erasure fan1
Well-Known Member
No, no, no, It's the new one. He's calling it King Iger II. It's glorious.Well that is already paid for with the $40M in stock he just sold, he's putting together that retirement plan. So much for him not leaving.
No, no, no, It's the new one. He's calling it King Iger II. It's glorious.Well that is already paid for with the $40M in stock he just sold, he's putting together that retirement plan. So much for him not leaving.
Funny, but lets not clog up this thread with stuff about Iger, who will be transitioning back to retirement by the time this movie releases.No, no, no, It's the new one. He's calling it King Iger II. It's glorious.
just curious disney irish are you from ireland? I've been to scotland and england. beautiful countries!No, no, no, It's the new one. He's calling it King Iger II. It's glorious.
You didn't quote me in your post, rather quoting another poster, but no I'm not from Ireland. I'm Californian of Irish descent.just curious disney irish are you from ireland? I've been to scotland and england. beautiful countries!
That's pretty neat...my wife's family originates from there...where I went in Scotland years ago had Celtic origins, very similar to Ireland I believe...not sure about that though...You didn't quote me in your post, rather quoting another poster, but no I'm not from Ireland. I'm Californian of Irish descent.
The Celts got around, so very similar origins.That's pretty neat...my wife's family originates from there...where I went in Scotland years ago had Celtic origins, very similar to Ireland I believe...not sure about that though...
Speaking of Kings, not necessarily Disney ones, this is pretty cool:No, no, no, It's the new one. He's calling it King Iger II. It's glorious.
And Gaelic, of course too!The Celts got around, so very similar origins.
Speaking of Kings, not necessarily Disney ones, this is pretty cool:
Here's the first teaser for Moana, in theaters July 10, 2026:
New poster:
Yes because real water can be controlled so it could twisted up and made into shapes at will in real life.It's still CGI water!
I don’t think that was what he was getting at. The point is that this film seems entirely superfluous—not only is it barely any newer than the original, but it offers nothing that is visually superior or notable. I’m normally OK with the remakes, but this one is just absurd all round.Yes because real water can be controlled so it could twisted up and made into shapes at will in real life.![]()
My point is that there isn't much of a visual difference between the animated CGI water and the CGI water in the remake. It's less of a stark difference than doing a live action remake of a traditionally animated film.Yes because real water can be controlled so it could twisted up and made into shapes at will in real life.![]()
There is only some much you can do to "better" the CG of water. Look at even Avatar 2 just a couple years ago, which was praised for its visuals especially the CG water physics, the CG water physics in that film look pretty similar to what they are doing here. I would imagine they are using the same techniques if not the same software for the CG water here that they did for Avatar 2.My point is that there isn't much of a visual difference between the animated CGI water and the CGI water in the remake. It's less of a stark difference than doing a live action remake of a traditionally animated film.
I'm not saying its not superfluous, most of the live action remakes are. It was just that this idea that somehow the CG water was going to be visually different was silly. Its water, you can only do so much to make it visually different between this and the animated movie.I don’t think that was what he was getting at. The point is that this film seems entirely superfluous—not only is it barely any newer than the original, but it offers nothing that is visually superior or notable. I’m normally OK with the remakes, but this one is just absurd all round.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.