I bet this would have been awesome with BoomBlox... I wonder if they'll add this feature too as I'm pretty sure this tech isn't patented (...by Disney at least).
I'm not seeing any mentions of 8 endless 3rd person platformer worlds, each one culminating in a battle with a giant flying snake... so this is a piddly excuse for 3D gaming.
I never thought I'd catch myself defending motion sensing, but being able to make things appear popped-out hardly seems like it would open up many... ANY new mechanics.
How could it be the best version of graphic technology with red/blue glasses?? Even the old Mastetr System and Famicom's shutter glasses are FAR FAR better than red/blue analglyphs.
This is bunk! Only the PS3 is capable of this technology! You'd think a company like Disney would have enough resources to at least get that right! Don't they read the internet?!! WEAK!!!
Why oh why are Disney stuck on doing these uncharming CGI-movies?
I frankly got over the novelty of it and I long for the classic (a.k.a. not flash or CGI) animated movies. They used to be great. They looked charming and they caught me on a deeper level.
When it comes to CGI it just feels so shallow. Sure it is a simpler method but it feels like they are just dishing out the movies. Wall-e, Bolt and now G-force in less than a year? Man, and not even one of them even feature human protagonists. I remember when they did Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast, hell, even Tarzan. Those were great. I still love them. And they had killed soundtracks.
Nowadays, it's just comically deformed humans a la Invincibles that Disney push out.
@ShadowOdin, representing the people of Malmö, Sweden: Woah, woah, let's get things straight here. Pixar does the good CG movies. They made Wall E and do roughly one movie per year. Sure, Pixar is owned by Disney, but that doesn't mean you can directly clump their films with Disneys.
Disney and Dreamworks are to blame for the high number of CG animated films that are pushed to the market every summer.
@ShadowOdin, representing the people of Malmö, Sweden: holy moley! man have you see The Incredibles? Its probably the best disney movie I've ever seen! Rataouille? My friends of around 20 years of age came with me to the movie and we laughed harder than anybody else in the cinema. They definetly capture the spirit of what disney embodied back in the old days. Although I agree the 'animal CGI family movie' is getting really old.
Only thing I meant about The Invincibles is that it captures how humans are made in these CGI-movies. Very caricatury. They make me miss the more human characters Disney used to make.
But I can agree that Pixar knows their stuff. It's just getting oversaturated with similar kinds of movies.
@ShadowOdin, representing the people of Malmö, Sweden: Well Eisner didn't like the animation department, so he did what any executive would do and fired them. That left Disney with their own in-house CGI team, which produces movies that are barely good enough for straight to video fare and their deal with Pixar. The reason they seem to be dishing them out so frequently is that there are two separate studios making CGI movies.
I miss their great animated movies as well, but I doubt they would ever go back, especially since acquiring Pixar. In contrast to you though, I thoroughly enjoy just about everything Pixar has put out, in fact the Incredibles was one of my absolute favorite. The whole comically deformed character design was mimicking comic book art styles.
@ShadowOdin, representing the people of Malmö, Sweden: Oh yeah I totally agree, theres way too many 'me too' animal CGI-movies around. I mean Madagascar sucked compared to any Pixar effort but it got a sequel and another undeserving movie that got a sequel is....that movie with Ashton Kutcher as a deer. See I can't even fucking remember its name!
@cabjf: Curse you Eisner. Can we have Roy back? Is Roy dead? I preferred to have a Disney as head of Disney. It used to work better back then.
I don't hate Pixar at all. I just think their prime was before every other movie used CGI as well. Disney's own CGI-movies are just blatant mashes of Pixar's movies and their own poor non-movie-based tv-shows (excluding Kim Possible and Dave the Barbarian).
Dreamworks needs to get back to work on Shrek and only Shrek when it comes to CGI. At least they were good at butting heads by doing the exact same thing as Disney once.
Hell, I even like the straight-to-video sequels more than these CGI-ones. Even if I know they are much poorer in quality than the original movie was, at least the animations makes it feel that they tried.
@ShadowOdin, representing the people of Malmö, Sweden: I suggest watching the documentary made on Pixar. The movie addresses the death of the hand drawn animation and how John Lasseter (now head of Disney's animation department) is looking to bring it back.
@ShadowOdin, representing the people of Malmö, Sweden: Hm strange. I thougth Wall-E with it's absolutely awesome deeps in Story and Screenplay was..... absolut awesome. To be true i had the Feel that this movie with it's low amount of actual Dialog had told me a deeper story and more of it as every other movie since a whole lot of years of the near past.
I absolutely love this movie and a lot of the extremely creative and innovative (dream)works of Pixar.
@fELIXADER: I haven't seen Wall-e to be honest, but I am just not a huge movie-buff lately. But I've heard good things about it. However, if you read my other comments I clearly state that I have nothing against Pixar and I didn't comment on that one movie other than it is released within the short span of Bolt and G-Force here. And that it was also one on the long row of movies without a human protagonist.
I do believe fully that it is a really good movie.
Just that it is a movie in an oversaturated market.
@ShadowOdin, representing the people of Malmö, Sweden: Don't blame CG films for the disappearance of Disney's traditional animation. Blame the writers of their last few 2D movies and/or the execs who greenlit them.
The tragedy is that ho-hum concepts like Brother Bear couldn't hope to compete with the energy of Finding Nemo, regardless of the methods used to create it.
Disney simply saw that their gorgeously hand-drawn (but yawn-inducing) movies were failing to have the same box-office draw as Pixar's 3D (and witty and thrilling and well-written) movies and threw the baby out with the bathwater, as they say.
Oddly fitting that Disney is responsible for elevating 2D animation to a true art form, and is also responsible for its premature death.
@ShadowOdin, representing the people of Malmö, Sweden: A lot of people (mainly the ones responsible) do blame Pixar for the death of hand drawn animation. What they failed to notice was that people weren't going to see Pixar movies because of the CG, but because of the wonderful storytelling and heart that they manage to bring to each film.
I'm not implying that you need to be told this, but that's pretty much what happened, and it is very saddening.
I long for the rebirth of the classic Disney animated masterpiece.
One of the problems with 3D animation is that every. Single. Movie. Gets compared to Pixar, instead of being judged on it's own merits. It's like comparing a high school art class to the collective works of Vincent Van Gogh. And for what it's worth, I liked Madagascar.
05/07/09
05/07/09
05/07/09
05/07/09
05/07/09
IMO, Crecente deserves to be in 3D all the time!
05/07/09
05/06/09
05/06/09
05/06/09
05/06/09
05/06/09
05/06/09
05/06/09
Call it a gimmick if you want, but I think this opens a lot more room for innovative gaming than motion sensing.
05/06/09
I never thought I'd catch myself defending motion sensing, but being able to make things appear popped-out hardly seems like it would open up many... ANY new mechanics.
05/06/09
05/06/09
05/06/09
05/06/09
03/24/09
I got excited cuz I was like, "WHOA A G-FORCE MOVIE. YESSSSS".. until I saw the guinea pigs, and had nothing to do with the anime
I hate my life.
03/24/09
03/24/09
I frankly got over the novelty of it and I long for the classic (a.k.a. not flash or CGI) animated movies. They used to be great. They looked charming and they caught me on a deeper level.
When it comes to CGI it just feels so shallow. Sure it is a simpler method but it feels like they are just dishing out the movies. Wall-e, Bolt and now G-force in less than a year? Man, and not even one of them even feature human protagonists. I remember when they did Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast, hell, even Tarzan. Those were great. I still love them. And they had killed soundtracks.
Nowadays, it's just comically deformed humans a la Invincibles that Disney push out.
The Princess and the Frog is my last hope.
03/24/09
Disney and Dreamworks are to blame for the high number of CG animated films that are pushed to the market every summer.
03/24/09
03/24/09
Only thing I meant about The Invincibles is that it captures how humans are made in these CGI-movies. Very caricatury. They make me miss the more human characters Disney used to make.
But I can agree that Pixar knows their stuff. It's just getting oversaturated with similar kinds of movies.
03/24/09
03/24/09
I miss their great animated movies as well, but I doubt they would ever go back, especially since acquiring Pixar. In contrast to you though, I thoroughly enjoy just about everything Pixar has put out, in fact the Incredibles was one of my absolute favorite. The whole comically deformed character design was mimicking comic book art styles.
03/24/09
03/24/09
03/24/09
I don't hate Pixar at all. I just think their prime was before every other movie used CGI as well. Disney's own CGI-movies are just blatant mashes of Pixar's movies and their own poor non-movie-based tv-shows (excluding Kim Possible and Dave the Barbarian).
Dreamworks needs to get back to work on Shrek and only Shrek when it comes to CGI. At least they were good at butting heads by doing the exact same thing as Disney once.
Hell, I even like the straight-to-video sequels more than these CGI-ones. Even if I know they are much poorer in quality than the original movie was, at least the animations makes it feel that they tried.
Can someone call Don Bluth?
03/24/09
03/24/09
03/24/09
To be true i had the Feel that this movie with it's low amount of actual Dialog had told me a deeper story and more of it as every other movie since a whole lot of years of the near past.
I absolutely love this movie and a lot of the extremely creative and innovative (dream)works of Pixar.
03/24/09
I do believe fully that it is a really good movie.
Just that it is a movie in an oversaturated market.
03/24/09
The tragedy is that ho-hum concepts like Brother Bear couldn't hope to compete with the energy of Finding Nemo, regardless of the methods used to create it.
Disney simply saw that their gorgeously hand-drawn (but yawn-inducing) movies were failing to have the same box-office draw as Pixar's 3D (and witty and thrilling and well-written) movies and threw the baby out with the bathwater, as they say.
Oddly fitting that Disney is responsible for elevating 2D animation to a true art form, and is also responsible for its premature death.
03/24/09
But I really loved that soundtrack. Somehow Phil Collins make every Disney-movie better.
I might not be able to blame CGI for the disappearance of 2D movies. But there's plenty of other things to blame it for.
Like Aliens vs. Monsters.
I love how you can take an awesome concept and make it a run-to-the-mill CGI-movie with no appeal.
03/24/09
I'm not implying that you need to be told this, but that's pretty much what happened, and it is very saddening.
I long for the rebirth of the classic Disney animated masterpiece.
03/25/09
One of the problems with 3D animation is that every. Single. Movie. Gets compared to Pixar, instead of being judged on it's own merits. It's like comparing a high school art class to the collective works of Vincent Van Gogh. And for what it's worth, I liked Madagascar.
03/24/09
03/24/09