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

Prince Of Persia Sands Of Time Trailer Debut High Quality

Posted: Mon, 2nd Nov 2009, 11:47pm

Post 1 of 69

Joecool1081

Force: 460 | Joined: 7th Oct 2006 | Posts: 221

EffectsLab Pro User

Gold Member

http://movies.ign.com/dor/objects/664420/prince-of-persia/videos/pop_mov_trl1_110209.html

Check it out and let me know what you think, Great effects from what I saw but maybe a little skeptical on the story we'll see as more footage it released
Posted: Tue, 3rd Nov 2009, 12:36am

Post 2 of 69

Pooky

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

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Gyllenhaal seems like a crap choice; in the trailer he acts like he's autistic or something, which suffice to say is the opposite of what the Prince is supposed to be. Also, that girl really seems like she'll get very annoying by the end of the movie. And Kingsley is looking dreadfully generic.

Otherwise, it seems pretty good, but as the casting and acting are basically what will make or break a Prince of Persia movie, this isn't looking good to me.

Course, I don't work in the industry.
Posted: Tue, 3rd Nov 2009, 12:49am

Post 3 of 69

Thrawn

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

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

While I agree that the casting is a bit.. off, I do think I'll enjoy the movie a lot. It has a very "pirates of the caribbean" feel to it which, I'm sure, is what Disney was going for. I don't think the acting will be bad, I just don't think the actor and actress are appropriate for their roles.
Posted: Tue, 3rd Nov 2009, 1:20am

Post 4 of 69

Fxhome Dude

Force: 996 | Joined: 1st Jun 2009 | Posts: 927

CompositeLab Pro User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Pooky wrote:

Course, I don't work in the industry.
Thank you.
Posted: Tue, 3rd Nov 2009, 1:52am

Post 5 of 69

Atom

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

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I don't what anyone else will say, but I think this looks great. Perhaps the casting was off, but I generally like Jake Gyllenhal as an actor anyway and have confidence in him pulling it off- I mean, I didn't even realize the accented voice was his at first; so that's good.

But most of all, this movie looks like it knew what it was doing as far as style goes. There's a specific technical and production design flourish to the whole trailer that in some ways reminds me of what was so special about the first Pirates movie- it took you to this genuine yet semi-campy world in a very cool way.

In that regard, and the reason I'm excited about it, this trailer does too. Looks like a winning mix of The Mummy and Pirates- so I'm in.
Posted: Tue, 3rd Nov 2009, 3:05am

Post 6 of 69

RodyPolis

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

CompositeLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

This trailer was a great reminder to me of why I want to be a filmmaker. Can't wait for the movie, hope it blows me away!


Although, Jake looks nothing like the guy I see on the video game boxes smile Not that this has anything to do with anything.
Posted: Tue, 3rd Nov 2009, 3:15am

Post 7 of 69

Aculag

Force: 8365 | Joined: 21st Jun 2002 | Posts: 8581

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Looks pretty cool.

"We have to get out of here" *Stands still*
Posted: Tue, 3rd Nov 2009, 10:04am

Post 8 of 69

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

Aculag wrote:

"We have to get out of here" *Stands still*
Hehehe, I wondered about that bit, too.

It does actually look pretty nifty, visually they've captured the best bits of the games rather convincingly. I do worry that the end will be a giant smorgasbord of interest-sapping visual effects, rather than playing to the strengths of Indiana Jones-with-athletic-abilities, but we'll see.

There's a part of me that really wishes they'd cast the two leads with unknown actors that didn't look so ridiculously.....Western, but I guess that was never going to happen.
Posted: Tue, 3rd Nov 2009, 10:21am

Post 9 of 69

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Tarn wrote:

There's a part of me that really wishes they'd cast the two leads with unknown actors that didn't look so ridiculously.....Western, but I guess that was never going to happen.
Yeah, I've heard a few arguments that Persians were mostly indo-european back then and so would look western. And even though some explanations are provided in the film - I'm not entirely at one with the casting.

That said, the people I know who have seen the film have all said they enjoyed it and that it was better than they'd expected - we all saw the trailer a while ago here and came to the same conclusions other people have here - mostly positive but not solidly convinced. So perhaps all is not lost.

Did I mention that I work in the industry?

My VFX Career started with this film just over a year ago and it's a project I've kept coming back on to (and am still on) so in a way - I really hope it does alright as it's seen me move up positions and is irrevocably the film that kicked everything off for me.

But I won't be offended if you hate it (provided you like the VFX) razz

-Matt
Posted: Tue, 3rd Nov 2009, 10:35am

Post 10 of 69

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

I might specifically love it but hate the effects, just to annoy you.
Posted: Tue, 3rd Nov 2009, 10:38am

Post 11 of 69

Xcession

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

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User Windows User

SuperUser

Damn those VFX look pants. Whoever did those should be ashamed of themselves. I hope all those responsible for the VFX could be put in prison, but as thats impractical, i'd suggest that the palest person be publicly flogged instead.









razz
Posted: Tue, 3rd Nov 2009, 2:16pm

Post 12 of 69

Fxhome Dude

Force: 996 | Joined: 1st Jun 2009 | Posts: 927

CompositeLab Pro User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Hybrid-Halo wrote:


Did I mention that I work in the industry?
-Matt
Really?
i haven't seen the trailer yet, but hope to see it soon....
Posted: Tue, 3rd Nov 2009, 3:12pm

Post 13 of 69

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Wes the fxhome dude wrote:

Hybrid-Halo wrote:


Did I mention that I work in the industry?
-Matt
Really?
i haven't seen the trailer yet, but hope to see it soon....
The links right there, though something to keep in mind when you get a chance to watch it is that I work in the industry and so my opinion on pretty much anything even remotely associated with film is as a result, authoritative.

Did I mention I also moderate these forums? Hehe.
Posted: Tue, 3rd Nov 2009, 3:17pm

Post 14 of 69

Fxhome Dude

Force: 996 | Joined: 1st Jun 2009 | Posts: 927

CompositeLab Pro User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

Wes the fxhome dude wrote:

Hybrid-Halo wrote:


Did I mention that I work in the industry?
-Matt
Really?
i haven't seen the trailer yet, but hope to see it soon....
The links right there, though something to keep in mind when you get a chance to watch it is that I work in the industry and so my opinion on pretty much anything even remotely associated with film is as a result, authoritative.

Did I mention I also moderate these forums? Hehe.
In no way did I mean that as an insult. But by authoritive what do you mean? I have an idea, but...
Posted: Tue, 3rd Nov 2009, 5:37pm

Post 15 of 69

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Relax Wes, I'm making fun of myself/Tarn and Pooky are ridiculing me over a comment I made without realizing how it sounded a while ago.

Though I meant authoritative, it means official. But don't take anything in italics seriously. wink

-Matt
Posted: Tue, 3rd Nov 2009, 5:40pm

Post 16 of 69

No Respite Productions

Force: 985 | Joined: 4th Dec 2006 | Posts: 482

EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Completely stumped as to why Gemma Arterton (an English actress) seems to be heavily forcing through her accent to the point where it sounds like an American trying really really hard to sound British (the Keanu Reeves in Dracula effect) when Jake Gyllenhal seems to pull it off so effortlessly.

As much as I don't like these types of films, I have to admit this looks like it could be a nice film to relax and switch off to.

Also, was it just me or did anyone else watching this trailer think "yeah, this looks cool, but I now really want to see Assassin's Creed turned into a film".

Gorgeous VFX by the way wink
Posted: Tue, 3rd Nov 2009, 6:17pm

Post 17 of 69

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

No Respite Productions wrote:

Also, was it just me or did anyone else watching this trailer think "yeah, this looks cool, but I now really want to see Assassin's Creed turned into a film".
Can't say I did, though the second I saw the circling shot I shouted "Assassins Creed!" wink - Incidentally also a Ubisoft game.
Posted: Tue, 3rd Nov 2009, 6:24pm

Post 18 of 69

Staff Only

Force: 1805 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2005 | Posts: 1232

VisionLab User MacOS User

Gold Member

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

Relax Wes, I'm making fun of myself/Tarn and Pooky are ridiculing me
Ridiculing? I think you misunderstand. I have it on good authority that Tarn and Pooky have the highest respect for industry workers. razz
Posted: Tue, 3rd Nov 2009, 6:31pm

Post 19 of 69

Fxhome Dude

Force: 996 | Joined: 1st Jun 2009 | Posts: 927

CompositeLab Pro User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

Relax Wes, I'm making fun of myself/Tarn and Pooky are ridiculing me over a comment I made without realizing how it sounded a while ago.

Though I meant authoritative, it means official. But don't take anything in italics seriously. wink

-Matt
WHAT??? I thought you were serious, I sold my home, my car, deleted all my profiles on the internet, changed my name and you were joking? you can tell I'm joking, I didn't take your comment personal at all...
I just saw the trailer though and can honestly say the effects ere impressive. They were natural, and fluid. i did feel the constant slow-mo shots took away from the effect but that was about all. I didn't have my volume on as well so I couldn't vouch for the audio. Great none the less.
Posted: Tue, 3rd Nov 2009, 6:36pm

Post 20 of 69

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Hehehe, I don't think I am ever going to live this one down.
Posted: Tue, 3rd Nov 2009, 7:14pm

Post 21 of 69

CX3

Force: 3137 | Joined: 1st Apr 2003 | Posts: 2527

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

This might go down as the #1 video game to movie... movie. I'm excited. I'm gonna tell everyone that I know someone who worked on this. Well... It's more like a "eKnow"...
Posted: Tue, 3rd Nov 2009, 7:16pm

Post 22 of 69

B3N

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

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

People in the industry never live anything down. smile

The trailer did look cool, with some decent VFX, however not the best I've seen to date, but the story should hopefully be good? Please say it is?

Jake just doesn't look right in this role though, I keep seeing him as this druken sobbing boy with a girlfriend whos addicted to sex in a really bad film. Really not how I want to see him in this film.
Posted: Tue, 3rd Nov 2009, 9:51pm

Post 23 of 69

CX3

Force: 3137 | Joined: 1st Apr 2003 | Posts: 2527

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Rating: +1

Check this out: http://johnaugust.com/archives/2009/pitching-prince-of-persia

Give's a break down of how August went about pitching the film and it even shows the trailer that he originally used to pitch the idea with.

Pretty interesting.
Posted: Wed, 4th Nov 2009, 5:27am

Post 24 of 69

Thrawn

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

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Nice find CX3! Really interesting. +1
Posted: Wed, 4th Nov 2009, 7:04am

Post 25 of 69

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

Looks good fun. I'm getting a nice but not as cool Pirates/Mummy-feel out of this so it can't be all bad. smile
Posted: Wed, 4th Nov 2009, 8:42am

Post 26 of 69

Redhawksrymmer

Force: 18442 | Joined: 19th Aug 2002 | Posts: 2620

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

SuperUser

I think it looks...interesting. I' sure it'll be a fun ride, and I think Gyllenhaal looks quite good in his role - Gemma Arterton looks quite nice - she might be an irritating character but she looks the part wink Oh, and I think the VFX mostly looks brilliant, especially the sands of time effect - will have to redownload the trailer to check it out in 1080p. Looks like a good popcorn flick and will probably spawn loads of sequels - hopefully better than Pirates of the Carribean 2 and 3 though wink

Also, for all you HD enthusiasts wink

480p (81,5 Mb)
720p (145 Mb)
1080p(213 Mb)
Posted: Wed, 4th Nov 2009, 1:43pm

Post 27 of 69

Staff Only

Force: 1805 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2005 | Posts: 1232

VisionLab User MacOS User

Gold Member

Redhawksrymmer wrote:

Also, for all you HD enthusiasts wink

480p (81,5 Mb)
720p (145 Mb)
1080p(213 Mb)
Yay! Thank you, thank you, thank you.

My view on the trailer is that it looks great, but I have a bad feeling about it mostly because of how put off I was by the: "Disney" then "Bruckheimer" then "Pirates" references in the trailer. It really cheapened the whole thing.

Now let me explain because my friends immediately yelled: "Hypocrite!" when I said this because of my positive reaction to the "Terminator, Aliens, T2 etc." references in the Avatar trailer. The key here is that in Avatar it was a reference to the director, not the producer, or even worse the studio. The difference being that a director makes movies, a producer (in most cases, and especially with Bruckheimer) and a studio make(s) money. The message in the Avatar trailer is that "This guy makes awesome movies!", while the message in this one seems more: "These guys have made a film that is very similar to that other franchise that made lots of money." Now I like Pirates, I don't mind Disney, and I admittedly don't like what Bruckheimer does (not to say that I don't like the movies he's involved in), but hanging a franchise on another franchise seems to be more of a limiter than a sales pitch. Golden Compass was certainly hurt by being compared to LotR, Fringe was hurt by being compared to Lost, and if I'm not mistaken Dreamworks had to stop comparing everything they made to Shrek by the time Kung Fu Panda came out if they ever wanted to be taken seriously again. Then there's the advertising of the studio inside the trailer (as supposed to at the start like normal people). This pissed me off in The Half Blood Price trailer as well. Good trailer, but completely unnecessary to have a guy saying "From Warner Brothers Pictures" in the middle. Who cares?! Studios don't make movies, they pay for them. I get that they are doing brand-building, but it's at the expense of the movie in my opinion. I don't know how else to say it, but I think they have limited this movie to be in the shadow of Pirates now.

Just to be clear, this is a criticism of the trailer, not the actual film which I have completely different reasons to dislike. To sum them up: 1. Mike Newell butchered a great Harry Potter book so forgive me for hating his guts (yes, I belong to the Potter-fanboy generation). 2. If this film succeeds we'll be drowning in weak video-game adaptations like how we have been with comic-book adaptations the last years except video-games generally make for weaker source material as most of them comprise of game-play, and they have whinier fans who haven't even had 20 years to grow out of their fandom like comic-book fans have. If Uwe Boll is any indication to how bad a video game adaption can get, the film industry really doesn't need this scenario right now.

Finally the effects look really great, and the film looks like it has a lot of potential so all credit to you Hybrid! biggrin
Posted: Wed, 4th Nov 2009, 4:28pm

Post 28 of 69

ben3308

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

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

No, Jerry Bruckheimer doesn't just make money, he makes bankable films on the basis of making them high-contrast and cool. Hence, people pay to see them.

Whether or not that's something he should be doing is debatable, but by and large, Bruckheimer's hands-on producing style has yet to prove to the detriment of any movie I've seen. His name isn't synonymous with other franchises, it's synonymous with a standard of production quality that's expected from him. You watch a Bruckheimer-produced film, you know it's going to be of high technical quality at the very least, because that's what his name, in essence, guarantees.
Posted: Wed, 4th Nov 2009, 6:34pm

Post 29 of 69

Atom

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

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Rating: +1

Staff Only wrote:

Good trailer, but completely unnecessary to have a guy saying "From Warner Brothers Pictures" in the middle. Who cares?! Studios don't make movies, they pay for them.
Aside from that trailer being completely badass and renewing and rejuvenating my faith and interest in HP- and ultimately treating it more like an 'event' of a movie by saying 'From Warner Brothers Pictures...'- there's this:

You ask who cares about a movie coming from Warner Bros.? I do.

Like Ben says about Jerry Bruckheimer (which is most-assuredly true, too) I care when I see something is made by WB because, despite their goliath-like studio presence; I also know they're a company known for making more and better quality movies (blockbusters, at least) then any other studio in the past 5 or so years.

Why? Because I think they have such great quality control, and because they generally trust their creative department. Look at movies like The Dark Knight, all of the Harry Potter films, The Hangover, and even Where The Wild Things Are: all are top-shelf franchises- not just moneymakers but generally good movies because WB is willing to stake a lot of money on people they think are talented.

Hell, they just gave Christopher Nolan, what, 200 million for Inception? To make a project they barely knew anything about! Stuff like that happens with WB, and I don't see it happen with the other big studios.

Superman Returns and Speed Racer were both considered relative flops- but I really, really enjoyed both because it was obvious the studio gave creative reign to the people who wanted and could do something with it, and while both films are a tad self-indulgent I'm ultimately more-pleased that I got to see them that way; and that's because of the trust and money WB is willing to put in.

I'm not saying they're a messiah-like studio, no not at all, but just like you're discounting Jerry Bruckheimer- don't discount a studio name in front of movies. It's not always synonomous with money-grossing; sometimes it's a marker of quality.
Posted: Wed, 4th Nov 2009, 10:02pm

Post 30 of 69

Staff Only

Force: 1805 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2005 | Posts: 1232

VisionLab User MacOS User

Gold Member

Atom wrote:

I'm not saying they're a messiah-like studio, no not at all, but just like you're discounting Jerry Bruckheimer- don't discount a studio name in front of movies. It's not always synonomous with money-grossing; sometimes it's a marker of quality.
I hope that is the case here. You both make very valid points. Maybe I was just overreacting.

Yes Bruckheimer is a quality stamp, but Verbinski was very quick to say that Bruckheimer just kind of hung around the set sometimes and gave some input, but if things got rough he said "You guys figure it out." and disappeared (this was said in a joking manner, he wasn't attacking Bruckheimer). I guess I don't see Bruckheimers work as that important to the films, as in: any talented marketing person could do it. John Lasseter is known for being a mentor and father figure at Pixar during every production. I just get the feeling that Bruckheimer doesn't work that hard on "his" movies, but just handpicks good scrips and good directors and watches the magic. I believe Stu Maschwitz refers to this tactic of film-making in his book. Just kind of hiring all the "best and brightest", mixing it, then box office gold. But what do I know? For all I know Bruckheimer has earned every penny the hard way. I'm sure I'm just underestimating the amount of work it takes to be a really great producer.

I still stand by that the Pirates thing was a bit castrating, mostly because Pirates didn't have a Pirates to lean on in the first place (although they did mention Bruckheimer in the trailer as well). Then again I used to yell "Why do we need a recap of your movies? Is there anyone on Earth who doesn't know Pixar's filmography by heart?" every time I saw a new Pixar trailer since The Incredibles. Turns out a lot of people don't know Pixar's filmography by heart. A girl once told me that Pixar's worst film was Bee Movie "...because that sucked.". I've also heard people confusing Over The Hedge with Pixar. So I guess these guys know what they are doing.
Posted: Thu, 5th Nov 2009, 8:37am

Post 31 of 69

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

I think Atom's point about studios is a very good one. It goes in cycles, of course, but WB definitely have the edge at the moment in terms of the big films.

Compare them to, say, 20th Century Fox, who regularly screw with their creative talent, leading to rushed crapola like X-Men 3. Having said that, their TV department seems to be heading in the right direction, actually trusting their creative staff rather than pulling the rug out, so maybe that culture will spread to the film staff too?
Posted: Thu, 5th Nov 2009, 2:48pm

Post 32 of 69

Staff Only

Force: 1805 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2005 | Posts: 1232

VisionLab User MacOS User

Gold Member

Tarn wrote:

It goes in cycles, of course
I'd add to that, that is goes in CEOs. I'd say there's a good enough chance that Apple will fall quite a bit when Jobs retires (hell the share prices fell when Apple failed to cover up that Jobs was ill), and that Pixar will hit a very patchy period when the first or second John Lasseter replacement comes around. The mentality/competence of the CEO and Board of Directors is very important to how the company prospers. I've seen a lot of companies rise and fall shortly after changing CEO.

Last edited Thu, 5th Nov 2009, 4:32pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Thu, 5th Nov 2009, 2:59pm

Post 33 of 69

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

Yeah, by that same token I've seen a lot of the fault for Fox's often lame attitude laid squarely at the feet of Tom Rothman.

You need money men near the top to keep everything running but, as you pointed out on the previous page, they absolutely need to trust the creative talent otherwise all you'll get are mediocre results.
Posted: Thu, 5th Nov 2009, 6:18pm

Post 34 of 69

Atom

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

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Staff Only wrote:

I just get the feeling that Bruckheimer doesn't work that hard on "his" movies, but just handpicks good scrips and good directors and watches the magic.
You..........do realize.........this is........a job too, right?

Knowing who and how to pick people, and being able to orchestrate locations and negotiate prices/countries/sets/props/etc. and sign on good talented people to productions I would say is incredibly hard work- and when you're overwhelmingly good at it (which, come on now, Jerry Bruckheimer obviously is- I know when I see his name I'm getting a certain bar of action/epic-ness quality) why the hell wouldn't they put your name on a movie, you know?

Producing is a tough job, and it isn't all song and dance and money and fun. It's work, too. And I think people forget that. Trust me, as I've got older and make more and more movies I've found what I'm best at is, well, producing. Being able to gather the right talent, locations, props, costumes, and orchestrate all these resources on one movie- and it's tough work, but it's something I know I can do well. It's something I know I can put out there with a certain level of consistency of quality.

If you want to minimize the scenario to a much, much, much, much smaller scale- when I make a movie with my friends, I mostly produce it- but I do this because I know I'm good at it as far as getting an 'Atomic Productions' caliber of movie out there, just like Jerry Bruckheimer gets a 'Jerry Bruckheimer' caliber of movie out there.

Does that make sense?
Posted: Thu, 5th Nov 2009, 7:31pm

Post 35 of 69

Staff Only

Force: 1805 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2005 | Posts: 1232

VisionLab User MacOS User

Gold Member

Atom wrote:

You..........do realize.........this is........a job too, right?
To quote Professor Snape: "Obviusly". I did say as much in my previous post.

Also if I may be so bold as to say I think that when you and I have to (sometimes) beg our friends to show up for filming, and when we have to coordinate a lot of non-professionals with no financial backing I'd say our work is probably harder for us than Bruckheimer's work is for him in the sense that we have to strech ourselves very far sometimes to get things done. You guys always impress me with the speed and efficiency you make films. That must take some serious backbone at times right? Do you think Bruckheimer ever feels like his day are even a little challenging anymore? I don't know. I just think that he makes films the easy way. Sure he has a certain brand and level of quality to uphold, but that isn't hard with his name and money. When Nolan made Following, Lucas made Star Wars, Cameron made The Abyss, Coppola made Apocalypse Now, and Jackson made Lord of the Rings that was hard.

Surely you can understand that the guys behind a small independent film that had financial problems all the way through, almost went into development hell at several points, and then by the sweat and blood of a few passionate people got made was much harder than for Bruckheimer to make all the phone calls, fly his private jet around to sets, check in on CSI every now and then etc.?

Not saying I could be Bruckheimer for a day, as I'm sure he has a shocking amount of contacts on his Blackberry calling him all day, massive amounts of money to keep track of and the quality control you mentioned, but I still think he has one of the easiest job in Hollywood. Though I'm not discrediting that it takes a lot of entrepreneur skill to get where he is. I just think that he, like Lucas, could have used his massive power on more interesting stuff than themselves. What Peter Jackson did for Blomkamp is what I would expect of Lucas and Bruckheimer (or what Lasseter did for Brad Bird). At least Lucas is inventing really impressive movie-making equipment with all his money.

Last edited Thu, 5th Nov 2009, 7:43pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Thu, 5th Nov 2009, 7:43pm

Post 36 of 69

Axeman

Force: 17995 | Joined: 20th Jan 2002 | Posts: 6124

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

SuperUser

There is a reason the Best Picture Oscar goes to the producer. Their job is tremendously complex and difficult. I'd suspect that it just gets moreso when you are working on projects as huge and complex as Bruckheimer's. The fact that his name is associated with a consistant level of quality and epic-ness, that should be a clue that those aspects of the film directly relate to his presence.

If finding people who are good at their jobs to work with you is 'making films the easy way,' then I'll take the easy way. And having his name as a brand is also a direct result of the amount of work he has put into his productions in the past. It is a result of the hard work he has already done.

Anyway, back to the Prince of Persia. I've never payed the game, though I've watched my brother play it briefly on occasion. The trailer does look like fun though. It looks very Bruckheimer, and with some very epically complex effects shots. I generally find Bruckheimer movies to be a visual feast, if not a mental one, so I am looking forward to this.
Posted: Thu, 5th Nov 2009, 9:14pm

Post 37 of 69

jawajohnny

Force: 1965 | Joined: 14th Dec 2007 | Posts: 829

VisionLab User VideoWrap User MuzzlePlug User Windows User

Gold Member

Tarn wrote:

Having said that, their TV department seems to be heading in the right direction, actually trusting their creative staff rather than pulling the rug out, so maybe that culture will spread to the film staff too?
No choice but to disagree here. smile As recently as this year they've screwed with (and then canceled) shows like Terminator and Dollhouse. Heck, they've even put Abram's Fringe at risk. And in general, poor scheduling and marketing, not to mention the pathetic treatment they give to producers. How is that "heading in the right direction"?

To get on topic, the trailer looks pretty good. As people have mentioned, it looks like a blend of Mummy/Pirates, which style-wise can't be a bad thing.
Posted: Thu, 5th Nov 2009, 9:55pm

Post 38 of 69

Atom

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

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I think you're just not putting things in perspective, Staff Only, and I think Axeman really took the words right out of my mouth- so there's not much more to say to that effect.

You want to know what I like best about this Prince of Persia trailer? The Jerry Bruckheimer-isms in it. wink
Posted: Thu, 5th Nov 2009, 10:46pm

Post 39 of 69

CX3

Force: 3137 | Joined: 1st Apr 2003 | Posts: 2527

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Just jumping in here (haven't read too much) but I'd just like to say that FOX is horrible. Can't stand them. They bring on new SciFi shows only to cancel them or talk about canceling them (and they're good!).

And them switching Fringe to Thursday nights it's such a horrible idea. Why would you have that compete with The Office, 30 Rock, Grey's Anatomy and CSI?? I mean it's like they want it to lose viewers.

I tell ya, Fringe is one of the best written & produced shows on television in my opinion and if it get's canceled, I more than likely will take my viewership away from FOX. Torrents R Us. (Even though I really wanna give Whedon my support).

I hate me some FOX ha
Posted: Thu, 5th Nov 2009, 11:30pm

Post 40 of 69

jawajohnny

Force: 1965 | Joined: 14th Dec 2007 | Posts: 829

VisionLab User VideoWrap User MuzzlePlug User Windows User

Gold Member

Yeah it is like they're purposely setting up for them to fail. Why bother with Firefly, if you're going to scrap the real pilot and air the rest of the episodes out of order? Why bother with Terminator if you don't even attempt to market or schedule it well? And why bother with Dollhouse if your going to immediately interfere with Whedon, and stick it in the Friday night slot? I would already be boycotting everything Fox, but there's still Fringe to watch as long as that lasts.

EDIT: Haha, just realized this... poor Summer Glau has now appeared in no less than three canceled series on Fox.
Posted: Thu, 5th Nov 2009, 11:38pm

Post 41 of 69

Atom

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

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Dollhouse was a shitty show with a brand name (Whedon) behind it. Doesn't change the fact that it was awkward, poorly-acted, and overly-conceived. Whedon doesn't immediately = excellence, you know.

I'm sorry, but that had to be said. Fox has some good shows they cancel, no doubt, but Dollhouse wasn't/isn't one of them.
Posted: Thu, 5th Nov 2009, 11:47pm

Post 42 of 69

CX3

Force: 3137 | Joined: 1st Apr 2003 | Posts: 2527

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Hmm... And to think, I enjoy Dollhouse... Maybe I was wrong. But I guess like the good scripture says, "Atom's word is all. Atom's word is just. Atom's word is truth."

... So say we all
Posted: Thu, 5th Nov 2009, 11:54pm

Post 43 of 69

jawajohnny

Force: 1965 | Joined: 14th Dec 2007 | Posts: 829

VisionLab User VideoWrap User MuzzlePlug User Windows User

Gold Member

Well, I haven't seen too much of Dollhouse (it's just not my kind of show). I have heard it got better towards the end of last season and the beginning of this one.

But my main point is that regardless of the overall quality of Dollhouse, Fox's handling of the show has been atrocious from the very beginning. I'm not saying it shouldn't have been canceled... I actually think it should have been already. It's pretty clear now that Fox made the wrong choice with their Terminator/Dollhouse decision in May.
Posted: Fri, 6th Nov 2009, 12:17am

Post 44 of 69

CX3

Force: 3137 | Joined: 1st Apr 2003 | Posts: 2527

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

If FOX would just step out of the way of creatives once in a while, we'd get even greater series. I still can't believe they made Whedon toss the original pilot episode for Dollhouse, not to mention requesting many stand-alone episodes only to muck up what he had originally planned. I think that's what hurt the 1st season quite a bit early on.

If only they took this approach towards Firefly...
Posted: Fri, 6th Nov 2009, 7:34am

Post 45 of 69

Thrawn

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

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Actually, on the contrary, Fox has let some pretty great/popular shows continue running. Lie To Me, 24, House, Mental, American Idol, etc are some great shows that people enjoy. I wasn't much of a fan of Dollhouse, so I don't really have a problem with Fox.
Posted: Fri, 6th Nov 2009, 9:10am

Post 46 of 69

CX3

Force: 3137 | Joined: 1st Apr 2003 | Posts: 2527

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

I was really only referring to FOX's sci-fi material. Being a science fiction fan, FOX disappoints me. They've been screwing over their scifi series and/or creators.

I used to watch House but I fell off during my move out west. I have a lot of catching up to do on that. Never got into 24. I don't really question American Idol.. I mean obviously they aren't gonna to touch a show with one of the highest viewerships ha. And I've actually never even heard of Mental.

But yeah, FOX's scifi treatment is kinda brutal.
Posted: Fri, 6th Nov 2009, 3:04pm

Post 47 of 69

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

Aren't FOX the ones who cancelled "Firefly", the unquestionably objectively determined best series ever?
Posted: Fri, 6th Nov 2009, 3:28pm

Post 48 of 69

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

Yep. And, yes, until very recently they've done stupid things with Terminator and Dollhouse. However, comments coming out of Fox relating to Dollhouse season 2 gave me hope that they're finally getting a clue.
Posted: Fri, 6th Nov 2009, 8:33pm

Post 49 of 69

jawajohnny

Force: 1965 | Joined: 14th Dec 2007 | Posts: 829

VisionLab User VideoWrap User MuzzlePlug User Windows User

Gold Member

Tarn wrote:

Yep. And, yes, until very recently they've done stupid things with Terminator and Dollhouse. However, comments coming out of Fox relating to Dollhouse season 2 gave me hope that they're finally getting a clue.
Yeah, when it was too late and the damage was done. razz Dollhouse is essentially canceled. They've pulled it from the November sweeps, and are going to air the remainder of episodes in back-to-back blocks next month. Unless there's a serious upswing in ratings...
Posted: Mon, 16th Nov 2009, 10:26pm

Post 50 of 69

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

I'm excited to see this once it arrives next year! smile This was the most extensive feature film that I've worked on in regards to the time I spent on it (about 65 days or something eek), which was great fun but bloody tiring!

Loved working on it, got many good memories and stories about the sets and the tantrums of the cast! Nice to see so many of you guys anticipating it as much as I am. Here's hoping for the studio they hit the nail on the head and have another good franchise on their hands! They've poured/spent/wasted so much money on this! I saw around $2million go into the set construction on 007 stage! I'll share some photos of some of the behind the scenes stuff I have once the film is out smile If a sequel is green lit then I've been offered a similar role again! Won't be turning it down! smile

Woohar!
Posted: Tue, 17th Nov 2009, 4:30am

Post 51 of 69

Pooky

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

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

ER-NO!! surprised
Posted: Tue, 17th Nov 2009, 7:31am

Post 52 of 69

Evman

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

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

I'm going to remain ambivalent about this one until I see more footage/trailers or actually see the movie. The games hold a very very special place in my heart, and this trailer doesn't really seem to gel 100% with the spirit of the games.

We shall see.
Posted: Thu, 19th Nov 2009, 9:26am

Post 53 of 69

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

Pooky wrote:

ER-NO!! surprised
Pooky! What's up? smile
Posted: Sat, 29th May 2010, 5:07am

Post 54 of 69

Pooky

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

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Saw this tonight. DO NOT PAY TO SEE THIS FILM!!

Quite possibly the most predictable, soulless, unimaginative and formulaic film I've seen all year. The acting is terrible, there is no wit at all in any of the dialogue (a huge part of why the game was so awesome), the action becomes terribly dull by about the halfway mark, and the ending, considering how perfectly the game ended, is moronic. The Sands of Time mythos and story had amazing potential, but all that's been kept is the setting (although decidedly 300-influenced, but not as good), the costumes and the idea of a time travelling dagger. I can't even recommend this as an entertaining swashbuckler, because everyone will be able to see the ending from a mile away, which ruins any tension and danger that might otherwise have been present. Basically, the only reason this movie exists is to show how sexy Jake Gyllenhaal apparently is. Judging by the loud tween girls sitting next to me, it at least succeeded at that.

Spoilers for those that have finished the Sands of Time game:
Remember the fantastic ending from the game, where the Prince fixes everything by going back to the start, but as a result loses the relationship he had with Farah because she doesn't remember any of it? It was basically the only way to get over the storytelling problem that travelling back in time can fix any problem: showing the one way such a power can be negative.

In the film, the Prince goes back, and the Princess does forget, but he is immediately offered to her as marriage, and she seems to be in love with him already. It even ends with a quote saying that legend says that some people are linked through space and time because of destiny, or some other bullshit. Seeing as the whole film alludes to the fact that the ending will be the Prince going back and just killing the main bad guy before he has a chance to do anything, the film ends up losing any feeling of danger because you know it's all for nothing anyway, and there's no downside to just starting over.
Posted: Sat, 29th May 2010, 9:14am

Post 55 of 69

Staff Only

Force: 1805 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2005 | Posts: 1232

VisionLab User MacOS User

Gold Member

Pooky wrote:

Saw this tonight. DO NOT PAY TO SEE THIS FILM!!

Quite possibly the most predictable, soulless, unimaginative and formulaic film I've seen all year.
Thank God. I've really wanted this film to suck. I must sincerely apologize to Sands of Time fans (I really don't want you to go through the same anger I had about Goblet of Fire, I just don't want Newell to succeed), but I can never forgive Mike Newell for not only slaughtering one of my favorite Harry Potter books, but making the most horrendously bad Potter-film ever in the process. (Seriously I can write 10 pages about how the people who wrote and directed The Goblet of Fire are just plain stupid. The film is full of bulls***.) I just didn't want the guy to redeem himself, and I certainly didn't want him to get the kind of nerd credit Nolan got when he made a good Batman film because Newell made a [the first] good video-game adaptation.

Sorry guys, just a bit of schadenfreude.
Posted: Sat, 29th May 2010, 4:48pm

Post 56 of 69

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

I'm kind of destined to watch this film given that I spent over a year of my life slaving away on some of the Visual Effects. But I have a suspicion I will come away with the same feelings as Pooky.

What did you think of the Effects? That's really all I'm interested in.
-Matt
Posted: Sat, 29th May 2010, 5:45pm

Post 57 of 69

Staff Only

Force: 1805 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2005 | Posts: 1232

VisionLab User MacOS User

Gold Member

Oh no, now I really feel bad! surprised I must apologize.

That someone I've spoken to (albeit only on the Internet) has worked on the effects kind of evens out my (childish) vendetta against Newell. I haven't seen the film myself, but from the trailers it seems like it's up to Bruckheimer film's usual standard of VFX (really high). Also from what I've read other than Pooky's review it's getting okey reviews and the effects are mentioned as being impressive.

Based on a video game set in the Middle Ages, the film has a great look that seamlessly blends advanced special effects with old-fashioned location shots, making it difficult to tell where reality ends and fantasy begins. The dusty Moroccan landscape is a character in itself, enhanced in the battle scenes with hundreds of extras.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/ent/movies/reviews/stories/052710dngdprinceofpersia.c12fdc7.html

I enjoyed the Pirates films on VFX alone. I will probably like this film. Congrats HH.
Posted: Sat, 29th May 2010, 9:14pm

Post 58 of 69

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Staff Only wrote:

Oh no, now I really feel bad! surprised I must apologize.
Don't be silly! You're free to feel however you want to regarding any aspect of the film. Besides working on some of the VFX, I don't often have any emotional investment in the films I work on.

Ideally, every film I work on is a masterpiece that sees all round praise and success. Though I know this is far from true and I welcome opinion regarding anything I have any level of involvement with. But.. Thanks for the congratulations. Prince of Persia was the first feature film I ever got to work on and regardless of it's failings, it's the film that saw me into the industry. smile

-Matt
Posted: Sun, 30th May 2010, 7:08am

Post 59 of 69

Axeman

Force: 17995 | Joined: 20th Jan 2002 | Posts: 6124

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

SuperUser

Best bit of the film, seeing "Matt W. B. Plummer" in the Nvizible portion of the credits. I didn't hate the movie, but it didn't particularly thrill me either. Didn't notice any flaws in the effects work or compositing, but I did in nearly every other aspect of the film. I went in expecting a fun bit of rubbish, and was only very mildly disappointed.
Posted: Sun, 30th May 2010, 3:40pm

Post 60 of 69

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Axeman wrote:

Best bit of the film, seeing "Matt W. B. Plummer" in the Nvizible portion of the credits. I didn't hate the movie, but it didn't particularly thrill me either. Didn't notice any flaws in the effects work or compositing, but I did in nearly every other aspect of the film. I went in expecting a fun bit of rubbish, and was only very mildly disappointed.
That's actually the first confirmation I've had that my name is in the on screen credits. Making it my first official credit! I definitely have to go and see it now, and with a laser pointer to point out my name to the whole cinema. Which granted, may result in a summary lynching.

Thanks Axe smile
-Matt
Posted: Sun, 30th May 2010, 4:14pm

Post 61 of 69

Staff Only

Force: 1805 | Joined: 22nd Feb 2005 | Posts: 1232

VisionLab User MacOS User

Gold Member

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

I definitely have to go and see it now, and with a laser pointer to point out my name to the whole cinema. Which granted, may result in a summary lynching.
I'd say the lynching would be worth it if I were you, but please don't sue me if you get hurt! wink
Posted: Sun, 30th May 2010, 4:44pm

Post 62 of 69

Pooky

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

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Hybrid - Yeah, in terms of execution I'd say the effects were quite awesome, some of the sand shots must've been a pain to work on. Where the film fails is in the design department, I'd say. The environments feel lifeless and unoriginal, and it ends up feeling like a less stylized take on 300 most of the time.
Posted: Sun, 30th May 2010, 7:39pm

Post 63 of 69

Axeman

Force: 17995 | Joined: 20th Jan 2002 | Posts: 6124

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

SuperUser

er-no wrote:

I'm excited to see this once it arrives next year! smile This was the most extensive feature film that I've worked on in regards to the time I spent on it (about 65 days or something eek), which was great fun but bloody tiring!
Sorry to say I didn't see you in the credits, Joby. I didn't know to look for your name on this one. What was your position? I'll have to look for you on the next go round, which will likely be video, but we'll see.
Posted: Sun, 30th May 2010, 8:13pm

Post 64 of 69

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Pooky wrote:

Hybrid - Yeah, in terms of execution I'd say the effects were quite awesome, some of the sand shots must've been a pain to work on.
I wouldn't know! Whilst yes, I spent a year working on Prince of Persia - that only includes a very small part of the bigger picture of the films effects. For which several companies are involved. 8 Months were spent literally rotoscoping elements so other people could do awesome things with it (Which was the first time you see the dagger rewind time sequence).

The other 4 months were spent doing prep and comp work for another couple of sequences. Mostly blue screen backgrounds and stuff for jungles, the sandstorm and stuff during the assault. A really small part of the bigger picture, but a part all the same. Hopefully, you wouldn't notice any of the effects work I did.

In the future, the parts will get bigger.. I hope!
Posted: Thu, 3rd Jun 2010, 1:13pm

Post 65 of 69

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

It's a shame you didn't create a single grain of sand Hybrid that was used in the final film. Then you could claim that to be your grain of sand.

I'd like that. Especially if it was a grain of sand that landed in Jake's eye, rendering him blind and thus I could take over as the Prince and play like hell with the dagger. It'd be like Bernards Watch.. only better.
Posted: Thu, 3rd Jun 2010, 1:18pm

Post 66 of 69

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

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

In the future, the parts will get bigger.. I hope!
That's what she said.
Posted: Thu, 3rd Jun 2010, 3:49pm

Post 67 of 69

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Rating: +1

er-no wrote:

It's a shame you didn't create a single grain of sand Hybrid that was used in the final film. Then you could claim that to be your grain of sand.

I'd like that. Especially if it was a grain of sand that landed in Jake's eye, rendering him blind and thus I could take over as the Prince and play like hell with the dagger. It'd be like Bernards Watch.. only better.
One shot I did required staring at, and recreating Jake's crotch (this lasted a week). So for one shot, you could say that Jake's crotch is mine.
Posted: Sat, 5th Jun 2010, 10:02am

Post 68 of 69

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

Rating: +1

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

er-no wrote:

It's a shame you didn't create a single grain of sand Hybrid that was used in the final film. Then you could claim that to be your grain of sand.

I'd like that. Especially if it was a grain of sand that landed in Jake's eye, rendering him blind and thus I could take over as the Prince and play like hell with the dagger. It'd be like Bernards Watch.. only better.
One shot I did required staring at, and recreating Jake's crotch (this lasted a week). So for one shot, you could say that Jake's crotch is mine.
Look! A crack!
Posted: Mon, 6th Sep 2010, 1:16am

Post 69 of 69

TheWrathPrince

Force: 0 | Joined: 6th Sep 2010 | Posts: 1

Member

Joecool1081 wrote:

http://movies.ign.com/dor/objects/664420/prince-of-persia/videos/pop_mov_trl1_110209.html

Check it out and let me know what you think, Great effects from what I saw but maybe a little skeptical on the story we'll see as more footage it released
the movie was good and the adaptation of the movie from the game POP sands of time was closely the same. It defer from the ending and how the prince unleashed the sands of time, same as the dagger and swords I thought they create a replica of the dagger(POP game) but does not mean I I don't like UC2679 dagger(movie). But above all it's a cool movie and I can't wait for the part2.

____________________________
"I'm the destroyer of my destiny" -
prince of persia sword