Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

News Credits: 5 · by **BluePhirePB** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 11:15 am

Not to be a Negative Nancy but I doubt DOTM will win. They'll probably give it to Hugo because it's artsy. Honestly, TF1 should have beat out The Golden Compass in 2008.

by **amtm** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 11:17 am

I haven't seen all of these movies, but frankly, of the ones I've seen, none of them had anything in it that I'd consider an "achievement". It's all been more of the same old computer graphics bashing and zipping and exploding. Big deal.

News Credits: 4 · by **SlyTF1** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 11:36 am

Tidalwavex wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:
Tidalwavex wrote:
BeastProwl wrote:you watch it in HD BLU-RAY 3D, you'll see why it won, even without 3D or HD DOTM Was (and still is) Jaw-Droppingly realistic

it hasn't won anything yet,hence the Nominated words.

Personally I think Dotm deserves to win the oscar for "achievement in visual effects."

However I don't think dotm is gonna win this "visual Effects" oscar. BECAUSE People voting have to actually think the visual effects COMPLIMENTED a great story plots filled with a talented team of actors,with decent spoken dialogue words. needless to say,the dialoge spokem in the Three TF movies are horrible,cheesy,outdated & lame-o. their are no decent stories in the Three TF movies that keep viewers entertained & challenges their minds. all the top rated actors in the three TF movies got small parts,while all the horrible or amatuer actors got huge starring roles.

Personally i'm sick & tired of micheal bay & shia le bouf. I want the Dotm movie to LOSE this oscar in visual effects to embrass micheal bay.

I don't want micheal bay to win this oscar because this will encourage the man to do a TF 4 movie. I'm looking for this nightmare roller coaster ride to end. I want a reboot,with a talented director & a starring cast not from any previous nickoladeaon TV series.

Then take your ass on somewhere else and go watch your boring ass movies with "plots". Nobody wants to hear that bs, it's a category for visual effects, not that crap you're talking about. Damn.

SLYFY1,I didn't insult you nor bully around your opinion. please show me the same polite repect i've shown you.

Well I'm sorry. It was early in the morning and I was pissed off already so...

That's a rather horrible excuse... Their are plenty of CGI movies out their with great well written story plots. decent spoken dialogue words & a talented crew of actors/actresses.

CGI & Visual effects mean zero if their their placed in what the majority think are awful movies. CGI & Visual effects need to have a soul & viewers need to connect with them.

Those movies bore me. And I did connect with the characters in ROTF and DOTM. Not so much the first movie though...

Planet of the apes is a awesome example of CGI & Visual effects used properly. the CGI apes had persona & they felt like real things. viewers looking at the CGI apes climbed into their heads & related to all their emotion,rage & dark persona's. they did a excellent job using the CGI to capture the emotion in the apes faces & body movements.

That movie bored me. They're just damn monkeys. You can go to the zoo and see them for real. Why the hell would I want to see a CG version of something I can see in real life?

Micheal bay doesn't know how to use CGI nor visual effects properly. micheal bay uses CGI as a bully weapon. he throws these huge CGI robots in viewers faces & all the CGI models do is bully their way down the street,stomping & ripping stuff apart.

That's the awesome part. And I'm pretty sure the TFs showed emotion throuought the movie.

Advatar is another perfect example of the CGI designs taking up the majority of the screen time & spoken dialogue words.

Avatar didn't bore me, but I hated it the second time I saw it.

Titanic is a perfect example of CGI & Visual effects used for a well written story. with a crew of talented actors/actresses

Again, another movie that bored the p!$$ out of me...

News Credits: 13 · by **Rodimus Prime** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 1:55 pm

Wow, there are way too many nominees. There should only be 5. And DotM should win. But, if any other flick takes it, I also think it will be Planet of the Apes.

News Credits: 50 · by **Burn** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 4:09 pm

SlyTF1 wrote:
Tidalwavex wrote:
SlyTF1 wrote:Then take your ass on somewhere else and go watch your boring ass movies with "plots". Nobody wants to hear that bs, it's a category for visual effects, not that crap you're talking about. Damn.

SLYFY1,I didn't insult you nor bully around your opinion. please show me the same polite repect i've shown you.

Well I'm sorry. It was early in the morning and I was pissed off already so...

Time and again Sly I have asked you to watch your language, i'm sick and tired of the excuses. You're old enough to know better. Grow up and start showing some respect.

Planet of the apes is a awesome example of CGI & Visual effects used properly. the CGI apes had persona & they felt like real things. viewers looking at the CGI apes climbed into their heads & related to all their emotion,rage & dark persona's. they did a excellent job using the CGI to capture the emotion in the apes faces & body movements.

That movie bored me. They're just damn monkeys. You can go to the zoo and see them for real. Why the hell would I want to see a CG version of something I can see in real life?

Really? You can see hyper-intelligent apes at a zoo? Apes that can talk? Wow, tell me where this zoo is because i'd love to see them too!

Seriously, have you considered a career as a movie critic? Because you clearly don't take the time to really watch a movie before criticising it.

by **OlivusPrime** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 4:20 pm

Out of all of them, DOTM probably deserves it the most, not just for the realism involved, but also for the effort put into all three films (ILM made two of their biggest, most detailed models for these movies).

Unfortunately though, I have a feeling that Hugo will get it, because of its high critical acclaim. I hope RotPotA doesn't get it, to be honest - I never thought that those apes were particularly realistic (despite everyone else's opinions of them), and it would be like The Golden Compass again if it won.

by **cotss2012** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 6:51 pm

The apes looked totally perfect in scenes where they weren't moving much. Unfortunately, during the high-motion scenes, I think the CGI people added a bit too much motion blur, and the effect became a bit cartoony. DotM didn't have that problem... it had a different one. Namely, the robots are made of too many tiny indistinguishable parts with the same rusted-over dark gray texture, so you can't really see what's what.

Of the movies that I've seen, I'd go with X-Men.

by **Evil_the_Nub** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 7:52 pm

cotss2012 wrote:The apes looked totally perfect in scenes where they weren't moving much. Unfortunately, during the high-motion scenes, I think the CGI people added a bit too much motion blur, and the effect became a bit cartoony. DotM didn't have that problem... it had a different one. Namely, the robots are made of too many tiny indistinguishable parts with the same rusted-over dark gray texture, so you can't really see what's what.

Of the movies that I've seen, I'd go with X-Men.

You might want to see an optometrist. I have great vision and nothing looked indistinguishable and the only one that looked rusted over was Megatron.

by **cotss2012** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 8:17 pm

This is what I'm talking about:

by **Kiyza** » Sat Dec 10, 2011 9:59 pm

You know, if there's any one award that this film deserves, it's in the visual effects department. Even if critics don't consider it up to par with a number of other films in terms of plot, drama, characterization, etc., it's hard to argue that the special effects aren't absolutely amazing.

And you know what? It's probably going to lose out to a movie that garners more critical respect, like the aforementioned Rise of the Planet of the Apes. Why? Because people in charge of these awards are biased. They can't look at a film specifically for one thing and one thing only.

It's hard to argue that the first Transformers film didn't look fantastic in terms of visual effects, and a lot of work was spent on the special effects, certainly more than The Golden Compass that it lost to. But the reason that that film won is, of course, because it has more "class" than a movie with giant robots beating the crap out of each other and gratuitous amounts of explosions. You know, despite the fact that according to Rotten Tomatoes, Transformers received a fair bit more critical and audience praise.

If you asked some person on the street which they thought looked more amazing between these films, I'd wager they'd say Transformers. If Transformers was a well received drama film with giant robots in the in the mix, the critics Transformers might have a chance of winning. But keep in mind, these are snooty pricks who can't appreciate good special effects if they're in a film that doesn't cater to their tastes.

Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

Transformers DOTM Nominated for Oscar's Achievement in Visual Effects

Re: Transformers DOTM Nominated for Oscar's Achievement in Visual Effects

Re: Transformers DOTM Nominated for Oscar's Achievement in Visual Effects

Re: Transformers DOTM Nominated for Oscar's Achievement in Visual Effects

Re: Transformers DOTM Nominated for Oscar's Achievement in Visual Effects

Re: Transformers DOTM Nominated for Oscar's Achievement in Visual Effects

Re: Transformers DOTM Nominated for Oscar's Achievement in Visual Effects

Re: Transformers DOTM Nominated for Oscar's Achievement in Visual Effects

Re: Transformers DOTM Nominated for Oscar's Achievement in Visual Effects

Re: Transformers DOTM Nominated for Oscar's Achievement in Visual Effects

Re: Transformers DOTM Nominated for Oscar's Achievement in Visual Effects

Moderators

Who is online

Transformers Movie

Forums

Transformers News

The Ultimate Caption Contest

Twincast / Podcast #68:
"ReChrome"