• Categories

Vanilla 1.1.4 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

 
  1. Thinking about the action material, I want Sgt. Silvestri for "The A-Team", but we'll see...
    The views and opinions of Ford A. Thaxton are his own and do not necessarily reflect the ones of ANYONE else.
  2. You mean Sarge Silvestri (sounds more badass) wink
    "considering I've seen an enormous debate here about The Amazing Spider-Man and the ones who love it, and the ones who hate it, I feel myself obliged to say: TASTE DIFFERS, DEAL WITH IT" - Thomas G.
  3. Justin, you want A-Team to sound like Sgt. Bilko? shocked wink
    http://www.filmmusic.pl - Polish Film Music Review Website
  4. Are you familiar with the action material from that?
    The views and opinions of Ford A. Thaxton are his own and do not necessarily reflect the ones of ANYONE else.
  5. I don't remember the film too well, so I can't recall if it has much action.
    http://www.filmmusic.pl - Polish Film Music Review Website
  6. I think a suite is in order. I'll cook something up soon for the suite thread.
    The views and opinions of Ford A. Thaxton are his own and do not necessarily reflect the ones of ANYONE else.
  7. ^

    COOL ! Never heard Sgt. Bilko myself. cool
    "considering I've seen an enormous debate here about The Amazing Spider-Man and the ones who love it, and the ones who hate it, I feel myself obliged to say: TASTE DIFFERS, DEAL WITH IT" - Thomas G.
  8. Two suites, maybe later today, or tomorrow; one reflecting the action material I think would work (if re-worked properly) for TA-T, and then a sutie of other material -- hopefully you'll all hear why it's one of my favorite Silvestri scores.
    The views and opinions of Ford A. Thaxton are his own and do not necessarily reflect the ones of ANYONE else.
    • CommentAuthorAnthony
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2010
    A short clip from the A Team with score.

    http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=27955
    •  
      CommentAuthorDemetris
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2010
    hm..
    Love Maintitles. It's full of Wanders.
    •  
      CommentAuthorErik Woods
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2010
    Wow! Does that ever suck!

    -Erik-
    host and executive producer of THE CINEMATIC SOUND RADIO PODCAST | www.cinematicsound.net | www.facebook.com/cinematicsound | I HAVE TINNITUS!
  9. Son of a bitch -- the film is actually WORSE than I imagined. It looks like pure fucking garbage.
    The views and opinions of Ford A. Thaxton are his own and do not necessarily reflect the ones of ANYONE else.
    •  
      CommentAuthorErik Woods
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2010 edited
    Everything from 1:17 on in this intro to the old TV series is better than what's in that bloated pile of crap clip above. Why? REAL STUNTS! This fifth season intro rocks, too!

    SLOW MO JEEP CRASHES! Now that's entertainment!!!!

    -Erik-
    host and executive producer of THE CINEMATIC SOUND RADIO PODCAST | www.cinematicsound.net | www.facebook.com/cinematicsound | I HAVE TINNITUS!
    •  
      CommentAuthorDreamTheater
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2010 edited
    Erik Woods wrote
    Wow! Does that ever suck!

    -Erik-


    I thought it was cool, in that typical Hollywood overblown sense. It's a movie to put your brain in neutral, that's for sure, just like the series was. And the budget allows for some totally ridiculous CGI trickery so I expect some ridiculous stunts & effects.

    Ah well I don't think it'll be a letdown though. In the end it all comes down to two things: is the fun present (explosions, actions and stunts), and is there real chemistry between those 4 guys? That's enough for me basically.
    "considering I've seen an enormous debate here about The Amazing Spider-Man and the ones who love it, and the ones who hate it, I feel myself obliged to say: TASTE DIFFERS, DEAL WITH IT" - Thomas G.
    •  
      CommentAuthorDemetris
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2010
    Of course it looks crap; what did you expect though?

    (the score sounds like Crappy.I.Jane too)
    Love Maintitles. It's full of Wanders.
    •  
      CommentAuthorThor
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2010 edited
    Anthony wrote
    A short clip from the A Team with score.

    http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=27955


    Ouch, that looks hilariously crappy. Also makes Spielberg's noisy 1941 (one of the noisiest films I've ever seen) come off as Tarkovsky in comparison.

    But hey, it's just a 30-second action clip. I'm willing to give it a chance.
    I am extremely serious.
    •  
      CommentAuthorDemetris
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2010
    You're courageous.
    Love Maintitles. It's full of Wanders.
  10. I pity the fool who sees this.
    The views and opinions of Ford A. Thaxton are his own and do not necessarily reflect the ones of ANYONE else.
    •  
      CommentAuthorErik Woods
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2010 edited
    DreamTheater wrote
    Erik Woods wrote
    Wow! Does that ever suck!

    -Erik-


    I thought it was cool, in that typical Hollywood overblown sense. It's a movie to put your brain in neutral, that's for sure, just like the series was. And the budget allows for some totally ridiculous CGI trickery so I expect some ridiculous stunts & effects.

    Ah well I don't think it'll be a letdown though. In the end it all comes down to two things: is the fun present (explosions, actions and stunts), and is there real chemistry between those 4 guys? That's enough for me basically.


    I have no issue with stuff blowing up and lots of special effects... just as long as the effects are SPECIAL!!! I've seen the original A-Team so I know about the camp value... shooting down planes while falling from the sky in a tank is par for the course but it's the fact that they spent millions on that sequence and it looks like SHIT! They aren't even trying anymore. It looks like a crappy video game. I don't want to spend $12-$15 to watch a video game.

    Like I said earlier, give me more real stunts... real cars crashing, slow mo jeeps doing aerials, real explosions, real airplanes chasing our good guys... then I'll gladly pay my hard earned cash. Until then, I might as well rent the original series, pop some popcorn and kick up my feet in my big ass leather recliner.

    -Erik-
    host and executive producer of THE CINEMATIC SOUND RADIO PODCAST | www.cinematicsound.net | www.facebook.com/cinematicsound | I HAVE TINNITUS!
    •  
      CommentAuthorDemetris
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2010 edited
    ^ Yeap, on his 2nd paragraph, i.e. what action movies used to be.
    Love Maintitles. It's full of Wanders.
  11. Well I love those old-school real stunts too, don't get me wrong. But Hollywood won't be taking those risks anymore, because those old-school stunts we love demand money up the wazoo, a crack stunt team willing to do them and lots of time, something which can also add to the money-factor. If they can do it in a computer with a minimum of risk, effort and money, they won't think twice to do it. It's sad, but it's reality.

    I don't know, I don't think it looks like a videogame. But then I happen to love videogames, and how they're portrayed visually. I think I have a somewhat higher threshold because games used to look very simplistic once, compared to now, so I can accept those videogame style graphics more easily I think. Don't know if that makes sense. dizzy

    I'll say it again, if those 4 guys manage to do what Peppard and co did back in the day, it'll be enough for me.
    "considering I've seen an enormous debate here about The Amazing Spider-Man and the ones who love it, and the ones who hate it, I feel myself obliged to say: TASTE DIFFERS, DEAL WITH IT" - Thomas G.
    • CommentAuthorBigMacGyver
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2010 edited
    I also dont buy that notion of "it looks like cgi so its crap". Instead, i like to look at the actual content of the clip and it gives me exactly what the a-team is about: one-liners, over-the-top crazyness and nobody getting hurt despite insane explosions and stuff. I find it funny that these planes are no actual planes but drones without pilots. That's perfectly in the spirit of the series. It would have been unforgiveable if these would have been planes with human pilots getting blown up. The score in the sequence is perfectly nice too. Silvestri is for me the master of synch-points whereas most of action music today just consists of boring, repetitive layers that sound like the composer was afraid to actually highlight any of the action thats going on in front of him. Love how that brass strikes when the computer screen goes to white noise as the rocket hits the big plane. If the rest of the score is just like that with some big a-team theme moments thrown in, i will be a happy camper.

    And for those who are put off by the cgi-ness of the clip, this is just a short promotional clip and there might be a chance that there's still some good old stunt work in the movie. Remember that trailer with B.A. sliding down the front of a skyscraper? That looked like actual stunt work to me. And even if theres heavy cgi you should never forget that it can also involve dangerous stunts performed in a green screen studio. Just because a stunt is cgi enhanced does not make it any less spectacular.
    •  
      CommentAuthorErik Woods
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2010
    BigMacGyver wrote
    I also dont buy that notion of "it looks like cgi so its crap".


    But in this case it does look like crap! I'm not against CGI if used properly (Terminator 2, Jurassic Park, The Lord of the Rings, Avatar). In this case it's just one big CGI bukkake. No thanks!

    -Erik-
    host and executive producer of THE CINEMATIC SOUND RADIO PODCAST | www.cinematicsound.net | www.facebook.com/cinematicsound | I HAVE TINNITUS!
    • CommentAuthorBigMacGyver
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2010 edited
    And that's exactly what i don't buy. It can't always be an effect that you don't notice as such or that blends in so well you won't recognize it. Effects that show themselves as such can also be charming on their own because no matter how you put it, lots of people are putting lots of effort into these images to give the director exactly what he wants and if this is what he wants his effects to look like then they did a terrific job. As far as i am concerned, i can also enjoy a "cgi bukkake" as long as the other elements are coming together and the clip shows nothing that makes me worrying about that aspect. Trailers also did nothing wrong for me, so it is promising to be a fun ride. If you can't let go just because you don't like the effects... well, that's your decision and you have made it. To me though, this is just as strange as people claiming that they don't like thin red line because hans zimmer scored it.
    •  
      CommentAuthorErik Woods
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2010 edited
    BigMacGyver wrote
    And that's exactly what i don't buy. It can't always be an effect that you don't notice as such or that blends in so well you won't recognize it.


    Oh, I like to take notice of special effects... especially when they work and you're left dumbstruck as to how they did it. (Any of the kick ass space battle sequences in Return of the Jedi come to mind) But when there is an overload of CGI where it becomes distracting then I'm completely taken out of film (The Star Wars Prequels)

    BigMacGyver wrote
    Effects that show themselves as such can also be charming on their own because no matter how you put it, lots of people are putting lots of effort into these images to give the director exactly what he wants and if this is what he wants his effects to look like then they did a terrific job.


    Bah! I understand that there's thousands of man hours of work up there on screen but if it looks like shit then it was a complete waste of their time! And there is nothing charming about the spooge on screen in that A-Team clip!

    BigMacGyver wrote
    Trailers also did nothing wrong for me, so it is promising to be a fun ride. If you can't let go just because you don't like the effects... well, that's your decision and you have made it.


    I enjoyed the trailer as well. But like I said earlier... I would prefer more REAL STUNTS and REAL CAR CHASES over blue screen CGI effects. But if it is neccsary to use CGI then directors should take some notes from David Fincher and his brilliant use of the technology in Zodiac.

    BigMacGyver wrote
    To me though, this is just as strange as people claiming that they don't like thin red line because hans zimmer scored it.


    Actually, Zimmer's score is the only aspect of that bloated turd of a film that I do like!

    -Erik-
    host and executive producer of THE CINEMATIC SOUND RADIO PODCAST | www.cinematicsound.net | www.facebook.com/cinematicsound | I HAVE TINNITUS!
    •  
      CommentAuthorBobdH
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2010
    For what it's worth, Sharlto (who plays Murdoch) has said he thought the tank-scene shouldn't have been in the trailer, because it wasn't representative for the film as a whole.
    •  
      CommentAuthorErik Woods
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2010
    BobdH wrote
    For what it's worth, Sharlto (who plays Murdoch) has said he thought the tank-scene shouldn't have been in the trailer, because it wasn't representative for the film as a whole.


    Now that is interesting. I still want to see the movie and hopefully there are better action sequences than the tank freefall!

    -Erik-
    host and executive producer of THE CINEMATIC SOUND RADIO PODCAST | www.cinematicsound.net | www.facebook.com/cinematicsound | I HAVE TINNITUS!
    •  
      CommentAuthorBobdH
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2010 edited
    BigMacGyver wrote
    Effects that show themselves as such can also be charming on their own because no matter how you put it, lots of people are putting lots of effort into these images to give the director exactly what he wants and if this is what he wants his effects to look like then they did a terrific job.


    I don't get this... Following this logic, every big tentpole blockbuster would be brilliant, just because so many people were involved. Including The Matrix Revolutions, Wild Wild West and Bad Boys 2. If effects don't work, blame the director, but his personal vision is not an excuse to present something that doesn't work.
    • CommentAuthorBigMacGyver
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2010 edited
    That might be true, but you have to admit thats equally unjustified to judge the work of these people and the director based on a short clip that likely was choosen for marketing purposes by people who have no idea about content but rather about sales.

    Furthermore, im missing a definition of a good cgi effect. Is it a good effect if the movie it was made for made lots of money? Is it a good effect if you can only live with it because it does not stick out of the picture? And where lies every single persons limited for that? I'd say if everything comes together i don't mind a cgi-heavy scene with "screaming" effects because it can also be the other way around. Example: transformers 2. Cool effects but one turkey of a movie where even the simplest principles of film making were ignored by its director.
    •  
      CommentAuthorErik Woods
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2010
    BigMacGyver wrote
    Furthermore, im missing a definition of a good cgi effect.


    Look at my Zodiac examples above.

    -Erik-
    host and executive producer of THE CINEMATIC SOUND RADIO PODCAST | www.cinematicsound.net | www.facebook.com/cinematicsound | I HAVE TINNITUS!