Alita: Battle Angel

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Well, I don't think "not liking something" is the same as "hating" something, but go ahead...use the vernacular of an eighth-grader on anyone that has a different opinion than you.
 
Well, I don't think "not liking something" is the same as "hating" something, but go ahead...use the vernacular of an eighth-grader on anyone that has a different opinion than you.
Well, consider that you're probably the most negative person on here, i often wonder if you even like any movies, and you're ripping this movie apart having never seen it.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 
I am ripping apart the few minutes I've seen of it. It looks awful.

There are plenty of movies that I love with a passion. But apparently they're not the same as yours, so I'm a "Hater."
 
I am ripping apart the few minutes I've seen of it. It looks awful.

There are plenty of movies that I love with a passion. But apparently they're not the same as yours, so I'm a "Hater."

There's plenty of movies that I don't care to see based on the trailer but I don't waste my time in the threads dedicated to those movies.

But to each their own I guess.
 
The irony is that if Zemeckis had the technology at the time, Who Framed Roger Rabbit would've turned out exactly like Alita.
 
The irony is that if Zemeckis had the technology at the time, Who Framed Roger Rabbit would've turned out exactly like Alita.

Well I thank my lucky stars that he didn't. Hand drawn cel animation will always look magical. Bad CGI will always look like rubbery uncanny valley.
 
I am ripping apart the few minutes I've seen of it. It looks awful.

There are plenty of movies that I love with a passion. But apparently they're not the same as yours, so I'm a "Hater."

Wait so you haven't even watched the movie? And you wonder why you're being called a hater? :huh :lol

So you have time to come into this particular thread and say that the few minutes you did watch the cgi was "awful." :lol There's not one instance when I watched it where that is even remotely the case. Bare minimum I'd say it's on par with most other movies with extensive cgi and that's an understatement.
 
Is she supposed to look like a real person or is she supposed to be a cartoon? Cause that scene with her eating chocolate didn't look like any real person. She also gives the sarcastic Dreamworks smirk just like a cartoon character.

CGI can do some amazing things but they still can't make a convincing human being.
 
So you have time to come into this particular thread and say that the few minutes you did watch the cgi was "awful."

And what's with the implication that it takes "time" to comment on any thread? It's Saturday night. I'm on summer break. I've got nothing but time.

I get that a lot of you enjoyed the movie, but I have a dissenting opinion. To the average movie-goer it most likely came across as creepy or even gross looking. I can understand why people didn't go see it.

By the way, I've had the original anime on VHS since it first came out in America. When was that...mid to late 90s? It was all right. Nothing ground breaking and unfortunately didn't have the budget for great animation. But I understand the appeal of the character design, especially from the original manga, which is surely what got James Cameron's attention in the first place. I just happen to think what worked in print and as a cartoon looks weird and fairly revolting when it's attempted in live action. A real actor wearing a suit might have looked better...or even a real actor's face...but that cartoony face just grosses me out. Sorry. I've been an anime fan since I was a little kid. I LIKE cartoon girls with big eyes. I'm just content to leave them as cartoons.
 
Agreed! There was no feeling of uncanny valley in this movie. This was, imo, Gollum level CGI.

And I don't remember people complaining about the size of Gollum's eyes.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

Alita puts Gollum to shame. Her eyes had 100 times more detail that Gollums.
 
Picked up the 3D/4K steelbook and watched it last night - great flick. Hoping for a sequel. Maybe if Cameron makes Disney enough $$$ on the Avatar sequels, they’ll let him make another Alita, which seems to be another of his passion projects.
 
Is she supposed to look like a real person or is she supposed to be a cartoon? Cause that scene with her eating chocolate didn't look like any real person. She also gives the sarcastic Dreamworks smirk just like a cartoon character.

CGI can do some amazing things but they still can't make a convincing human being.

She's not supposed to look like a real person because she isn't a person... At least not externally. She has a human brain and that's about it.
 
I saw the movie twice, and I don't think the CGI eyes were convincing with Alita.
Gollum for the most part worked because he and his face was entirely CGI, however in the Return of the King Prologue where Smeagol in a montage transforms into Gollum, there was some really bad CGI eyes that look far worse than anything in Alita.

Most of the rest of the CGI in Alita was good though, which is how I feel about Alita, it was good, just not great.
 
Back
Top