posted
Well, there are alot of problems of making Ender's game the movie. Everyone who is an Ender's game fan should know that. But what if it was created into and animated movie, not a live action movie? It would get rid of the age problem.
Posts: 72 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah but I doubt it would happen. Orson Scott Card has complete control over whether it be made of not, and with his background in theatre of course he'd much rather work with actors, directors, etc and not with computer artists. A cartoon show on the other hand...
Posts: 1138 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think it'd have nearly the same effect on the audience as watching real live kiddies would.
Posts: 1215 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ender's Game is a complicated story thick with human relationships and utterly depended on human motives in order to be intelligible and emotionally effective. Animation simply can't offer those things - they are precisely the area where animation is weakest. Some brilliant animators have pushed the envelope in that direction, and heaven knows there are plenty of films (Aeon Flux, for instance) that don't achieve the level of character complexity of Sailor Moon ... but the best live action films do things, characterwise, that the best animated films simply can't do. There are probably those who are so committed to animation that they might disagree; but I would suggest that perhaps they are bringing much of the emotional range of the "characters" to the film, and most audience members don't do that.
Posts: 2005 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think to those unaccustomed to such a media format would find it hard to relate to the characters. But for those of us who have a history with anime, I honestly think it would be more emotional to be animated (in Japanese style anyway), than to have normal actors.
Just a different media "language" I think...
Posts: 70 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
What about digital animation, in the vein of Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within? The movie's script may have been horrible, but the entirely-digital movie looked pretty good, with CG visuals that are still very impressive after several years of advances.
So you still have the emotions coming through, it'll still look realistic, and you avoid finding lots of talented child actors. =)
Posts: 208 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
No offense... But that's completely ridiculous. Our technologies can do some pretty incredible stuff, but you just can't replicate the kind of stuff you find in Ender's Game. Yes, for a lot of technology, that would be a great idea. But, to bring in the psychological aspect, to really delve into the depths of Ender's mind, through his curiosity, his success, his loss, his pain... You need real human emotions.
Posts: 53 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orson Scott Card: Ender's Game is a complicated story thick with human relationships and utterly depended on human motives in order to be intelligible and emotionally effective. Animation simply can't offer those things - they are precisely the area where animation is weakest. Some brilliant animators have pushed the envelope in that direction, and heaven knows there are plenty of films (Aeon Flux, for instance) that don't achieve the level of character complexity of Sailor Moon ... but the best live action films do things, characterwise, that the best animated films simply can't do. There are probably those who are so committed to animation that they might disagree; but I would suggest that perhaps they are bringing much of the emotional range of the "characters" to the film, and most audience members don't do that.
I see what your saying but I just don't agree. I think that animation can have "human relationships and utterly depended on human motives in order to be intelligible and emotionally effective". Its just that American's are use to the idea of cartoons to be funny or eye candy (i.e. the Aeon flux animated series (we use that for alot of examples)). But I have found some anime's to have extrodinary characters and character relationship's that bring out the "Intelligible and emotionally effective(ness)" out in the series (Sailor moon not being one of them).
Posts: 72 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Animation simply can't offer those things - they are precisely the area where animation is weakest.
I don't want to come off all otaku here, but I've watched far too much anime to buy that. Japan never had to suffer decades of the tyranny of Disney, so they've been free to use the medium of animation to explore a mind-blowingly wide range of topics. Some of them have been quite powerful. Just because most animation falls short doesn't mean that's anything inherent in the medium itself--most live action movies fall short as well.
Posts: 1814 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have to agree somewhat with Hitoshi here. I think that after a few more years(probably five to ten) to mature, computer animation will be able to achieve the expressiveness needed to tell Ender's Game.
For example, look at Advent Children. In my opinion, characters had some scenes in which they achieved a high level of expressiveness. While its true that they weren't at the level of actual human actors, it was way beyond what was being produced even a few years ago.
As computer graphics are increasingly used to create characters, I think that we will see massive improvement in the quality and realism of the work. I firmly believe that by the end of the decade, it will be possible to create a movie such as Ender's Game entirely using computer animation.
Posts: 2437 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think animations should be reserved for original stories (or else seperate story series based on an already existing story since they're original in their own right). That's what actors are for - their own unique way of telling an already existing story. That's why thousands of retellings of Shakepeare have been done brilliant by actors, and never in animation, not because shakespeare himself was a playwright. The same goes for movies (with actors) that retell famous books. I can't think of one movie that successfully used animation to do that, and I watch a lot of animated movies. The final fantasy movie animations were based on already existing stories, but they themselves were orignal stories. Advent Children was part of an already existing Universe, but it was still the first time *that* story had been published.
Okay, that was a bit of a ramble, but hopefully I managed to get what I mean across.
Edit: Actually, I can think of one that successfuly did that - the Little Mermaid. Of course, I've never read the original story but if it's the case that they did it with that, then I think maybe the rule I stated above doesn't applies to kids stories somehow.
[ December 24, 2005, 06:32 PM: Message edited by: cheiros do ender ]
Posts: 1138 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay, kids, but the real reason Ender's game can't be made in animation is that animation automatically equals "Kids' movie" for american movie markets. Some people have tried to break this mould, but it's just not working. Not only will that limit the market for the movie, but the studio would insist on making the movie appropriate for kids, which would of course severly cripple the story.
Posts: 368 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
Animation has not gotten the subtle acting that comes from a live actor. It's gotten close in various animes, but it's just not there yet.
You can blame Disney or whoever, the point is, animated films don't vibe with American moviegoers. Until that mold is broken I wouldn't even think about doing Ender's Game with animation, however great it is.
We won't have to worry about SFX, makeup, directing, etc. when it comes to the EG movie.
It's getting the EG story into a movie that's a challenge. That, and CASTING.
Good lawd! Who on this planet will/could play Ender? Bean? Valentine?
When I saw Finding Neverland and Chronicles of Narnia it gave me hope that assembling a great cast would be possible.
That's really the only "hurdle" that might benefit from animated characters, but people have a harder time relating to "cartoons" because they only watched that stuff when they were 7 years old.
Posts: 1236 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:The same goes for movies (with actors) that retell famous books. I can't think of one movie that successfully used animation to do that, and I watch a lot of animated movies.
Grave of the Fireflies.
Posts: 1814 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I should point out that I'm not pushing for Ender's Game to be made into an animation. Several threads have been made requesting it already, and it's not going to happen. And I agree it shouldn't be, for one reason only, which I'll get to in a moment.
I simply reject the notion that animation cannot have the depth of character or emotion that live-action has. It usually doesn't in this country, because Walt Disney declared that animation could only be used for light-hearted fluff for children, and generations of Americans have grown up thinking of it that way.
Today we have two main categories of animation in the United States. The first is light-hearted children's fluff. The second is edgy adult comedy that usually (not always, but usually) goes too far and succeeds primarily in being offensive.
What Americans have yet to pull off is an animation with real drama, genuine emotional content, and true depth of character. This is not, however, an inherent flaw in animation itself. The Japanese have been doing it for a very long time now. They never got stuck with the ingrained dogma "cartoons are for children" that we have grown up with. In Japan, animation is used for:
- Light-hearted children's fluff - Tear-jerking drama - Edgy, offensive comedy - Decent, humorous comedy - Romances - Space opera (the genre, not the Hatracker) - Pornography - Superhero adventures - Heavy psychological drama
And any other genre live-action can be used for. In America, "animation" is almost a genre unto itself. In Japan, it's simply a medium, neither more nor less valid than live-action for any purpose they decide to set for it. Some animations are based on comic books. Some are original stories. Some are based on novels.
To a Japanese audience, there would be no incongruity at all in seeing Ender's Game made into an animated film.
Someone is now going to come and say, "But Verily, the movie isn't being made for a Japanese audience, it's being made for an American audience." And I agree. If Card wants this movie to be successful in America--and I reckon he does--he won't do it animated. Too large a percentage of the potential audience still thinks of animation as just "children's cartoons". For that reason, I think it should not be animated. America isn't ready for that yet.
I hope that someday we are, but the only point I'm really trying to make here is that animation is not inherently an unfit medium for a serious character-driven story like this one. It could be made to work artistically. If it were to be made by Studio Ghibli and directed by Isao Takahata, for example, it would turn out as a beautiful and powerful film, absolutely worthy of its source material.
It's hard for Americans to appreciate animation when they look at the medium and see only "Kim Possible" on the one hand and "South Park" on the other. It's easy to conclude that animation is inherently trash. My point is that we have only to look at Japan and we see that, if audiences are not compelled to think it has to be that way, then it won't always be that way.
Posts: 1814 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Verily the Younger: [QBIt's hard for Americans to appreciate animation when they look at the medium and see only "Kim Possible" on the one hand and "South Park" on the other. It's easy to conclude that animation is inherently trash. My point is that we have only to look at Japan and we see that, if audiences are not compelled to think it has to be that way, then it won't always be that way. [/QB]
Totally agree with you there.
What I've seen so far has power, yes, but it's not to a level now, barring american dispositions, that can capture the Ender's Game emotional content.
It's just from what I've seen (which isn't complete by any means) even the Japanese, from a technical standpoint of just drawing frames, have only just made a scratch in the field of "subtle facial/bodily cues". The only movie that had a few of those kinds of facial details that I've seen, is Ghost in the Shell 2: Innocence. When I say "facial details" I don't mean the detailing of a expression of the characters face, you get that all over. What you don't get is detailing in the change of expression, which is vital in conveying a characters immediate thought processes.
Posts: 1236 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Seems to me that most of animation's expression of character doesn't come quite from facial expressions as much as the environment and dialogue.
It's getting better though ^_-
Japan also has much better voice actors... It'd only recently that anyone other than Disney has bothered with decent voice acting.
Posts: 70 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Ender's Game is a complicated story thick with human relationships and utterly depended on human motives in order to be intelligible and emotionally effective. Animation simply can't offer those things - they are precisely the area where animation is weakest. Some brilliant animators have pushed the envelope in that direction, and heaven knows there are plenty of films (Aeon Flux, for instance) that don't achieve the level of character complexity of Sailor Moon ... but the best live action films do things, characterwise, that the best animated films simply can't do. There are probably those who are so committed to animation that they might disagree; but I would suggest that perhaps they are bringing much of the emotional range of the "characters" to the film, and most audience members don't do that.
Then again, if you could get Brad Bird and Pixar behind this thing, I'd take them up on it in a minute; it would be a superior film to almost anything else I could imagine.
Posts: 202 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orson Scott Card: Ender's Game is a complicated story thick with human relationships and utterly depended on human motives in order to be intelligible and emotionally effective. Animation simply can't offer those things - they are precisely the area where animation is weakest. Some brilliant animators have pushed the envelope in that direction, and heaven knows there are plenty of films (Aeon Flux, for instance) that don't achieve the level of character complexity of Sailor Moon ... but the best live action films do things, characterwise, that the best animated films simply can't do. There are probably those who are so committed to animation that they might disagree; but I would suggest that perhaps they are bringing much of the emotional range of the "characters" to the film, and most audience members don't do that.
I would like to know what sci-fi fantasy films have ever been effective at this kind of character complexity?
OSC, your writing off a genre in its infancy, (ok your not writing it off entirely) but the great film directors have been behind the camera all their adult lives! Just wait 15 years, until some of these computer animators have been doing motion picture faces for decades, I think you'll find it increasingly effective in this realm.
I have been thinking about this, and if EG comes out as a motion picture, I probably won't want to see it... I have been burned by too many sappy childrens pics to go back for more.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
I really don't think Hollywood is particularly talented at covering characterization and telling great stories very often. Maybe you should make it with Taleswapper but have it produced by a foreign film company. Or maybe not...
[ December 26, 2005, 02:01 AM: Message edited by: cheiros do ender ]
Posts: 1138 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by cheiros do ender: if it were made as an animation there's only one group who could do it: Square Enix. OSC, have you seen Advent Children?
It's a very beautiful tech demo (completely fanserviced too!), but they still have a "ma ma ma" problem with the way they animate the mouths. Not to mention the cost PER FRAME of making that movie.
Posts: 1236 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
So, it's final Fantasy, it's famous for "ma ma ma" mouths. Doesn't mean they'd do it for any movie they made.
Posts: 1138 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not impressed with complex computer animation that's meant to simulate reality. Animation does not exist to create reality. We already have reality for that.
I can't word it any better than Roger Ebert did in his review of Grave of the Fireflies--which can be found in the "Great Movies" section of his site, by the way--so I'll simply quote him here:
quote:The book is well-known in Japan, and might easily have inspired a live-action film. It isn't the typical material of animation. [At least, not from our Western standpoint. -VtY] But for "Grave of the Fireflies," I think animation was the right choice. Live action would have been burdened by the weight of special effects, violence and action. Animation allows Takahata to concentrate on the essence of the story, and the lack of visual realism in his animated characters allows our imagination more play; freed from the literal fact of real actors, we can more easily merge the characters with our own associations.
Hollywood animation has been pursuing the ideal of "realistic animation" for decades, even though that's an oxymoron. People who are drawn do not look like people who are photographed. They're more stylized, more obviously symbolic, and (as Disney discovered in painstaking experiments) their movements can be exaggerated to communicate mood through body language. "Grave of the Fireflies" doesn't attempt even the realism of "The Lion King" or "Princess Mononoke," but paradoxically it is the most realistic animated film I've ever seen--in feeling.
The locations and backgrounds are drawn in a style owing something to the 18th century Japanese artist Hiroshige and his modern disciple Herge (the creator of Tin Tin). There is great beauty in them--not cartoon beauty, but evocative landscape drawing, put through the filter of animated style. The characters are typical of much modern Japanese animation, with their enormous eyes, childlike bodies and features of great plasticity (mouths are tiny when closed, but enormous when opened in a child's cry--we even see Setsuko's tonsils). This film proves, if it needs proving, that animation produces emotional effects not by reproducing reality, but by heightening and simplifying it, so that many of the sequences are about ideas, not experiences.
quote:Originally posted by Verily the Younger: I'm not impressed with complex computer animation that's meant to simulate reality. Animation does not exist to create reality..
Why not? While animation's biggest strength is that it is not limited by reality, I don't see why that should rule out using computer animation to simulate reality.
Posts: 2437 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ricree101: While animation's biggest strength is that it is not limited by reality, I don't see why that should rule out using computer animation to simulate reality.
Because simulated reality doesn't look real.
Final Fantasy anything by SquareEnix, does not look real, and who's to say after making Flight of Osiris, FF:Spirit Within, FF:AC, and the mryiad of ingame cutscenes, they wouldn't continue to make "ma ma" mouthings?
Again, they look great from a technical achievment standpoint, but they're not there yet.
There has only been one shot that looked real enough for one SECOND that my disbelief was suspended, and that was when the big driller bot in Matrix Rev, shifted it's weight and was beginning to attempt to haul itself up.
Everything else so far I can look at and go "blue screen, miniature, matte painting, cg, chroma key, chroma key suit" and a variety of combinations.
SW Ep 3 had no substance the actors might have well been walking on air. There was plenty of "good cg" there.
We're just not there yet.
Posts: 1236 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
True, SW3 is a good example of misused animation that wasn't good enough to augment the movie, and instead detracted from it...
I still argue that they are simply different mediums, and should not be compared to one another. Some forms of story work best in animation, and others not, I don't think we're anywhere near them being interchangeable.
Posts: 70 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
FF: spirits within, their upper lips never moved! Drove me CRAZY. The models were excelent though!
If anything, Enders Game could benifit from techniques like what they did in LOTR with Gollum and other scenes. In other words, make it a live action movie, but use CG to "help".
One scene in particular sticks out in my mind. In one of the battle scenes in ROTK, Legolas, on the ground, grabs the reins of a horse riding by, and he swings himself to the other side of it and onto its back. Completely CG but it looked real.
Posts: 1209 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by human_2.0: One scene in particular sticks out in my mind. In one of the battle scenes in ROTK, Legolas, on the ground, grabs the reins of a horse riding by, and he swings himself to the other side of it and onto its back. Completely CG but it looked real.
Wasn't that TT? And yah, that was good.
Posts: 1236 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I recall that shot still looking quite forced though... Perhaps with more modern technology it would be better, but it still looks... well, animated.
Gollum is a decent example of an animated character showing emotion, though his character never had to relate *deep* emotions like the Ender's Game characters will have to.
I hate to say it guys, but I think it's a lost cause. I could see it being a great anime *series*, but I think this movie does have to stay within the realms of visual reality.
Still... I'm so worried about the actors... Good acting is so hard to come by, especially with children. Just look at little Anakin in Eps 1. Is that REALLY the best they could do?
Posts: 70 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Watch "Chronicles of Narnia" the girl who plays Lucy is fantastic as a young actor. And while I despise Dakota Fanning, she's been good at times in her roles (her look just bothers me for some reason, I get the feeling she's already had plastic surgery at 8 or so)
"Harry Potter" also managed to cast some pretty talented child actors.
But I can't in my right mind imagine a 9 year old out there who could pull off the role of "Ender" or "Bean" and be at all believable.
Posts: 202 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think one of the kids from either Finding Neverland or Chronicles could pull off Bean/Ender.
Posts: 1236 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
You can't hold Anakin responsible for George Lukas's inability to write diologue that doesn't suck out loud.
Posts: 368 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The reason Gollum from LOTR had emotions was because they didn't try to go in and drag the little points around on a computer, they used motion capture. If you stick enough little motion capture things on someones face and then use that data to animate a face, the animation will convey exactly the same emotion as the real person.
Posts: 4 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Side-note: I agree, the dialogue has always been the true killer of the new prequel trilogy, rather than the acting... But still...
Hmm, I still don't think we've really seen any movies that required such complexity of children's acting as Ender's Game would.
Well, guess we'll just have to put our faith in Mr. Card and the studio he's working with. Not like we can do all that much to change their minds anyway. ^_-
Posts: 70 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by A Rat Named Dog: They didn't use motion-capture on Andy Serkis's face. They just used it for reference as they hand-animated the face.
Motion-capture was only used for his larger movements.
And if you were going to motion capture someones face, why not just use live actors anyway?
Posts: 1209 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
How about a tastefully lit set with OSC in a comfortable chair reading the novel aloud to us? I could bring the project in under 80 million dollars, I bet.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Ender's Game is a complicated story thick with human relationships and utterly depended on human motives in order to be intelligible and emotionally effective. Animation simply can't offer those things - they are precisely the area where animation is weakest.
I think that is something that both can and has been done in animation. I would argue that the expression of human motives and complex emotion is actually one of the great strengths of animation, as illustrated in particular through Japanese works ranging from Grave of the Fireflies to the Evangelion series. This is because animation has an advantage over live-action film.
I think live-action films are forced to be realistic, and are only allowed to express motivations and relationships through the few methods that physical reality allows us to in real life. Actors can express it through words, expressions, and actions. Animation, however, is not bound by that realism. At the simplest and most direct level, comics have long used "thought bubbles" to directly express what a character is thinking. At more subtle levels, animators can actually draw characters or whole scenes in a different fashion to express emotions or thoughts of the characters in those scenes. And unlike live-action films, viewers of animated films usually expect and accept this. This means an animated film has many more tools available to express what is going on inside characters' heads. It is similar to novels in this way. In novels and animation, you can use direct or indirect methods to simply tell or show the viewer/reader what characters are thinking. In live-action films, there are very few methods of doing this, other than by relying on an actor's ability to express it physically and the audience's ability to infer what you want it to infer.
The downside to this is that viewers must be comfortable with allowing reality to be altered in the way animation requires. I think some viewers simply aren't willing to suspend their disbelief that far. For them, exaggerated facial expressions, changing animation styles, etc., are all too distracting. I suspect theater has a similar problem - since it too cannot make the stage look just like reality, and relies on various techniques to exaggerate and distort reality in order to get points across. Live-action films are the most realistic, and thus are going to easiest to believe, but for the same reason are going to be the most difficult medium with which to express internal thoughts and motivations. Animation and theater are both less realistic, and require more imagination, but also allow for a greater flexibility in how to express internal feelings. And books are the least realistic, requiring almost total imagination, but allowing the author to directly tell the audience what characters think and feel.
Now, if you look at Disney and Pixar movies, you aren't going to see animation being used to its fullest in expressing emotion and character motivation. But that's because those films rarely attempt to delve into characterization much. Deeply character-driven films are not made into animation in America - at least not at the blockbuster level. That's not because it can't be done, but rather because it does not seem to be really attempted, and because not all audiences have come to accept that medium for serious movies. But if you look to foreign animation, particularly in Japan, I think you can find examples of characterization that match or in some cases even exceed the level attained in most of the very best live-action films. I think there are definitely some that exceed the level of expression attained by the best child actors.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Ender's Game is a complicated story thick with human relationships and utterly depended on human motives in order to be intelligible and emotionally effective. Animation simply can't offer those things - they are precisely the area where animation is weakest.
Now, if you look at Disney and Pixar movies, you aren't going to see animation being used to its fullest in expressing emotion and character motivation. But that's because those films rarely attempt to delve into characterization much.
You were doing great until you got to those statements.
I'm sorry, but when we're made to feel sad for a cowboy girl doll, or a big hairy monster, or a discarded toy, I'd say that's expressing emotion and characters/motivations FAIRLY WELL.
While I personally think PIXAR should totally split from Disney because they're geniuses compared to "the emperors new groove" animators, to say that those films don't use animation to express emotion is almost denying reality itself! O.o
Posts: 1236 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
However, those movies are directed to a rather young audience, and the situation those cowboy dolls and hairy monsters in are decidedly less complex than those of Ender's Game.
Animations express emotion, but not as subtlely as live faces do. Cartoons are by nature exaggerated because of the lack of detail.
Also, why bother with motion capture instead of just having the real thing? It's not as if Ender has to look like a swamp creature or something. That sure sounds like a lot of hassle for something that could be done in a much more direct and inexpensive fashion.
Posts: 13 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Except that there aren't really enough really good child actors out there to fill in the major roles, let alone the extras (such as the other squadron's kids during the Battleroom sequences).
Yes, faces express more subtle emotions than animations, but you have to have actors with those faces; the problem live action presents for this movie is that there really aren't that many child actors that could play such demanding emotional roles, and do it well. Plus, how would they show aging? They can't just put makeup on him as they would an adult; he'd have to grow, and finding another child actor that's just as good an actor *and* looks like the younger actor *and* is older would be extremely difficult.
Posts: 208 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think the reason there aren't good child actors is because there haven't been good child roles. It's like saying there aren't good horse actors. Mainly, I think there aren't directors who know how to direct children. You can take Oscar worthy actors and put them under a bad enough director, and you get the Star Wars prequels.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree with OSC that animation just isn't great with subtle character emotions. Either they don't show any, or they shout them out blatantly. It's very hard to convince most audience members (especially adults) that a 2-D drawing or a computer-born puppet is capable of feeling things that humans in-the-flesh can.
After all, has anyone seen an animated romantic drama before?
Posts: 973 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can see Freddie Highmore (Finding Neverland, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory) playing Ender. He has the subtle emotions that I think are critical to anyone playing the role of Ender. He made me cry in Finding Neverland.
I also agree that animation would not be sufficient in any EG movie. I imagine something more like 2001: A Space Oddysey where the plain beauty of the settings is used rather than flashy and usually exploding things.
For instance, I imaging anything in the battle room to be virtually void of sound. The only exceptions would be when the camera is looking from the viewpoint of a character, and then the only things the audience would hear would be the only things that the character would hear.
Posts: 1711 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
I could've sworn I read about one or more characters taking their helmets off after a battle or during practice.
Posts: 1236 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
