- This topic has 242 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 5 months ago by
an.
-
AuthorPosts
-
August 27, 2011 at 12:49 PM #726482August 27, 2011 at 1:35 PM #725277
blahblahblah
Participant[quote=briansd1]
What’s wrong with films with real actors depicting real human emotions in realistic scenes?[/quote]Nothing is wrong with them, but that is irrelevant to the discussion. The point was that Jobs and Pixar took a fringe technology and reinvented filmmaking with it. “Titanic” is a film with real actors depicting real human emotions in realistic (they actually happened) scenes, and it couldn’t have been made the same way without CGI. And as I explained before, that technology would not have the same place in Hollywood when Titanic was made in 1997 if Steve Jobs had not purchased Pixar in 1986.
August 27, 2011 at 1:35 PM #725366Participant[quote=briansd1]
What’s wrong with films with real actors depicting real human emotions in realistic scenes?[/quote]Nothing is wrong with them, but that is irrelevant to the discussion. The point was that Jobs and Pixar took a fringe technology and reinvented filmmaking with it. “Titanic” is a film with real actors depicting real human emotions in realistic (they actually happened) scenes, and it couldn’t have been made the same way without CGI. And as I explained before, that technology would not have the same place in Hollywood when Titanic was made in 1997 if Steve Jobs had not purchased Pixar in 1986.
August 27, 2011 at 1:35 PM #725962Participant[quote=briansd1]
What’s wrong with films with real actors depicting real human emotions in realistic scenes?[/quote]Nothing is wrong with them, but that is irrelevant to the discussion. The point was that Jobs and Pixar took a fringe technology and reinvented filmmaking with it. “Titanic” is a film with real actors depicting real human emotions in realistic (they actually happened) scenes, and it couldn’t have been made the same way without CGI. And as I explained before, that technology would not have the same place in Hollywood when Titanic was made in 1997 if Steve Jobs had not purchased Pixar in 1986.
August 27, 2011 at 1:35 PM #726117Participant[quote=briansd1]
What’s wrong with films with real actors depicting real human emotions in realistic scenes?[/quote]Nothing is wrong with them, but that is irrelevant to the discussion. The point was that Jobs and Pixar took a fringe technology and reinvented filmmaking with it. “Titanic” is a film with real actors depicting real human emotions in realistic (they actually happened) scenes, and it couldn’t have been made the same way without CGI. And as I explained before, that technology would not have the same place in Hollywood when Titanic was made in 1997 if Steve Jobs had not purchased Pixar in 1986.
August 27, 2011 at 1:35 PM #726485Participant[quote=briansd1]
What’s wrong with films with real actors depicting real human emotions in realistic scenes?[/quote]Nothing is wrong with them, but that is irrelevant to the discussion. The point was that Jobs and Pixar took a fringe technology and reinvented filmmaking with it. “Titanic” is a film with real actors depicting real human emotions in realistic (they actually happened) scenes, and it couldn’t have been made the same way without CGI. And as I explained before, that technology would not have the same place in Hollywood when Titanic was made in 1997 if Steve Jobs had not purchased Pixar in 1986.
August 27, 2011 at 2:18 PM #725307
svelteParticipant[quote=briansd1]
I don’t get the fantasy films.What’s wrong with films with real actors depicting real human emotions in realistic scenes?[/quote]
They demand a share of the profits, do unpredictable things in their private lives, and can leave the studio for more money elsewhere.
August 27, 2011 at 2:18 PM #725396svelteParticipant[quote=briansd1]
I don’t get the fantasy films.What’s wrong with films with real actors depicting real human emotions in realistic scenes?[/quote]
They demand a share of the profits, do unpredictable things in their private lives, and can leave the studio for more money elsewhere.
August 27, 2011 at 2:18 PM #725991svelteParticipant[quote=briansd1]
I don’t get the fantasy films.What’s wrong with films with real actors depicting real human emotions in realistic scenes?[/quote]
They demand a share of the profits, do unpredictable things in their private lives, and can leave the studio for more money elsewhere.
August 27, 2011 at 2:18 PM #726147svelteParticipant[quote=briansd1]
I don’t get the fantasy films.What’s wrong with films with real actors depicting real human emotions in realistic scenes?[/quote]
They demand a share of the profits, do unpredictable things in their private lives, and can leave the studio for more money elsewhere.
August 27, 2011 at 2:18 PM #726516svelteParticipant[quote=briansd1]
I don’t get the fantasy films.What’s wrong with films with real actors depicting real human emotions in realistic scenes?[/quote]
They demand a share of the profits, do unpredictable things in their private lives, and can leave the studio for more money elsewhere.
August 27, 2011 at 4:22 PM #725312afx114
ParticipantThat TMZ article is a fake.
http://i.imgur.com/WV5Y0.jpgAugust 27, 2011 at 4:22 PM #725401ParticipantThat TMZ article is a fake.
http://i.imgur.com/WV5Y0.jpgAugust 27, 2011 at 4:22 PM #725996ParticipantThat TMZ article is a fake.
http://i.imgur.com/WV5Y0.jpgAugust 27, 2011 at 4:22 PM #726152ParticipantThat TMZ article is a fake.
http://i.imgur.com/WV5Y0.jpg -
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.