Require that executives not be allowed to have any publicly traded stock in the industry, esp. in that company.
Likewise, they are not allowed to have stock in competitors.
A bunch of nerds on a nerdsite ripping things apart for not being popular enough. And then, if that weren't enough, offering opinions on how to make things popular.
Be still, my gaping laugh hole.
jokes don't get funnier the more you tell them.
You obviously aren't very familiar with Slashdot. Or the Internet, for that matter.
Well, some effects are okay.
Unless you changed the setting to the current day (Gatsby as drug dealer?) you can't use real footage of New York unless you only have fairly tight shots outside in front of buildings that are from the 20s and can be 'dressed up' to their appearance from that time. (More neon, fewer translucent plastic panel signs, etc.). Some effects like matte paintings can be used for establishing shots and replacement backgrounds, or even entire shots minus the actors. Here's an example: http://youtu.be/mCXE9cNzcgI
I agree that too much of this would cause the budget to balloon, and wouldn't add anything of quality to the movie, but used judiciously, I think effects can be worthwhile and not break the bank.
Kids today also think they invented the blowjob
Though at some point he had the choice between working on Bee Movie or Kung Fu Panda. He chose Bee Movie ("Jerry Seinfeld is writing, producing, and starring in it!") and will always regret that decision
Oddly, they seem to have been produced in parallel, with neither inspiring the other. Bugs's Life was released just 2 months after Antz, with both in production for quite some time beforehand (the final render pass for each likely took more than 2 months).
A friend of mine worked on Antz (and is still at PDI/Dreamworks). The movie itself was in development for more like 3 years, not 2 months. And WAAY more than 2 months to render the final frames. Remember, this was 1998. Each frame took hours to render, depending on the complexity. A Bug's Life reportedly took up to 100 hours to render some frames (though Pixar's tools were notably not as efficient as PDI's).
Not coincidence, but synchronicity: computer animation had just reached the point where you could take a leap forward in realism, as long as you didn't try for hair or muscles-under-skin. Toy Story was the breakthrough, but "what else doesn't have hair or muscles?"
Well... not quite. The real story of the two movies is fairly interesting, and revolves around Jeffrey Katzenberg (who left Disney to start Dreamworks). Turns out the Antz concept came first (almost 10 years earlier) but Katzenberg decided to make it largely in response to Pixar's project and feeling slighted by its competition with another Dreamworks release (The Prince of Egypt).
It's a real shame people have to be competitive. Life would be so much better if those of us who are productive in more than a "stock-the-cooler, flip-the-burger, greet-people-at-walmart" sense were forced to provide a comfortable lifestyle for everyone else. After all, being entertained is the most important thing after whining about how it's not fair that you somehow have to be competitive.
I don't have any particular reason to shit on this, since I think it's pretty cool, but I want to be a Slashdot hipster so I hate this and the people who made it are stupid and this is nothing new and I'm sure someone here made this back in 1996 but kept it quiet because they aren't an attention whore.
I'm curious, how many people would be living in such splendid circumstances as we have without modern medicine?
Or maybe you're just being super subtle with sarcasm and I missed it.
be the first to see the new Bieber vampire movie
Why bother? He doesn't need to play a vampire in order to suck.
Because the basic laws of physics didn't follow Moore's Law over that time, unfortunately...
Natural laws have no pity.