From the perspective of the history of film development, technology has always been an extremely important driving force. Animated movies are no exception. Big animation studios like Pixar, DreamWorks, and Blue Sky Studio basically release an animation blockbuster every year. These films, relying on computer technology, bring us a new visual experience. However, wait a minute, in fact, I personally think that the real top company in CGI technology should actually be Industrial Light and Magic.
This "rango" is very telling.
In terms of plot, this film can only be regarded as medium, but in terms of technology, Industrial Light and Magic is much stronger.
But it is very strange that although ILM's technology is advanced, it has never made animated feature films before (maybe George Lucas hates cartoons?) However, in the field of film special effects, I believe ILM said the second, No one dares to say number one. Perhaps in recent years, the lively box office of cartoons has also attracted Industrial Light and Magic, so they tested this one. However, whether these technical controllers will continue to do it, I don't know.
Back to movies.
From the first few shots, it can be seen that the technical level is obviously stronger than that of other companies (such as Pixar).
In the scenes where the protagonist appears, there are many scenes that can be faked (I really can't see any flaws). For example, the insect that died in the water, can you feel that it is fake? The toy fish (floating in the water), the cup held by the protagonist, and the umbrellas used for decoration on the cups and other small props, if these things did not appear in the hands of a lizard, you would think it was made by CG ?
However, the same objects appear in other films, and you can almost tell at a glance that they are fake.
But, I think, from a movie perspective, it's really another weird thing. Originally, cartoons are equivalent to creating a world out of thin air. In fact, people will have one in their subconscious. What I want to see is an artificial world, not a live-action movie. This world is just a microcosm of our real world. , or the film will take place somewhere in the world. Is it really necessary to reproduce the objects in the real world in such a real world of animation? Will it make people feel absurd?
If combined with the plot, this may really have some effect. After all, if you say that this is a spring and autumn dream made by the protagonist himself, it can also be explained in terms of the plot (the plot was originally ridiculous).
However, technically speaking, it should really be considered an improvement to be as realistic as possible.
View more about Rango reviews
