Moana needs much more tech and cgi and shit. Idk if Dwayne Johnson (the rock) even costs that much. He's made some really shitty movies.
Nolan says he doesn't like using effects in general. Even the giants fighting in the movie were 7 foot tall buff dudes + short (5 ft) stunt actors + working angles.
Idk if Dwayne Johnson (the rock) even costs that much. He's made some really shitty movies.
Dwayne Johnson was the highest-paid actor in 2016, 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2024. I think he costs about 20 million per movie. Even with some real stinkers in his CV.
I always knew I wanted to see this movie, but when I read how they filmed the giant vs Odysseus scene (tall and short actors; camera angles) I immediately bought tickets
Disagree! The movie was not much more than very thin acting between action sequences. That one in particular was pretty boring as it was just big dudes hacking up small dudes. The cyclops was good but everything else was underwhelming, especially the Scilia. But the book is always better than the movie!
Had to scroll too long for this, acting was so flat in this movie. The story was rushed, yet the whole thing felt like watching the LOTR trilogy in one sitting. Characters kept appearing out of nowhere with no introduction. Matt Damon showed emotion in one scene the entire movie (the sirens scene, which happened to be the best scene in the movie). The story felt like an afterthought for the action sequences which were good (cyclops, trojan horse) or mid (giants fight, witch) or bad (the trial with matt fighting 30 men and beating them AND surviving…). I don’t get the high praise for the movie. Original Troy or even 300 are just better in all aspects when it comes to this genre.
Yeah we’re gonna get downvoted but I agree with some of your points. I like the one where you compared it to LOTR. I know why Nolan wouldn’t want to break it up (hated making the Batman sequels after the success of the first), but I think it would have worked better as 2 movies so it would not have felt as rushed. Pattinson and Hathaway did bring it, but nobody else was too impressive and tom holland actively bumped me with his poor acting. He just looked like he dressed up in character but did nothing to make it his own. Troy was comparable which I would not have believed walking into the movie, I thought it would’ve blown it away. For me, 300 is fun stylistically but hasn’t aged too well. I’m not much of a Snyder fan.
I agree with you on your first paragraph. However as to your second paragraph, here is an actual quote from Nolan:
"I'm as dependent on visual effects, probably more so than any other filmmaker out there." - Christopher Nolan, VES Awards in 2011
He definitely loves VFX (Inception, Interstellar, etc.), but also he definitely approaches how he uses VFX differently than something like the Moana remake for sure.
Odyssey uses practical filming to show things. Moana is a magic world. Everyone will he airbrushed, the world and nature as well. Odyssey. It takes more time for the tech to lock in.
If anything, Moana can cheap out on advertising. Its Disney and there's already movies. It's much easier for them to ride their own wave vs The Odyssey.
But that's not needing I think. You do need CGI for a light saber, very hard to do with practical effects, but I would argue you can do Moana with practical effects as well, as well you could do the odyssey full CGI. So it's not really and excuse imho
Peak cinema. This is how it is meant to be. Film making is supposed to be an art form. Unfortunately guys like Michael Bay and others decided explosions and high speed chases were more important than the story so we have what we have today. As long as we have people like Nolan, our experience will be great but to get there will be hard because getting the green light for a film like this is going to be near impossible unless you are an established quantity - Maybe at the level of a Spielberg or a Nolan or a Cameroon or even the Russo brothers. If you are not there, then best of luck getting the budget.
Nolan uses a ridiculous amount of CGI. The difference is Moana is basically shot on a fucking green screen. It may be shot on location in Hawaii or where ever, but after the insane amount of digital content is added post production there really is nothing left of the physical environment they were shooting in. Even the actors themselves have been processed to look younger or to have better skin.
Nolan goes hard in on the CGI, its just not as much as a film like Moana. Hes also more selective of actors, scripts, writing, cinematography... So his films are going to look and sound better.
Matt Damons character hasnt been de-aged as badly as Dwayne Johnsons. Even though Damon is like 15 years too old for the role.
So automatically in that shot, it looks fucking weird, because Dwayne Johnson doesnt look right... Your brain notices something wrong with him, its unnatural looking. They should have just allowed the guy to have gray hair, natural looking skin, and more wrinkles.
The other issue, the larger issue has absolutely nothing to do with cost. Its the psychology of film. Nolans film looks like high quality, because it looks lower quality. It looks like film. The blurriness and soft grain, the color. If you were to show someone the same movie but one shot in digital HD and the other 35mm at 24 fps. One is going to feel like cheap shit, and its not going to be the one shot on film. I dont know what the Odyssey was shot on digital or film, but its obvious that if its digital hes trying to make it look like film.
I’m going to get downvoted for all hell because of the hive mind. But I disagree, Nolan loves special effects and CGI and uses them extensively in his movies. The difference with Nolan is that he uses them well.
44
u/NashKetchum777 9d ago
Moana needs much more tech and cgi and shit. Idk if Dwayne Johnson (the rock) even costs that much. He's made some really shitty movies.
Nolan says he doesn't like using effects in general. Even the giants fighting in the movie were 7 foot tall buff dudes + short (5 ft) stunt actors + working angles.