You are viewing an archive of the old fxhome.com forums. The community has since moved to hitfilm.com.

UPDATED Hey Check This Out !

Posted: Tue, 21st Aug 2007, 11:16pm

Post 1 of 98

Bucees

Force: 2477 | Joined: 4th Jun 2007 | Posts: 382

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Hey i put this in the topics forum becaus this is to small of a video to put on the Cinema page and its quiker

Me being hit by a car
http://img532.imageshack.us/my.php?image=ouchnt4.flv

me punching my evil twins' head off
http://img531.imageshack.us/my.php?image=deadlypunchaz4.flv

UPDATED!

me flying
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=722214569666215450

me slicing my evil twins head with a light saber
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3782353055360742072

UPDATED AGAIN

asteroid
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1767212143192204342

UPDATED YET AGAIN!!!

Me getting my head shot by a predator!!!

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6833718014721477828

me turning invisible
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5713513675141399168

Last edited Mon, 17th Sep 2007, 1:16am; edited 5 times in total.

Posted: Wed, 22nd Aug 2007, 12:47am

Post 2 of 98

Serpent

Force: 5426 | Joined: 26th Dec 2003 | Posts: 6515

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Besides the first one being a bad key, there was a hard light in the background. Notice the objects off the road had dark, defined shadows? You should incorporate that in your composition. You also need to work on sound design. That sounded terrible when the sound effect of someone being hit by a car should make one flinch. We attempted the same effect. Ours is certainly not perfect, but I'd have to say it's a tad more realistic because we shot him on the edge of the frame and used masking (he was actually standing in the road, we filmed the car separately while the camera remained on a tripod) rather than greenscreening. I think you should focus more on methods that would sell the effect:

http://www.cpostudios.com/moviegroupfiles/joeycar.mov

The second effect is a simple one, but you chose the wrong stock media, again. Terrible sound effect, terrible stock footage/particles/whatever the hell that was. I know you are just doing tests, but neither of these are really cinematic. Kind of just boring, simple. But not bad, there is potential. Just something to work on/think about.
Posted: Wed, 22nd Aug 2007, 12:55am

Post 3 of 98

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Serpent, regarding yours: nice shot at it. However, editing was about two or three times too slow, and you should have greatly sped up the car. Sound design was also too silent and I would have wanted to hear some nice loud gruesome crunching noises. The whilhelm scream kind of deducted from the effect, I think if he hadn't had time to say anything it would have made it more gruesome and sudden.

ChristianFilmer, I take it that was the first time you tried those effects, so in that sense, not bad. You'll have to work on integrating keys with the background, by using techniques such as color grading, adding a shadow and feathering masks. The blood you used was also much too light, I'm not really sure what you did there.
Posted: Wed, 22nd Aug 2007, 12:59am

Post 4 of 98

Serpent

Force: 5426 | Joined: 26th Dec 2003 | Posts: 6515

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

You'd have to see it in context. The film is supposed to be ridiculous and it was supposed to look like the car wasn't even trying to stop. I was just showing an example of how the effect could be achieved more realistically. I agree on amplifying the noise though. As for the Willhelm scream, again, you'd have ot see it in context.
Posted: Wed, 22nd Aug 2007, 1:04am

Post 5 of 98

Bucees

Force: 2477 | Joined: 4th Jun 2007 | Posts: 382

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Rating: -3

thanks...pooky biggrin um yeah that was in fact the first time i tried that effect with greenscreen my dad bought some insulation foam board things and let me paint 3 of em green about 3 weeks ago. and the light blood effect i got from the free page on detinationfilms.com

i used autodesk combustion 4 for the chromakeying


Um serpent try to make the subject who gets hit by the car, to get hit by the car in the center of the frame or
to the same side of where the vehicle enters the frame.
And next time you overly critisize someones videos make sure that yours is just as good or if not BETTER than the video you are critisizing wink
Posted: Wed, 22nd Aug 2007, 3:13am

Post 6 of 98

Serpent

Force: 5426 | Joined: 26th Dec 2003 | Posts: 6515

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

How about next time, I won't try to help you in the future? My goal was to make the effect realistic, that's why I put them on the edge of the frame because the cause/effect would be more believable. Your actor slid backwards with the car that hit him. To avoid that, I tried to use a camera angle that would assist the shot rather than make it look bad.
Posted: Wed, 22nd Aug 2007, 3:22am

Post 7 of 98

Bucees

Force: 2477 | Joined: 4th Jun 2007 | Posts: 382

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Rating: -4

My effect looked bad Huh!?! Alright your 17 im 13 you have a bit of an advantage here and you should have shown youre actor getting hit by the truck more than 1 FRAME!!!! Quite frankly i feel that youre clip should have been spead up to show the trucks bruttle force, add a pan blur and added sound higher than .01 decibells.
Posted: Wed, 22nd Aug 2007, 3:30am

Post 8 of 98

Serpent

Force: 5426 | Joined: 26th Dec 2003 | Posts: 6515

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

*sigh...*

Read the topic. The point of the clip was to show you that you might want to not have the actor get hit in the middle of the shot via greenscreen. This was made for a comedy film and was supposed to look silly (the truck driver going about 25 and not even attempting to stop, etc.) I agreed on the sound, but that wasn't the point. The truck was not meant to have "bruttle force." I wasn't going for an intense effect so I thought the most realistic way to depict this scene would be to have him hit the way he was hit. All I was trying to tell you was that you might want to try that because it's rather simple to achieve and make look good. I am not trying to compete against you, I am trying to help you. Calm down. I'm done with this topic and any other topic created by you until you grow up. Your maturity level has me shocked that you are as old as 13.
Posted: Wed, 22nd Aug 2007, 10:25am

Post 9 of 98

er-no

Force: 9531 | Joined: 24th Sep 2002 | Posts: 3964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Please can I have some change?
Posted: Wed, 22nd Aug 2007, 10:39am

Post 10 of 98

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Alright alright, calm down people. smile

I think Serpent was a little harsh given that ChristianFilmer's tests were presumably just a bit of quick fun. Having said that, ChristianFilmer also needs to be aware that if he puts quick tests on the Internet, not everyone is going to think they're great.

Getting back on track......

We did a 'being hit by a car test' just recently. This was just a really quick version we did in about an hour:

http://tarn.fxhome.com/DeathOfTarn.mp4

It's quite an amusing shot. smile

We're hoping to do a more realistic and convincing one soon, which'll hopefully include the body landing properly and returning to being live action.
Posted: Wed, 22nd Aug 2007, 10:40am

Post 11 of 98

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Hm, neither of these effects looked very good. But the basics are definately there. Car one has horrible keying and the head slap off is a funny idea, but the blood stock looks badly composited and doesn't fit really.

Try again. I'm sure you'll get there.
Posted: Wed, 22nd Aug 2007, 11:42am

Post 12 of 98

doppelganger

Force: 134 | Joined: 16th May 2006 | Posts: 1157

MacOS User

Member

ChristianFilmer 100001 wrote:

make sure that yours is just as good or if not BETTER than the video you are critisizing wink
Um... it was
Posted: Thu, 23rd Aug 2007, 2:35am

Post 13 of 98

BlueSmudge

Force: 808 | Joined: 30th Dec 2004 | Posts: 401

CompositeLab Pro User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

My problem with the first was was that:
1: It didn't look like the wheels were moving. Just a sliding image.
2: The body just attached to the car. If a body is hit by a car it is usually thrown, much like Tarn's.

The others were pretty good, but try adding a second identical layer of the blood stock footage to make it darker and more real.

Serpent:
Good job on that shot, but I think it would have been more funny if it was a wider shot, to further emphisize that the driver of the truck is going slow and not stopping at all.
Posted: Thu, 23rd Aug 2007, 2:47am

Post 14 of 98

King of Blades

Force: 1700 | Joined: 29th May 2006 | Posts: 794

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

I could still see some very minor green edging around your evil twin when you punch his head off... but of course, the audience isn't really going to be looking ever so closely at that.

The car hit seemed alright, but as others have said, the lighting of your body was a bit misplaced amongst the environment, but it was a good test, nonetheless.

But the blood spurting out of the second one seemed quite cartoony, and not very realistic... but it is indeed difficult to achieve realistic blood in a VFX program.

Good job.
Posted: Thu, 23rd Aug 2007, 3:02pm

Post 15 of 98

Bucees

Force: 2477 | Joined: 4th Jun 2007 | Posts: 382

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

thanks.
Posted: Thu, 23rd Aug 2007, 9:33pm

Post 16 of 98

the Fiddler

Force: 1900 | Joined: 21st Dec 2004 | Posts: 286

VisionLab User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

BlueSmudge wrote:

2: The body just attached to the car. If a body is hit by a car it is usually thrown, much like Tarn's.
Not if the car continues at the rate it was already moving, as it did in ChristianFilmers. If, on the other hand, it comes to a stop, like Tarn's, then it would throw the body. So I don't think he needs to wory about that. What to me was less realistic was that the person remained upright, rather than being flattened over the hood & windsheild.
Posted: Thu, 23rd Aug 2007, 10:30pm

Post 17 of 98

Bucees

Force: 2477 | Joined: 4th Jun 2007 | Posts: 382

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

i actually did hunch over you just did'nt see it because my shirt was dark and the left side of the screen was darker too.


hey Serpent, man i apologize about early its just that i was really tired and i kinda have developed a short fuze over the past school year, so no hard feelings ok, lets just wipe the slate eh? no more fighting. In other words I AM SORRY. upset biggrin
Posted: Thu, 23rd Aug 2007, 10:55pm

Post 18 of 98

Jabooza

Force: 2743 | Joined: 21st Jul 2006 | Posts: 1446

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

You getting hit by a car would look better if you were lit better.

You punching your evil twin's head off might have looked decent if their wasn't an insane amount of blood.

With you flying you could kinda tell where your jump movement became digital and for some strange reason the screen kinda squooshed in.

And you cutting your clones head off looked pretty good but would have looked better if their would've been more lightsaber glow, an optic effect where the saber hit you and less blood.
Posted: Thu, 23rd Aug 2007, 11:42pm

Post 19 of 98

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I think Serpent's car test has more polish, but I like ChristianFilmer's because you see more of the car hitting the guy. On Serpent's I couldn't even really tell they did a special effect, it just looked like the car pulled up to the guy and he jumped out of frame. No offense, it just didn't look as cool to me.

The realism is there in Serpent's, but the idea is better in ChristianFilmer's.

Also, the blood did indeed make the clone thing look stupid, but the key was pretty awesome. In fact, it wasn't until a third or fourth viewing that I realized it was even greenscreened! I thought, "oh, here's another split-screen cloning test" and almost slubbed it off as nothing. It wasn't until I noticed a small green edge that I actually appreciated how good the key was- particularly when juxtaposed with the bad key in the car test.

All-in-all, these are all really good efforts. I suspect if you put more time and a bit more thought into them, they'll seem more relistic.
Posted: Fri, 24th Aug 2007, 12:11am

Post 20 of 98

Bucees

Force: 2477 | Joined: 4th Jun 2007 | Posts: 382

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

thanks ben. but remember these were the first tests of mine biggrin
Posted: Fri, 24th Aug 2007, 1:25am

Post 21 of 98

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Tarn wrote:

http://tarn.fxhome.com/DeathOfTarn.mp4

It's quite an amusing shot. smile
Oh my god! Tarn is.... Tarn is made out of rubber!

On a side note, that shot was something I'd always wanted to see.
Posted: Fri, 24th Aug 2007, 8:30am

Post 22 of 98

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Pooky wrote:

On a side note, that shot was something I'd always wanted to see.
You've always wanted to see me get run over?
Posted: Fri, 24th Aug 2007, 11:07am

Post 23 of 98

Rawree

Force: 3250 | Joined: 27th Jun 2002 | Posts: 1925

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

If you're just starting out I'd suggest you stay away from Combustion, it's not the simplest of programs as it's designed for use by professionals and production houses. I would question why and how a 13 year old found the £900 to buy a program like that but I'm hungover so I can't handle being vindictive enough to put you on the spot like that. Start with something simpler, build up your skills and then you can move on to stuff like Combustion.
Posted: Sat, 25th Aug 2007, 4:50am

Post 24 of 98

Thrawn

Force: 1995 | Joined: 11th Aug 2006 | Posts: 1962

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Tarn wrote:

Alright alright, calm down people. smile

I think Serpent was a little harsh given that ChristianFilmer's tests were presumably just a bit of quick fun. Having said that, ChristianFilmer also needs to be aware that if he puts quick tests on the Internet, not everyone is going to think they're great.

Getting back on track......

We did a 'being hit by a car test' just recently. This was just a really quick version we did in about an hour:

http://tarn.fxhome.com/DeathOfTarn.mp4

It's quite an amusing shot. smile

We're hoping to do a more realistic and convincing one soon, which'll hopefully include the body landing properly and returning to being live action.
That was pretty awesome... I am pretty sure I know the answer but, Did you use a 3D program and FXhome? Or did you just use Fxhome? Or did you use a completly different program?
Posted: Sun, 26th Aug 2007, 2:16am

Post 25 of 98

Bucees

Force: 2477 | Joined: 4th Jun 2007 | Posts: 382

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

what do you mean thrawn?
Posted: Sun, 26th Aug 2007, 2:46am

Post 26 of 98

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

He's asking as to whether or not they re-created Tarn in 3D for the shot (inherently using a 3D program, as Thrawn assumed) or simply used an FXHome product to digital mask and move the image. I'm assuming CompositeLab or VisionLab would be capable of such a feat.

The next question, including the "both" simply refers to whether or not they had to use both a Lab program and a 3D application (likely Cinema4D, Lightwave, or 3DStudio Max) or just one of either software set.

Judging from the shadows and lighting, I'm assuming they probably did the former; using a 3D digital double and tracking him to the shot. They might've also used CompositeLab to tweak bits and pieces of the image, but more than likely, they just used a 3D app. This isn't to say it can't be done completely in CompositeLab, but in this case I'm almost certain a 3D application was used.
Posted: Sun, 26th Aug 2007, 2:50am

Post 27 of 98

King of Blades

Force: 1700 | Joined: 29th May 2006 | Posts: 794

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

Tarn wrote:

You've always wanted to see me get run over?
Oh, who hasn't? wink
Posted: Sun, 26th Aug 2007, 9:57am

Post 28 of 98

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

It was a mixture of VisionLab and Poser, in fact. A rough animation was created in Poser using its physics system, which was then animated again in VisionLab to get the correct movement, with motion blur etc added.
Posted: Mon, 27th Aug 2007, 12:24pm

Post 29 of 98

Physt

Force: 400 | Joined: 25th Jul 2007 | Posts: 12

EffectsLab Pro User

Gold Member

Throwing my 2 cents in...

Both clips of cars hitting people look at bit off which really isn't a bad thing. As someone that has hit and killed living things by accident, I can truly say that that I don't care to relive those experiences.

In the first case, I hit two dogs as one was chasing the other into the road. Since the coefficient of restitution (http://www.racquetresearch.com/coeffici.htm) of living tissue is not even close to rubber, neither dog bounced off the car. The first dog was directly in front of my car and was scooped up by the front of my car much like the first video. I distinctly remember seeing 4 legs sticking up as I drove along. Once I stopped, the body dropped to the ground.

My car clipped the head of the second dog as it was running into the road. The force spun the dog around and badly injured him. He was dead but was hurt so badly he had to be put down immediately.

Some years later, I was traveling along a dark road at about 50MPH when a ~150lb deer tried to cross the road (right to left) and made contact with the right side of my SUV. Again, the deer did not rebound like a super ball but was spun off in a direction equal to her lateral velocity plus my forward velocity. The body was found about 100 feet up the road on the left hand side.

I have to admit I'm a sick of violence in films. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Puritan at all. I've seen and enjoyed my share of zombie/slasher films, it's just I find that gore isn't enough to make a good film.
Posted: Mon, 27th Aug 2007, 11:47pm

Post 30 of 98

doppelganger

Force: 134 | Joined: 16th May 2006 | Posts: 1157

MacOS User

Member

FXhomer39855 wrote:



I have to admit I'm a sick of violence in films. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Puritan at all. I've seen and enjoyed my share of zombie/slasher films, it's just I find that gore isn't enough to make a good film.
It was just a test dude, probably for a scene in a film. Just because something gets hit by a car in a movie doesnt mean its extreme gore movie. most violence in films are recreating what would really happen for realism. I mean a war movie without a lot of gore and stuff just wouldnt be realistic. Some movies have a reason for violence, others dont. Violence is nessesary in a lot of films. just the way it is
Posted: Tue, 28th Aug 2007, 12:38am

Post 31 of 98

Bucees

Force: 2477 | Joined: 4th Jun 2007 | Posts: 382

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

true true
Posted: Tue, 28th Aug 2007, 8:27am

Post 32 of 98

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I've never been a huge fan of gore, either. I think unless it's a Rodriguez-style, overdone movie (a la Planet Terror) then it just comes off as cheesy, tacky, and unrealistic. Even in V for Vendetta I felt they went just a bit overboard on some of the blood effects; although they were quite cool.

Personally, I think the implication of violence is much more powerful than actually showing the violence itself. I hate to bring up Pulp Fiction here (I just saw it for the first time, didn't care for it) but the whole samurai sword scene is so memorable and works so well because we don't see much gore. In fact, most of that scene has the camera focused on something else; but it's the fact that we know something is going on that makes us like it.

Even in war movies, where the character accidentally drops a grenade, and we see his scared, shocked face slowly looking down at it as it engages. Oftentimes, the cut to a wide to show the building he's in blowing up is much cooler than just showing him be incinerated.

Another good example is Equilibrium. Christian Bale walks into the room and takes everyone out in the dark. We don't necessarily see all these people getting shredded to bloody chunks, but we know that that's a likely outcome. Or the whole scene where they shoot the dogs, and it pans over to Christian Bale grimacing after every shot. In my opinion, that's much more powerful than just showing dogs get hit by shotgun shells.

In one of the more recent episodes of the Sopranos, a guy gets shot in the head while walking up to his car at a gas station. His family is in the car, and it's halfway in gear. He falls over in front of the car once shot, and his wife quickly gets out of the driver's seat to see what happened. Once she gets out, we see the car accidentally shift to drive, and the camera cuts to a shot of the wheels inching closer to the dead guy's head on the ground. The next shot, rather than showing gore, is of inside the car, showing the kids in it bounce up and down as the car rolls over the dead guy. The following shots aren't of the aftermath, either, they're of the other people at the gas station yelling and screaming, one of them throwing up.

To me, that's how it should be done. In real life, do we actually look to see all the gore unfold? No. Normal people look away when they know something gruesome or squeamish is gonna go down. In my opinion, the camera should function with its viewing range in a very human way.
Posted: Tue, 28th Aug 2007, 9:46am

Post 33 of 98

Arktic

Force: 9977 | Joined: 10th Nov 2003 | Posts: 2785

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

I disagree that people have a tendency to look away/avoid gore - I mean, the next time there's a road traffic accident by the side of the motorway, look at what happens to the traffic. Even after the wreckage has been cleared to the side of the road, people drive past very, very slowly - because they all want to have a look and see what's happened. The police call it 'rubbernecking', and it's a cause of further delays and accidents.

A lot of people have a morbid fascination with gore, and death, and horror - it's why films like Hostel have become so popular recently.

But regardless, I don't think there are any hard-and-fast rules about what is better; the implication of violence or actually showing it. For example (and I know I bang on about it all the time, but it's an amazing piece of film-making) the two notorious scenes in Irreversible. That film is basically structured around the viewers being forced to watch these two horrific events, and make sense of them, to try to relate to the characters, to think what we would do in their situation... If these events were just implied, then I don't think that the film would hold anywhere near as much impact, at all. As it stands, it's sickening, utterly sickening and visceral - but without the visible portrayal of violence on screen, you would not get that effect at all.

But on the other hand, there are many, many films which would have benefited from less gore/horror - as you say, it can have a tendency to make films look cheesey and cheap. But I really don't think there are any black-and-white rules about what is and what is not the best thing to do in order to maximise the effect on an audience.

Just imho smile

Cheers,
Arktic.
Posted: Tue, 28th Aug 2007, 9:54am

Post 34 of 98

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

About the whole "looking away" thing.

I still disagree. People will try like hell to look and see what's going on, but as soon as they see something like a clearly dead, bloody body at a car crash they'll immediately look away. It's a shock-reaction, is what normally happens. We build ourselves up to see something we think we can handle, and then immediately move away.

For instance, a good movie example of something a bit more gory is A History of Violence. Whenever there are really gory parts, they're shown very, very briefly in a cutaway. Like when Ed Harris gets shotgunned by his son; it's an immediate splash of blood and then you don't see any more gore until the end of the movie. Or when Vigo Mortensenn hits the thug's nasal cavity off his face, it's there for maybe two shots of the whole bloody thing, if that. It's shown quickly and grossly, then left alone.

This is in stark contrast to hyperviolent films like Hostel or the later Saw films where it's violent and gory for the sake of being gratuitously violent and gory.
Posted: Tue, 28th Aug 2007, 10:40am

Post 35 of 98

Arktic

Force: 9977 | Joined: 10th Nov 2003 | Posts: 2785

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

This is a slightly different topic, but I think that movies that DON'T show you the violence and gore (and their effects) are the ones that contribute to violent problems within society.

By not really showing the effects of, for example, shotgunning someone, impressionable people can take away the idea that it's 'just a spash of blood' and that's it really. A few seconds of something unpleasant, but that's it, no repercussions. By making on-screen violence 'clinical' and without any emotional response, I think you run the risk of desensitising people to such actions.

For a really, really good portrayal of violence as it actually is - not glamourising it and not taking away it's emotional impact - watch Michael Henke's "Funny Games". It's a great movie that challenges the audience and makes a statement about "Hollywood-ised Violence". It's currently being remade in the US by Henke himself, in an effort to bring the message to a wider audience (as the original is Austrian-language with English subtitles). I'm *really* looking forward to that one, but I can't reccomend you all watch the original as soon as possible.

Cheers,
Arktic.
Posted: Tue, 28th Aug 2007, 11:01am

Post 36 of 98

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Arktic wrote:

By making on-screen violence 'clinical' and without any emotional response, I think you run the risk of desensitising people to such actions.
I got what you were saying all the way up until here.

I think by not showing some stuff you leave room for more emotion. Whereas just showing some gore you risk desensitizing people. Not to start a huge argument here, but gore that's mindless with little emotional response, like in Planet Terror, by your logic, is something that'll likely desensitize people to all the blood.

Whereas the scene in Equilibrium where they shoot all the dogs is something that actually made me feel for the character in the movie that had to witness it; I had to actually think about what was going on and how it affected the story. I didn't find the scene 'clinical' in any sense of the word.

Another good 'for instance' here is the final standoff scene in Saving Private Ryan. There's very little gore shown (mostly Tom Hanks sitting, with inaudible dialogue) but that's the crescendo of the movie where you realize the most how the violence affects the soldiers.

Now, of course, some of these are generalizations, and must be taken on a movie-to-movie basis, but I found your analogy rather backwards. Perhaps you're thinking of movies where gore strengthens the realism. I'm speaking of films where the 'cutaway-from-the-gore-shot' is so potent that it, in truth, seems more 'real' than a movie with gore. Equilibrium might not have been the best example, but anybody who has seen the Sopranos episode I'm speaking of (or anything from the Sopranos in general, actually) will know that the way they portray violence makes it seem like a very emotional process.
Posted: Wed, 29th Aug 2007, 1:28am

Post 37 of 98

Bucees

Force: 2477 | Joined: 4th Jun 2007 | Posts: 382

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

your all right but i just wnt to say any movie i make with blood and gore will probably be a test.
Posted: Wed, 29th Aug 2007, 1:30am

Post 38 of 98

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

That doesn't make it any less gory, it's still blood.
Posted: Wed, 29th Aug 2007, 1:40am

Post 39 of 98

doppelganger

Force: 134 | Joined: 16th May 2006 | Posts: 1157

MacOS User

Member

ChristianFilmer 100001 wrote:

your all right but i just wnt to say any movie i make with blood and gore will probably be a test.
Whats the point if your not going to use what you learned in the test for a movie isnt that the point of making a test.
Posted: Wed, 29th Aug 2007, 12:29pm

Post 40 of 98

Bucees

Force: 2477 | Joined: 4th Jun 2007 | Posts: 382

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

yeah. Thats why they call it a TEST.
Posted: Wed, 29th Aug 2007, 12:39pm

Post 41 of 98

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Rating: +1

ben3308 wrote:

I think by not showing some stuff you leave room for more emotion.
That's true, particularly in decent films which now how to work a scene.

I think Arktic was referring primarily to run-of-the-mill action movies, in which Arnie/Bond/etc can shoot 20 'bad guys' and they simply fall over, with very little blood/gore/pain, and 'stop' - or simply disappear out of shot. That portrayal runs the risk of making people think that violence is a painless, convenient thing that enables you to 'get the job done'.

Films that take the time to show the actual consequences don't gloss over the nastiness and, therefore, are more likely to make people think "wow, guns/knives/etc actually are pretty horrible."

(nb: There's also the other type of film that shows a load of gore because it actually thoroughly enjoys it, of course. But that's another kettle of fish)

One excellent example of this is Rules of Attraction. It's not an action sequence by any means, but it is extremely gruesome - or is meant to be.

In the UK theatrical cut of the film, the bathtub suicide scene is absolutely horrendous to watch. It's excruciating. It feels genuinely painful, and horrible. You don't even know the character that is committing suicide, but you feel immediate empathy. It shows suicide to be a terrible thing, both physically and emotionally.

The UK DVD cut of the film, however, had a highly censored version of the scene thanks to the BBFC. Why? Their reasoning was that the suicide showed a highly effective method of slitting your wrists, which 'most people' are generally unaware of. In order to not spread this highly effective suicide knowledge, they removed all the shots that showed the girl actually cutting herself.

The result? The scene lost all its power, didn't feel painful, didn't feel horrible, and actually ended up feeling like a very 'generic' movie suicide scene, complete with candles, comforting lighting and a mostly peaceful death. The vast contrast of the theatrical cut, which showed the cliched 'comforting' setting, followed by the exruciating death itself, was totally lost.

As such, in trying to be over-protective, I believe that the BBFC made a serious mistake. In its original, violent, gruesome form, the scene told an astoundingly powerful message of "don't commit suicide". In its cut form, it does nothing of the sort, and in fact makes it all look rather easy - not the kind of thing that is going to make depressed teenagers think twice.

Right, I'll shut up now. I'm glad I got that off my chest, though. It's been bothering me for years. smile
Posted: Wed, 29th Aug 2007, 12:57pm

Post 42 of 98

Xcession

Force: 42802 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 1964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User Windows User

SuperUser

Rating: +1

Just to add my 2c. The keyword that people have been oddly missing from all their posts, is "Context".

It is context which makes the difference between a violent scene which is irresponsibly cursory and a one which is unavoidably detailed and it is context which makes the difference between a scene from which you learn good and bad things.

In principal at least, all people on the planet (except perhaps, for clinically diagnosed psychopaths) know when something is bad and shouldn't be inflicted on someone else. A detailed scene which shows the causes and repercussions of violence, will invariably give a viewer the context necessary to conclude that the violence shown on screen is to be avoided at all costs.

"Cut-away"/Hitchcock violence only really works when the entire film is equally as subtly narrated, which rules out most bog standard action films.

When you watch Under Seige on terrestrial TV, the knife in the forehead shot is always cut. You could call this hitchcock violence, but since the rest of the film has been a meaningless barrage of consequence-less deaths, the cut only serves to further dilute the realism and i've no doubt there have been at least a few children "pretend" the knife fight as a result.

One scene which still haunts me almost 10 years after its release is the knifing scene in Saving Private Ryan. I can't possibly deny that the scene has given me a new appreciation for being stabbed and that appreciation naturally reflects on my desires (or lack thereof) to stab other people.
Posted: Wed, 29th Aug 2007, 8:56pm

Post 43 of 98

Frosty G

Force: 540 | Joined: 28th May 2005 | Posts: 640

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

ChristianFilmer 100001 wrote:

yeah. Thats why they call it a TEST.
I really don't think you understand what he was saying.
Posted: Wed, 29th Aug 2007, 8:59pm

Post 44 of 98

doppelganger

Force: 134 | Joined: 16th May 2006 | Posts: 1157

MacOS User

Member

Frosty G wrote:

ChristianFilmer 100001 wrote:

yeah. Thats why they call it a TEST.
I really don't think you understand what he was saying.
He doesnt...

There is no reason to make a TEST if your never going to use it in a movie... its pointless.

One scene which still haunts me almost 10 years after its release is the knifing scene in Saving Private Ryan. I can't possibly deny that the scene has given me a new appreciation for being stabbed and that appreciation naturally reflects on my desires (or lack thereof) to stab other people.


That was a brutal scene, made me scared of knives, or at least getting stabbed with one.
Posted: Wed, 29th Aug 2007, 9:24pm

Post 45 of 98

Bucees

Force: 2477 | Joined: 4th Jun 2007 | Posts: 382

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

A test clip is for testing my effects ability, hense a test.
Posted: Wed, 29th Aug 2007, 9:34pm

Post 46 of 98

doppelganger

Force: 134 | Joined: 16th May 2006 | Posts: 1157

MacOS User

Member

Nevermind you dont get what I'm saying, and i doubt that will change.
Posted: Wed, 29th Aug 2007, 10:08pm

Post 47 of 98

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

ChristianFilmer 100001 wrote:

A test clip is for testing my effects ability, hense a test.
You know, I like people like you, you're funny. Here's a more extreme example so you might possibly maybe sorta half understand:

I don't approve of cutting people in half with a Katana. However, I often practice it in order to improve my precision since I want to become a doctor (for the sake of the example). But I've still cut someone in half, and I didn't really learn anything regarding precision that I could use as a doctor, or have learned from something else.
Posted: Wed, 29th Aug 2007, 11:37pm

Post 48 of 98

Evman

Force: 4382 | Joined: 25th Jan 2004 | Posts: 3609

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

To his defense, doing effects tests, of any effect, can help his compositing and other such abilities in general... but I do agree with everyone else... if you don't like it, why would you bother making anything with gore, even if it is just a test? Do a test of something you might actually end up doing in a film at some point?

Last edited Wed, 29th Aug 2007, 11:49pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Wed, 29th Aug 2007, 11:48pm

Post 49 of 98

doppelganger

Force: 134 | Joined: 16th May 2006 | Posts: 1157

MacOS User

Member

Evman wrote:

Do a test of something you might actually end up doing in a film at some point?
Thats what I was trying to say, he just didnt get it.
Posted: Thu, 30th Aug 2007, 3:05pm

Post 50 of 98

Merrick

Force: 1067 | Joined: 12th Apr 2007 | Posts: 548

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Slicing your twin's head off, flying, getting hit by a car. You never get to have any fun, do you? biggrin I actually liked the last two
Posted: Thu, 30th Aug 2007, 10:59pm

Post 51 of 98

Bucees

Force: 2477 | Joined: 4th Jun 2007 | Posts: 382

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

yo pooky i understamd what you are saying. the only difference is that in not actually slicing off someones HEAD. When i made that clip i just finished making me a greenscreen using stuff my dad bought me (thanx DAD biggrin)
and so i wanted t try everything that poped into my mind.

And i never said i didn't like gore by itself i basicly said i dont like an Outragous amount of gore, like in Hot Fuzz.
Posted: Fri, 31st Aug 2007, 12:00am

Post 52 of 98

Evman

Force: 4382 | Joined: 25th Jan 2004 | Posts: 3609

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Hot Fuzz in no way shape or form had excessive amounts of gore.

Have you ever even watched Saving Private Ryan (not saying that the amount of gore in that is excessive), but seriously.
Posted: Fri, 31st Aug 2007, 3:46am

Post 53 of 98

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Evman wrote:

Hot Fuzz in no way shape or form had excessive amounts of gore.

Have you ever even watched Saving Private Ryan (not saying that the amount of gore in that is excessive), but seriously.
Whoa, whoa, whoa. That's ridiculous, Evman! Hot Fuzz has some of the most gratuitous for the sake of excess gore I've ever seen! Not that it was strung throughout every minute of the movie, but in every 'victim' scene and such the violence/blood/gore was off the charts- for humor and scare- obviously (a little trying to be like Shaun of the Dead, I'm sure smile).

But comparatively to Saving Private Ryan? I might go as far as even ranking them in the same category for 'excess gore', as both probably have a similar amount of screentime that shows a similar amount of gore. The key difference in them, of course, is that the gore in Saving Private Ryan is more meaningful, justified, and overall understood to the point where we can look in horror at it as opposed to satire like Hot Fuzz. Because of this, maybe it has a more lasting effect, but I'd say they rank up on gore similarly still.

And outside of ChristianFilmer's defense: What are you doing complaining about all the gore, etc. in movies all the time and how you don't watch them and how you're only 13 when:

1.) You can't complain about something you're not really allowed to see in the first place. Don't like the stuff in it, don't think it's appropriate? Of course it isn't, dumb-dumb! That's why there's an age restriction rating on the movie!

2.) Stop talking about movies with an end-all knowledge that you at the same time condemn and say you don't pass an eye over. For someone who rebukes a lot of elements of movies, you sure do mention and discuss several recent R-rated and worse movies.

3.) First, read #1 and 2. Second, if you're always bothered by these things, stop commenting/asking about them. And then don't try to argue with people who are older and likely more mature than you about the content of something unless you have substantial evidence- or at least a strong opinion- to back it up. Your weakness in explanations and excuses/"clarifications of opinions" are getting tiresome. If you have a problem with the stuff, simply don't watch it. After all, like you say, you're "only 13, NOT 17!" and probably shouldn't be watching it anyway.
Posted: Fri, 31st Aug 2007, 6:59am

Post 54 of 98

Evman

Force: 4382 | Joined: 25th Jan 2004 | Posts: 3609

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

How is it possible that Hott Fuzz was more gorey than Saving Private Ryan? I really can't understand that rationing at all. I saw Hot Fuzz once 6 months or so ago and I don't even remember that there was any gore at all (except for one incident with a gargoyle taking a guy's head off). Saving Private Ryan, on the other hand, was gore every single second. Some things are up to interpretation, but in this case you are just plain wrong.

The second half of your post Atom, I agree with. razz
Posted: Fri, 31st Aug 2007, 7:07am

Post 55 of 98

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

The gargoyle head thing, the throat being stabbed with garden shears, the two close-up decapitations of the actors, the following shots of the beheaded heads on the ground, many of the bloody splashes during the final battle, the model town going through the chin, and many other parts that weren't gratuitous for violence, necessarily, but for gore.

It wasn't NONSTOP-GORE-ALLTHETIME!!!! but it was overly gorey at parts. I remember sitting in the theater and thinking, "Well, maybe this gore thing is just some British thing I don't understand." This was just in the context of Hot Fuzz, however, I don't feel this way about everything. I thought the gore in Planet Terror was great, but in Hot Fuzz it was a bit too outlandish at times. The chin thing especially.

Saving Private Ryan, on the other hand, has less "gore" gore and more actiony violence. Well, except for the whole first storm of the beaches. But most stuff after that is pretty tame, actually. We watched it in school, and we were (legally, by the state) allowed to see the whole movie except the first scene and the stabbing scene, which required a signed form from parents. I'd already seen the movie, though.

I'm not saying the elements of gore are on the same levels for both movies, but as far as which one's more "over-the-top" it's definitely Hot Fuzz.
Posted: Fri, 31st Aug 2007, 9:05am

Post 56 of 98

Xcession

Force: 42802 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 1964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User Windows User

SuperUser

Having gore in a harrowing war film is like having water in a shark movie. Conversely the elements of gore in Hot Fuzz were deliberately over the top and deliberately bordering on unrealistic.

I can't obviously speak for Pegg & Frost, but I'd imagine the blatant gore in HF was a homage to the kinds of films their generation and mine grew up watching and loving - Hellraiser, Evil Dead, Bad Taste etc. For those generations, there is a huge emotional investment in a time when CG effects looked hilariously bad, when blood spurted 10ft high, when stop-frame creatures walked the earth and when the you laughed with glee at the insanely gore scenes, which got increasingly creative and ridiculous. The whole point was that these scenes got so outrageously implausible, that the whole hammed-up horror genre became a tongue-in-cheek cult obsession.

I'd imagine P&F deliberately chose to have high-latex, low-plausibility gore rather than CG perfection, for that very reason.

As such while HF is visually gory, if you felt compelled to complain about the gore then you simply don't understand the film. I don't mean that as some kind of aloof personal attack, I mean that as a factual certainty - the film wasn't aimed at people who don't themselves have a personal knowledge of the same 80s material on which it is based.

Like I said before - its about context. The context of Hot Fuzz is 'nostalgia'. Without any knowledge of that nostalgia, its bound to confuse.
Posted: Fri, 31st Aug 2007, 11:44am

Post 57 of 98

doppelganger

Force: 134 | Joined: 16th May 2006 | Posts: 1157

MacOS User

Member

ChristianFilmer 100001 wrote:



And i never said i didn't like gore by itself i basicly said i dont like an Outragous amount of gore, like in Hot Fuzz.
I really dont understand what this guy has against Hot Fuzz, its like hes trying so hard to get everyone on fxhome to hate the movie.
Posted: Fri, 31st Aug 2007, 10:06pm

Post 58 of 98

Bucees

Force: 2477 | Joined: 4th Jun 2007 | Posts: 382

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

SORRY

And i dont apreiciete (dont know of to spell that) being called a "dumb-dumb"
Posted: Fri, 31st Aug 2007, 10:13pm

Post 59 of 98

Xcession

Force: 42802 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 1964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User Windows User

SuperUser

Apology accepted. Lets move on.
Posted: Fri, 31st Aug 2007, 10:18pm

Post 60 of 98

Frosty G

Force: 540 | Joined: 28th May 2005 | Posts: 640

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

Wait so are you against violence or just gore? Take for instance the tv show 24(or any television action-based show). It has alot of gun-fighting and action,etc but no actual blood or gore. Do you not like that or do you?
Posted: Fri, 31st Aug 2007, 10:27pm

Post 61 of 98

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

ChristianFilmer 100001 wrote:

SORRY

And i dont apreiciete (dont know of to spell that) being called a "dumb-dumb"
I'm sorry, but 'dumb-dumb' is probably the most gentle and unoffensive word I could use. You need to stop narrowing the opinions of others and making big statements about things that you might not understand/have seen, and then maybe your 'dumb-sense' won't be on alert. smile

Oh, and it's "appreciate". wink
Posted: Fri, 31st Aug 2007, 11:12pm

Post 62 of 98

Frosty G

Force: 540 | Joined: 28th May 2005 | Posts: 640

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

Fred Flintstone got called a dumb-dumb by that little green alien.
Posted: Sat, 1st Sep 2007, 12:38am

Post 63 of 98

Bryce007

Force: 1910 | Joined: 5th Apr 2003 | Posts: 2609

VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

Ha, this thread is great.


But the tests were kinda...eh...Unrealistic, but you're starting where everyone has started. You'll get better as long as you keep focusing on building up layers of effects to pull it off.


On another note: 24 has plenty of blood. But what makes it more severe is what they DON'T show.


This could be a lesson to you, Christianfilmer
Posted: Sat, 1st Sep 2007, 2:31am

Post 64 of 98

Evman

Force: 4382 | Joined: 25th Jan 2004 | Posts: 3609

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

ChristianFilmer 100001 wrote:

SORRY

And i dont apreiciete (dont know of to spell that) being called a "dumb-dumb"
Wow I'm sorry, I know you're trying to apologize, but seriously, the fact that you couldn't quickly check even Dictionary.com to look up the spelling of appreciate proves that you are in fact a "dumb dumb". That mixed with the lower case "i" really doesn't do much for your credibility. You are going to be in serious trouble when you are going to have to start writing 10+ page well written essays... There's only so much that spell check can handle.
Posted: Sat, 1st Sep 2007, 4:01am

Post 65 of 98

sfbmovieco

Force: 2354 | Joined: 19th Mar 2002 | Posts: 1552

VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Something like A History of Violence completely changed my perception of handguns and the brutality of violence. The film was filled with images of gore and violence but was definitely necessary in my opinion.
Posted: Sat, 1st Sep 2007, 5:46am

Post 66 of 98

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

sfbmovieco wrote:

Something like A History of Violence completely changed my perception of handguns and the brutality of violence. The film was filled with images of gore and violence but was definitely necessary in my opinion.
Exactly. The screentime for the gore is maybe, maybe 5 or 10 minutes, but the storytelling and showing of it- in the right context- creates a lasting effect.

Same with Saving Private Ryan, to an extent. Most of it is walking and talking, actually. But in the right context and shown in the right way, there's a necessary lasting effect of the opening scene......well.......nobody who has seen it will ever forget.
Posted: Sat, 1st Sep 2007, 5:48am

Post 67 of 98

SilverDragon7

Force: 2265 | Joined: 29th Jun 2006 | Posts: 1990

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I don't even know why this thread became like this...

But, I agree with the two posts above me.
Posted: Mon, 3rd Sep 2007, 7:48pm

Post 68 of 98

Bucees

Force: 2477 | Joined: 4th Jun 2007 | Posts: 382

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

gun fights and action to me are ok but like in "Starship Troopers" where that one guy gets his brains blown out of his skull cavity is just a little bit to far, i mean no one wants to see that unless ther just reaaly messed up. ya know what im sayen.
Posted: Mon, 3rd Sep 2007, 8:19pm

Post 69 of 98

Evman

Force: 4382 | Joined: 25th Jan 2004 | Posts: 3609

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

All I'll say is that you would not have survived circa the Renaissance.
Posted: Mon, 10th Sep 2007, 12:34pm

Post 70 of 98

Bucees

Force: 2477 | Joined: 4th Jun 2007 | Posts: 382

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I added a new video on the front page check it out
Posted: Mon, 10th Sep 2007, 12:44pm

Post 71 of 98

szczepanski

Force: 346 | Joined: 10th Aug 2007 | Posts: 227

Windows User

Member

ChristianFilmer 100001 wrote:

I added a new video on the front page check it out
Hey, that looks pretty good
How did ya do it and how long did it take?

I noticed that while the commet came, it looked good and all but there was one thing that made it look a bit unrealistic. I don't really knw howto explain it but, it looks like there were like, semi-circles trailing behind it (don't know how to explain it propaly) but yeah that was just one down side that i noticed.
But what can i say, i've never done anything like that so i can't really notice anythink as i have no experience with it.
Otherwise, it's good *thumbs up*
Posted: Mon, 10th Sep 2007, 12:47pm

Post 72 of 98

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

ChristianFilmer 100001 wrote:

gun fights and action to me are ok but like in "Starship Troopers" where that one guy gets his brains blown out of his skull cavity is just a little bit to far, i mean no one wants to see that unless ther just reaaly messed up. ya know what im sayen.
That's all part of Starship Troopers' commentary on the media, though. smile
Posted: Mon, 10th Sep 2007, 10:58pm

Post 73 of 98

Bucees

Force: 2477 | Joined: 4th Jun 2007 | Posts: 382

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member


Hey, that looks pretty good
How did ya do it and how long did it take?
It took me about roughly an hour. I used 3d studio max for the fireball but i really didn't create the textures and all that using AfterBurn 3 but i did manipulate all the move ments of it.

Then i used combustion 4 for the masking of the houses on the left side of the screen.

And the rest was all effects lab pro
Posted: Mon, 10th Sep 2007, 11:18pm

Post 74 of 98

Limey

Force: 547 | Joined: 11th Sep 2005 | Posts: 752

Gold Member

Good Job Man

Some good fx in there.

-BitZ
Posted: Sat, 15th Sep 2007, 1:27am

Post 75 of 98

Bucees

Force: 2477 | Joined: 4th Jun 2007 | Posts: 382

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Oh and a correction on me, I do not like human on human gore. i like alien on alien or alien on human gore or visa versa.
Posted: Sat, 15th Sep 2007, 1:34am

Post 76 of 98

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

"Thou shalt not remove the limbs from any man, so long as thou art not an alien lifeform."
Posted: Sat, 15th Sep 2007, 2:41am

Post 77 of 98

Bucees

Force: 2477 | Joined: 4th Jun 2007 | Posts: 382

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

LOL! LOL! LOL! that was hilaryous dude youre funny!
did you like my new vid?


NEW VIDEO CHECK IT OUT



HELLO ?????????
Posted: Fri, 28th Sep 2007, 3:53pm

Post 78 of 98

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

What?
Posted: Fri, 28th Sep 2007, 4:00pm

Post 79 of 98

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Christian guy wrote:

like in "Starship Troopers" where that one guy gets his brains blown out of his skull cavity is just a little bit to far, i mean no one wants to see that unless ther just reaaly messed up.
Starship Troopers is brilliant. I love it and own it on DVD. You trying to say I'm messed up, punk? twisted
Posted: Fri, 28th Sep 2007, 4:19pm

Post 80 of 98

Rockfilmers

Force: 2182 | Joined: 10th May 2007 | Posts: 1376

VisionLab User PhotoKey 4 User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Starship Troopers is brilliant. I love it and own it on DVD. You trying to say I'm messed up, punk?
Yah, cause that could never happen, huh.biggrin It's been a while since I saw that movie. I don't care to much for it. I just wasn't that satisfied with it.
Posted: Fri, 28th Sep 2007, 4:40pm

Post 81 of 98

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

To be hones, I was shocked the first time I saw it. I seemed to have left my "cynical mode" at home and didn't quite get it. When I saw it again, I loved it for the clever and bitter evil bite into society it is.

Well anyways, let's not stray off topic
Posted: Fri, 28th Sep 2007, 4:46pm

Post 82 of 98

SketchWork

Force: 2065 | Joined: 11th May 2007 | Posts: 386

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Rating: +1

Starship Troopers is one of my all time favs. Pitty Starship Troopers 2 sucked like a baboons rear.

I don't think the violence is bad after all it is an 18(R) certificate movie - so little jabbers shouldn't be watching it in the first place smile
Posted: Fri, 28th Sep 2007, 6:01pm

Post 83 of 98

Arktic

Force: 9977 | Joined: 10th Nov 2003 | Posts: 2785

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Sollthar wrote:

You trying to say I'm messed up, punk? twisted
Why Sollthar - you're an evil genius... of COURSE you're messed up wink
Posted: Fri, 28th Sep 2007, 6:30pm

Post 84 of 98

Rockfilmers

Force: 2182 | Joined: 10th May 2007 | Posts: 1376

VisionLab User PhotoKey 4 User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

You trying to say I'm messed up, punk?


Why Sollthar - you're an evil genius... of COURSE you're messed up
I knew it! lol biggrin
Posted: Sat, 29th Sep 2007, 12:50am

Post 85 of 98

Bucees

Force: 2477 | Joined: 4th Jun 2007 | Posts: 382

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Ok sew me about that, can we please get back to why I posted this here?
Posted: Sat, 29th Sep 2007, 9:33am

Post 86 of 98

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Sew you? Silence of the lambs style?

You have a twisted mind, my little christian filmer...
Posted: Sat, 29th Sep 2007, 3:19pm

Post 87 of 98

Bucees

Force: 2477 | Joined: 4th Jun 2007 | Posts: 382

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Whatever, youre being very immature, lets get back to my three new clips.
Posted: Sat, 29th Sep 2007, 3:29pm

Post 88 of 98

B3N

Force: 3081 | Joined: 26th Feb 2006 | Posts: 1534

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

ChristianFilmer 100001 said
Whatever, youre being very immature, lets get back to my three new clips.
I could honestly say the same to you.

LOL! LOL! LOL! that was hilaryous dude youre funny!
did you like my new vid?


NEW VIDEO CHECK IT OUT



HELLO ?????????
Posted: Sat, 29th Sep 2007, 3:55pm

Post 89 of 98

Bucees

Force: 2477 | Joined: 4th Jun 2007 | Posts: 382

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

No one was replying, SORRY, can we please talk about my three new clips
Posted: Sat, 29th Sep 2007, 4:05pm

Post 90 of 98

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

It might be worth pointing out to people where they can find these 3 new clips...
Posted: Sat, 29th Sep 2007, 4:37pm

Post 91 of 98

Bucees

Force: 2477 | Joined: 4th Jun 2007 | Posts: 382

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

All the lasted clips are on the very first page where my others are, all und the Updated again.
Posted: Sat, 29th Sep 2007, 5:20pm

Post 92 of 98

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

lets get back to my three new clips.
Go back then. I'll follow you. Lead us to victory. oink
Posted: Sat, 29th Sep 2007, 9:40pm

Post 93 of 98

Bucees

Force: 2477 | Joined: 4th Jun 2007 | Posts: 382

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Just go back to the front page, there under the words "Updated Again"
Posted: Sat, 29th Sep 2007, 9:53pm

Post 94 of 98

Fill

Force: 1257 | Joined: 1st Jul 2005 | Posts: 1652

CompositeLab Lite User EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

Sollthar wrote:

lets get back to my three new clips.
Go back then. I'll follow you. Lead us to victory. oink
I find it hilarious when Sollthar is an complete ass. smile

As for your tests... They're honestly not that well done.

Why is there a random little kid running behind you in the invisible clip?
Posted: Sat, 29th Sep 2007, 10:09pm

Post 95 of 98

RodyPolis

Force: 805 | Joined: 28th Apr 2007 | Posts: 1839

CompositeLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I'd say so you can see how well the effects was done. It's always good to see movement through the invisible person.
Posted: Sat, 29th Sep 2007, 11:23pm

Post 96 of 98

Bucees

Force: 2477 | Joined: 4th Jun 2007 | Posts: 382

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Exactly rody, that "little kid" behind me would be my little cousine Riley.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Oct 2007, 2:16am

Post 97 of 98

rikmills

Force: 420 | Joined: 4th Aug 2007 | Posts: 6

CompositeLab Pro User

Gold Member

At the start of the punching clip, it looks like the painting on the wall behind you has its finger up your evil twin's nose. :o) Very funny, and nicely done. Cool work dude.
Posted: Tue, 2nd Oct 2007, 10:46pm

Post 98 of 98

Bucees

Force: 2477 | Joined: 4th Jun 2007 | Posts: 382

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

biggrin thats funny yeah my mom pointed that out to me!