rotoscoping for "a scanner darkly"

J5 squared

Well-known member
Obviously this movie isn't out yet, but based off the previews and trailers what is peoples opinion of an entire movie that is rotoscoped? I was immediatly drawn to this film when i saw the trailer and it was all due to the style. But at the same time i find the technique to be very distracting. What do you all feel of an entire movie being released with this effect? Cool, stupid, don't care?
 
It must be a new trend now.
From what point do you find it distracting?
The only bad think is the guys who did the rotos. Very tedious and boring work!

Now I haven't seen any of those roto films like Walking Life, but I don't think this look gives much to the movie, it's only there to impress. Sure it would be better to view the real images/videos.
 
I find it distracting because what is normally a simple light shift on someones face is now a big block of a solid color sliding around. While you don't really notice changing shadows and such on someones face sharp edges like are in rotoscoping is very distracting to me.
 
Annoying. It looks cool for about two seconds, then it loses effect and makes you want to see the actors in REAL-LIFE.
 
pto2212 said:
Annoying. It looks cool for about two seconds, then it loses effect and makes you want to see the actors in REAL-LIFE.

yes it is interesting for a few minutes.
 
Eh - it's a style, and you watch the whole movie you get past it - like cars that talk in Cars. I know some folks who worked on it and have read a bit about the production - INCREDIBLY time consuming! Late and over budget. It's all hand drawn, so ya gotsta account for light changes somehow - it's basically like Illustrator with fills - not easy to do subtle shading and keyframe it.
 
This technique was also used in one of the segments of Lars von Trier's "The Five Obstructions."
 
i thought it looked cool at first but now the more i watch it i think its going to get annoying after a while too... the movie will still be cool though
 
Maybe this goes without saying...but the movie is done this way because of the story. It's not just a random sci-fi movie that they thought would look cool as a rotoscoped cartoon.

The story is about drugs, paranoia, disorientation, varying perceptions of reality, etc...They chose the medium because it serves the story perfectly, in the same way that the surreal story of "Waking Life" was suited to the roto-scoping technique. I almost think the filmmakers want that amount of distraction caused by the unusual style. It keeps the viewer aware that this is an abnormal movie that takes place in an abnormal version of reality.
 
jaustere said:
Maybe this goes without saying...but the movie is done this way because of the story. It's not just a random sci-fi movie that they thought would look cool as a rotoscoped cartoon.

The story is about drugs, paranoia, disorientation, varying perceptions of reality, etc...They chose the medium because it serves the story perfectly, in the same way that the surreal story of "Waking Life" was suited to the roto-scoping technique. I almost think the filmmakers want that amount of distraction caused by the unusual style. It keeps the viewer aware that this is an abnormal movie that takes place in an abnormal version of reality.

Exactly what I was thinking about this thread...Linklater definatley could have shot it "normal", but he said he wouldn't be able to pull it off and stay faithful to PK Dick's story. Considering people are saying, even Dick's family, that this will be a very faithful recreation, and they let Linklater do it since he would do the story justice, sounds like he made the right choice on the style.
 
jaustere said:
Maybe this goes without saying...but the movie is done this way because of the story. It's not just a random sci-fi movie that they thought would look cool as a rotoscoped cartoon.

The story is about drugs, paranoia, disorientation, varying perceptions of reality, etc...They chose the medium because it serves the story perfectly, in the same way that the surreal story of "Waking Life" was suited to the roto-scoping technique. I almost think the filmmakers want that amount of distraction caused by the unusual style. It keeps the viewer aware that this is an abnormal movie that takes place in an abnormal version of reality.

Well i'd sure as **** hope they had a reason behind choosing the style and not just doing it on a whim. But that doesn't mean it still won't be too distracting and a faliure. I'd like to shoot a 3hr movie about two kids in a cave, because i want it to feel dark and closed in there will be no video to go along with it, just a black screen and sound. But hey thats my stylist choice for my film and it will make millions i'm sure.
 
I hope to god the majority of this movie isn't Downey jr., Reeves, and Harrelson sitting around high and waxing philosophical about the kind of pointless drivel stoned college kids discuss in between bong hits.

Cause that would irritate the crap out of me.
 
jaustere said:
Maybe this goes without saying...but the movie is done this way because of the story. It's not just a random sci-fi movie that they thought would look cool as a rotoscoped cartoon.

The story is about drugs, paranoia, disorientation, varying perceptions of reality, etc...They chose the medium because it serves the story perfectly, in the same way that the surreal story of "Waking Life" was suited to the roto-scoping technique. I almost think the filmmakers want that amount of distraction caused by the unusual style. It keeps the viewer aware that this is an abnormal movie that takes place in an abnormal version of reality.
well said. Waking Life benefits from that style.


Those goddamn annoying Charles Schwab ads are doing it just because it's the cool thing to do and it annoys me to no end because I'm an advertising art director.
 
I think its pretty. I even like the stuff they talk about, but i feel like the visuals are just to make up for what are pretty much just talking heads.
 
J5 squared said:
Well i'd sure as shi* hope they had a reason behind choosing the style and not just doing it on a whim. But that doesn't mean it still won't be too distracting and a faliure. I'd like to shoot a 3hr movie about two kids in a cave, because i want it to feel dark and closed in there will be no video to go along with it, just a black screen and sound. But hey thats my stylist choice for my film and it will make millions i'm sure.

Not the same thing at all :)

But I hear you: you're not a fan of the rotoscoped footage. It's probably not for everyone. No one visual style or artform is!
 
J5 squared said:
Obviously this movie isn't out yet, but based off the previews and trailers what is peoples opinion of an entire movie that is rotoscoped? I was immediatly drawn to this film when i saw the trailer and it was all due to the style. But at the same time i find the technique to be very distracting. What do you all feel of an entire movie being released with this effect? Cool, stupid, don't care?

Ralph Bakshi did a rotoscoped film of LORD OF THE RINGS back in 1978. The quality of the work was inconsistent, and in some scenes (especially darker ones) it looked like a simple wash of color over the live action film. Got to be a bit distracting (or maybe it was because I was watching a midnight showing, and the film overall wasn't that great...)

It's hard to tell from the trailer, but it's possible that A SCANNER DARKLY will work this way. If the story is compelling enough...
 
The funny thing is that many people will praise the rotoscoping achievement here, but when Bakshi was making Lord or American Pop, he was slammed for "tracing" and not really drawing the characters.

I personally liked the style, and it gave the characters an eerie quality, since they aren't people, but they move realistically like people.

Artists, just like the average public, are often so damn random with their alternating praise and condemnation.

Without rotoscoping, we wouldn't have cool games like Prince of Persia, or movies like Who Framed Roger Rabbit, etc.
 
Back
Top