Thursday, August 21, 2008
Extraordinarily lifelike animation: Meet Emily (kinda creepy)
Ok, I admit I've been thinking for a long time that if fashion designers/movie industry moguls are so hot on having extremely thin women be models/actresses, they should go with animation. If the woman is animation, then there's no need to put a living woman through the hell that is dieting and exercising to a fare-thee-well in order to meet their standards (not to mention making a living woman either wear a fat suit or gain weight for a role and then have to lose that weight). But, I also wondered, would animation-women make women think they still had to meet those unattainable-for-many standards (not to mention all the women it would put out of work, however, they could also use animation-men to replace the male models/actors, then they could get the exact look they wanted for a film). After all, if they use animation-people, they don't have to worry about talent, that can be programmed into the animation, they don't have to worry if a certain actor/actress is really right for the part, they can program the "right" actor/actress.
I wondered how long before the technology to do this would be available, and I'm wondering now about the cost (monetarily, at least) to do this. Would it be cheaper than paying several million dollars to an actor/actress for starring in a movie? Would movie-goers actually go to see movies made this way, without a "big name" actor in them? We go to see cartoon movies, where you don't see the actor behind the voice of the character, you just hear the actor's voice (and some actors don't really have a distinctive voice, like Whoopi Goldberg's, Sean Connery's, Eddie Murphy's, or Tom Selleck's [just the ones I can recognize if I hear them on TV without seeing what's on]).
What do y'all think of this?
Via Brad Neese at Living Large in Oklahoma
6 comments:
Comment moderation is enabled. If you're a troll and trying to slander someone or just being generally an asshat, your comment probably won't see the light of day. If you want to have a reasonable, civil discussion, welcome, and feel free to comment.
To the troll at IP: 70.242.65.196 , adsl-70-242-65-196.dsl.stlsmo.swbell.net, your comments will not be published, nor will they be read. They will be automatically deleted. Get a life, sad sack.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think that video is a hoax, but then I think almost everything is a hoax, so maybe it's a knee-jerk reaction. I'm going to go check out Snopes now and see what they have to say about it.
ReplyDeleteI'm into Machinima, and I am often amazed at how lifelike machinima gets -- and that's "amateur" video production. I know how realistic animation can be these days, I think more movied are going to be made with digital elements, and digital actors. And that people who don't fit into the lollipop-head mold of the industry will have to work as hard or harder than unique (fat, old, unusual looking) actors do today to get work.
ReplyDeleteI think it's interesting that they chose a pretty woman with slightly asymmetrical facial features and expressions to represent perfect animation. Whether she's animated or not, if someone wants to claim that their animation is indistinguishable from live actors, they're going to have to include markers of "life" and "humanity" in their characters. That means including flaws - i.e., deviations from "perfection" (including asymmetry, wrinkles, pores, etc., etc.). Maybe a step in the right direction, even if this step is only theoretical?
ReplyDeleteAll I can think is to say, I really wonder what Rod Serling would have to say about this.
ReplyDeleteviolet_yoshi - that's it exactly, the twilight zone is striking here.
ReplyDeletePeople would defnitely fall in love with animation characters. There is plenty of people in love with heroines from computer games etc. Kind of scary though. It was so real. I wonder how far they can push the 'perfect' body now. I thought it was bad enough before.
ReplyDelete