• Judge_Juche [she/her]
    ·
    3 years ago

    Wtf, it looks like they found a Twitter post of someone who covered their dog in paprika, cropped it out and lazily photoshopped him into the background

    • mittens [he/him]
      ·
      edit-2
      3 years ago

      looks like they just went a bit ham with the hue in photoshop lmao

    • Sus [none/use name]
      ·
      3 years ago

      They did the Saturation Mistake. An instant way to identify CGI is when they crank the saturation on an object way higher than anything around it.

  • regul [any]
    ·
    3 years ago

    Are there no American actors who aren't like super huge and muscley?

    Surely there's some reason third-rate bri*ish comedian Jack Whitehall is playing a man who lives in NY?

    • zifnab25 [he/him, any]
      ·
      3 years ago

      Are there no American actors who aren’t like super huge and muscley?

      Not since the 90s crowd aged out. You have to look like a model to get on SNL these days.

  • Llituro [he/him, they/them]
    ·
    3 years ago

    If the entire movie places Clifford in depth and lighting this fucking poorly, it will legitimately be nightmare fuel.

  • ekjp [any]
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    deleted by creator

  • OldSoulHippie [he/him]
    ·
    3 years ago

    The least they could do is make it look better. But they know lowest common denominator types will seal clap over this cause they remember it from before life got hard or something. As chuddy as south park is, I liked what they were trying to say with the "member berries".

    • Wildgrapes [she/her]
      ·
      3 years ago

      Oh yeah I'm always down for more puppets and shit in films so that sounds good.

      • GalaxyBrain [they/them]
        ·
        3 years ago

        I spent my childhood obsessing over practical effects and how to do them and it was big time what I wanted to do for a job and then CG

        • Wildgrapes [she/her]
          ·
          3 years ago

          It's so often that practical effects are just better than CG. Obviously I think one can be used to enhance the other to great effect but instead of touching up the practical in post you just animate whole big ass dogs actors have to pretend to interact with.

          Also if cg is bad it's bad. If practical is bad it's usually still fun as hell to watch.

          • GalaxyBrain [they/them]
            ·
            3 years ago

            For sure, the CG in Titanic holds up because most people didn't even know it was used. They just touched up things here and there like making a rail shinier and stuff

            • GalaxyBrain [they/them]
              ·
              3 years ago

              Fuck they should just use a real dog and rear screen projection, miniatures and forced perspective. Shit would be so cute

            • zeal0telite [he/him,they/them]
              ·
              3 years ago

              Titanic was made in the glorious era when they'd use several special effects and blend them together.

              Titanic has a lot of CGI, but there are also miniatures and real sets involved.

              Those are real people and that's real water. They knew when not to use CGI. Hell, if they made it today they'd probably use CGI water and it would look like crap.

            • Wildgrapes [she/her]
              ·
              3 years ago

              Oh nice didn't even know that. I always think of Pans Labyrinth as a good combination. Got those really cool practical costumes but touched up to have various magical effects around them.