(no subject)

Date: 2011-07-06 03:24 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] whisperkit.livejournal.com
Teehehehe. I really shouldn't be surprised by this.

(no subject)

Date: 2011-07-06 03:49 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] kafziel.livejournal.com
Yeah, you really shouldn't. Everybody does it. Ridley Scott reused footage from The Shining when making Bladerunner. It means saving a fortune on special effects, one less car's worth of metal and plastic built just to be destroyed and thrown out, and unless you start going through movies frame by frame looking for an excuse to hate on a director you already hate, it's unnoticeable.

(no subject)

Date: 2011-07-06 03:51 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] theweaselking.livejournal.com
Or, sometimes it's noticeable and that's okay.

(no subject)

Date: 2011-07-07 04:51 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pappy-legba.livejournal.com
"noticeable to an obsessed action movie junkie who puts together animated gifs" or "noticeable once you see side-by-side evidence" are very narrow definitions of "noticeable." I doubt that a fraction of a percent of moviegoers said to themselves, "hey! that's the car from The Island!"

(no subject)

Date: 2011-07-07 11:41 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] theweaselking.livejournal.com
I wasn't suggesting that this was one of them. But the use of stock footage, particularly of planes and explosions, is sometimes very noticeable.

And, of course, The Wilhelm Scream is the classic example.

(no subject)

Date: 2011-07-06 03:45 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] stormfeather.livejournal.com
Duuuude, artists/filmmakers should REALLY know better than to think they can get away with this shit in the current day of the internets (and bored searchy people)

(no subject)

Date: 2011-07-06 03:50 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] theweaselking.livejournal.com
There's no particular reason to destroy a NEW car when you have perfectly good old car-destroying footage to paint over.

But it's still funny.

(no subject)

Date: 2011-07-06 03:58 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mejoff.livejournal.com
Damn right. I hate the thought of defending Bay over anything, but 'waste not, want not' is a sensible point.

Roger Corman, of course, was the greatest exponent of this technique. Look at Battle Beyond The Stars, then look at Space Raiders.

(no subject)

Date: 2011-07-06 07:00 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cuddlycthulhu.livejournal.com
Damn right. I hate the thought of defending Bay over anything, but 'waste not, want not' is a sensible point.

Especially when you consider the cost. I have a few friends who work for Tippit Studios. The amount of money they bill for doing some of their CGI work is obscene.

(no subject)

Date: 2011-07-07 12:05 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] lederhosen.livejournal.com
It happens within individual movies too. I have fond memories of Robert Rodriguez' commentary on one of the "Spy Kids" flicks. It went something like this:

"Okay, see this scene here? All those rocks? You know how many rocks we actually used? Guess! One! That's right, just one rock! We didn't have the money to use two rocks, so we just painted up one rock, shot it from several different angles, and edited them together!"

(Also, compare the car chase music from "The Rock" to the PotC soundtrack...)

(no subject)

Date: 2011-07-07 08:26 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mejoff.livejournal.com
And the music from Gladiator!

(no subject)

Date: 2011-07-06 03:56 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ucnu112.livejournal.com
Not being snarky, just trying to inform; this is why they used the same footage:

http://archive.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/09/woman-remains-unconscious-after-transformers-accident.html

http://jalopnik.com/5629380/extra-has-skull-sliced-open-on-transformers-3-set

(no subject)

Date: 2011-07-06 03:57 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] whisperkit.livejournal.com
Ouch. :/ Didn't realise that.

Profile

theweaselking: (Default)theweaselking
Page generated Feb. 7th, 2026 04:53 am