|
|
Post by Xenorama ™ on Mar 15, 2005 10:02:36 GMT -8
this one has a fair amount of stop-motion in it as well. thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by Shonokin on Mar 15, 2005 10:23:01 GMT -8
The stop(go)-motion used in that is a great showcase of how powerful the medium could be (same for Howard the Duck for that matter). IMO it's far superior to CGI in aesthetic look and feel... and "real-ness". I guess it costs too much these days though. Or more likely Directors just like the fact that they can micromanage CGI to the Nth degree, while the stop-motion medium is controlled by the artist.
As for Dragonslayer itself, the effects are purely amazing but the story leaves me cold and uninterested. It suffers from a early 80's "our hero should look like Willie Ames" thing. BTW, Willie Ames is American sentai hero "BIBLE MAN".
|
|
|
|
Post by stareater on Mar 15, 2005 13:28:35 GMT -8
This is one that I didn't appreciate enough as a youngster, and have grown to enjoy more & more over the years. Peter MacNicol was an odd choice for the lead, given he had no experience and wasn't a name actor, but it was a Disney film and at least he didn't look like the mutant he does now. The film wasn't completely tame either, with a few graphic scenes sprinkled about.
I thought the storyline was interesting, moved at a fairly brisk pace, and the effects were outstanding for 1981. I even think MacNicol did a very good job in the film. He came off very believable as a neophyte mage in over his head. Too bad more films don't take the chance of casting unknowns nowadays. The chum coming out of Hollywood might be easier to stomach if we didn't have to see the same unappealing, hideous goons in every single film. Give me David Warner or Jeffrey Combs over Tom Cruise or George Clooney any day of the week.
|
|
|
|
Post by Xenorama ™ on Mar 15, 2005 17:47:13 GMT -8
he definately is an interesting lead. i had a friend of mine say he preferred Harry Hamlin as Persueus over Peter as, uh, whoever his name was, since he was more "heroic" and knew what he was doing.
Percy was much blander i thought, but that could be ol' Harry's acting.
|
|
|
|
Post by amphiboid on Mar 15, 2005 17:53:12 GMT -8
I enjoyed this film quite a bit. Nice effects too. It was great in the theatre...I remember riding my bicycle for quite a few miles to the mall to see this.
Go motion was sort of the bridge between motion control spaceships and CG...the moment when the movement of creature models became programmable (if you don't count "Fiend Without A Face"!). It was very short-lived, and that's a shame, too, because a lot of people liked the way it looked.
I remember that the one time I saw this in the theatre, they had the sound turned up REALLY LOUD, and that was fun too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Shonokin on Mar 15, 2005 18:00:41 GMT -8
Go Motion was cursed with being associated with a lot of flops such as Howard the Duck and probably the last major instance of its use in Willow. And Willow had the first ILM digital morphing algorithm, so it was definately the generational bridge between the two mediums. (Not counting previous mechanical looking CGI movies such as The Last Star Fighter and Tron.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Xenorama ™ on Mar 15, 2005 18:13:51 GMT -8
Howard had a lot of traditional stop-motion in it as well. i like the movie, but then, i was not a big fan of the comic, which might have helped.
one of the complaints about the dragon from stop-mo enthusiasts was that the dragon, the awesome looking Vermithrax Pejoritive flew like a spaceship. of course, with the advent of cg, it sure doesn't look like it any more!
i was surprised that it flopped though.
|
|
|
|
Post by WaverBoy on Mar 23, 2005 22:42:15 GMT -8
he definately is an interesting lead. i had a friend of mine say he preferred Harry Hamlin as Persueus over Peter as, uh, whoever his name was, since he was more "heroic" and knew what he was doing. Percy was much blander i thought, but that could be ol' Harry's acting. Harry Hamlin is AWFUL in CLASH OF THE TITANS. One of the most wooden performances this side of Dolph Lundgren. And he has about as much panache with a sword as your average GQ model. |
|
|
|
Post by jamiemark on Mar 29, 2005 19:09:30 GMT -8
Wow, all I can remember about this movie is the hero having a shield made out of dragon scales(??). Methinks I'll have to check this out again soon....
|
|
|
|
Post by Xenorama ™ on Mar 29, 2005 19:26:53 GMT -8
the DVD is a nice presentation, but sure is a barebones disc- i mean NO extras at all. bet this comes out again in a special edition eventually.
|
|
|
|
Post by stareater on Apr 1, 2005 8:53:26 GMT -8
This seems to be the modus operandi in the industry. Put out the film on a barebones disc first, guage interest, and then come out with the collector's/special/deluxe/anniversary edition with all the bells and whistles. It's be nice if they'd just give us a nice edition to begin with instead of the insulting theatrical/extended/collector's editions (such as the LOTR series). Oh well.
|
|
