agree with.

jin

p.s. yah! wouldn't it be awesome if they colorized schindler's list?! it would be in living color then, as god intended and not the 8 bit rip off that we initially got.

p.s.2. what can i say, i'm a glutton for punishment... let's keep that club growin'!

jin choung
10-28-2004, 02:54 AM
i think the problem might be the length of my posts....

if you SKIM, it's very easy to misunderstand.

people, if you are to understand me correctly, you must hang on my every word. it's all, 100%, 24k gold. i cannot emphasize powerfully enough how extremely vital my every letter is for the survival and wellbeing of the lightwave community in specific and humanity at large in general.

i recommend not only reading it but cherishing it in your heart. meditating upon it during break and lunch times. perhaps memorizing and forming the syllables in your mouth as you drift off to sleep. extruding them in modeler may help as well.... remember the microbevels.

only then (maybe) will the true light fill your every orifice with wisdom, reason and meaning.

jin

archiea
10-28-2004, 11:38 PM
No, I didn't skim, nor did I stray from the point. In fact I nearly quoted your opinion ragarding level of FX = getting your money's worth, i.e. the redo of star wars, with my point being that that is the attitude of a consumer nont connoisseur. What puzzles me is that BOTH of your replies dwell on how great you think your post are.

And where is there sarcasm regarding your opinion of Lucas' revision of Starwars or the fact that you thought that iRobot was "great". Its not that I don't understand your post as much as its the fact that they are all over the fawking place.



i think the problem might be the length of my posts....

if you SKIM, it's very easy to misunderstand.

people, if you are to understand me correctly, you must hang on my every word. it's all, 100%, 24k gold. i cannot emphasize powerfully enough how extremely vital my every letter is for the survival and wellbeing of the lightwave community in specific and humanity at large in general.

i recommend not only reading it but cherishing it in your heart. meditating upon it during break and lunch times. perhaps memorizing and forming the syllables in your mouth as you drift off to sleep. extruding them in modeler may help as well.... remember the microbevels.

only then (maybe) will the true light fill your every orifice with wisdom, reason and meaning.

jin
:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

jin choung
10-29-2004, 12:02 AM
whatever man.

you don't understand what i say. i don't care. you don't care. move on and be done with me then. i'm done with you.

jin

kurv
10-29-2004, 07:46 AM
I do object to the sales pitch that it cost $5000 as it doesn't account for food, fuel, and necessities for the 6 months of the production to sustain both Tim and the production.


Actually, it did. Thats why Tim moved to Alaska. :D

glassefx
10-29-2004, 02:04 PM
I'd like to have a brew'haha with some of u crazee bastards! Jin, you funny! And you think too much as I do.

I'll have to see KGW before I dare say a word, but I will say this...

The proof is in the pudding!

About 1% of the total amount of entertainment we percieve globally is noteworthy. This means its doing something new or so good in an old way that it will change what people perceive as "quality."

A quick example: Terminator 2 - I and lots of people wondered how they did what they did... Today its simple

I just wish I could remember all of the perfect thoughts I have had about things I've seen in movies and in entertainment in general about how the've broke new ground. Lots of things are so ground breaking that they take years to absorb into the collective understanding of people. At one time I could define a few in my mind....They will come back now that I am thinking around that brain cluster.

hazmat777
10-29-2004, 11:28 PM
jin- It's GOLD baby. Gold. Every word.... :D

archiea
11-01-2004, 01:39 AM
Actually, it did. Thats why Tim moved to Alaska. :D

Well he stated that the equipment cost $5000, i.e. toaster, DFX, etc. I didn't get the impression that it was his TOTAL cost, including equipment, as well as cost of living. However, even if it does, what concerns me is that these kind of statements don;t reflect the artist time. I.e. If I had spent 6 months doing just the animation, I'm sure do want to get paid more than 5K, let alone doing everything else.

So again, i appreciate the point that Tim makes with the claim of the production costing 5K, and I'm proud of his accomplishments. Its just that my philosopy is different in that if I were to calculate the budget of my own film, I would include my "fee", i.e. what my hourly rate is for 6 months of work. I just don't want producers to think that now artist should work for less than 1K per month because he heard at siggraph that a 20 min film was done for 5K...

archiea
11-01-2004, 01:47 AM
whatever man.

you don't understand what i say. i don't care. you don't care. move on and be done with me then. i'm done with you.

jin

What do you mean whatever. You pull this stunt every time I debate you. Even as I quote your words, you state that I didn't understand you. Instead of talking in riddles, just restate your point in a few sentences, as I argue that YOU don't understand what you yourself said.

yes or no: Did you not say that you consider the audience getting their money's worth by lucas altering and updating his original films? So essentialy your point was that had the original Star Wars been shown in thaters again or sold as the DVD collection, that the audeinces would NOT have gotten their money's worth because the orig FX would be deemed so inferior compared to today's films.

Just a yes or no, no exhausting reply regarding the greatness of your posts. Just a yes or no.

jin choung
11-01-2004, 02:29 AM
WHY THE F are you trying to debate me?!

you don't have the language skills necessary to sustain your part of the conflict. stop before you pull a muscle in your head and hurt yourself.

YES!!! YES!!! FOR HEAVEN'S Fing SAKE YES!!! I SAID EXACTLY THAT!!!

I MEANT THE EXACT Fing O*P*P*O*S*I*T*E!!!

look up the defintion of the word 'irony'. look up the definition of the word 'sarcasm'.

and for heaven's sake, don't criticize what you can't understand. do yourself a favor and assume that you can't.

jin