Matthew
I think that it is necessary that this movie has a realistic look to it rather than a cartoon look. A more realistic look will fit in far better with its live action predecessors than a cartoon look. I also think that it is important for Ghostbusters to actually have a scary side to it. The scene in the New York Public library? The scene where the hands grab Dana from the couch? etc etc I just don't think the scares which are so important in Ghostbusters can be acheived if the film is given a cartoon look.

I have one word for you, Matthew: VERISIMILITUDE. The movie needs to look like real life, but exaggerated slightly.

But not so much exaggerated that it looks like:



Btw, Sony Imageworks did the animation for Polar Express and Monster House, both two completely different styles. So it's just up to them of which style they'll do.

And I'm expecting the movie to be motion captured too.

Matthew
I think that it is necessary that this movie has a realistic look to it rather than a cartoon look. A more realistic look will fit in far better with its live action predecessors than a cartoon look. I also think that it is important for Ghostbusters to actually have a scary side to it. The scene in the New York Public library? The scene where the hands grab Dana from the couch? etc etc I just don't think the scares which are so important in Ghostbusters can be acheived if the film is given a cartoon look.

Exactly. Not to mention that this movie is suppose to be a sequel, it's Ghostbusters III. Not RGB the movie. And if it's a sequel then it's gotta have the same style as the previous 2.

I kind of know what you mean. Like Spitting Image? Make Venkmans nose bigger than it really is, Stanzs eye closer together etc etc. That could actually work.

here's an example

http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/S/htmlS/spittingimag/spittingimag.htm

The woman with the big lips scared me lol.

I'm not gonna be the happiest if they all have giant heads and small bodies and eyes the size of fish's.

The spitting image characters are really well designed. they just take recognisable people and exagerate their features. If they did this to the characters in a CGI version of Ghostbusters III I think that it could work quite well.

:p

What I'm talking about is a slight slight exageration. No massive heads or big bodies with tint little legs etc. Even if they try to make the actors as real as possible (which I prefer) they still wont look or feel real anyway.

fome


:p

What's that directed towards? The Spitting images thing?

Matthew
What I'm talking about is a slight slight exageration. No massive heads or big bodies with tint little legs etc. Even if they try to make the actors as real as possible (which I prefer) they still wont look or feel real anyway.

Motion capture like on Polar Express. That way they feel real and look very realistic.

Again, I am not to excited till I see something. CGI, well, ok then. If the style sucks, then forget it.

Just makes no sense to me. If Murray's willing to have his name attached in voice, what's the difference if his face is in it? If he's worrying about it turning out to be a GB2 and being criticized, he's still going to be the number 1 target either way.

I'm not totally against the idea of a CGI movie, and I'm really really resisting knocking this thing outright. But I just can't imagine any style of CGI that'd work for this kind of thing. The backgrounds, settings, New York, busting and trapping - I can see a world of benefits in these regards. But characters? NOTHING is coming to mind. And methinks Murray is not going to stand around for a bunch of motion captures.

Siiigh…if you're gonna fucking do it, Murray, commit all the way.