What's with all the Union Jacks in the trailer?

[Squiggy]

But only ranked 66th in the world in 2007 and that's including Oakland...

http://www.citymayors.com/statistics/largest-cities-population-125.html

Why San Francisco/Oakland? Why not the entire Bay Area? It's pretty much one large megacity from the Golden Gate to South San Jose and around the South Bay and up north again to San Pablo Bay.

I honestly don't know? I'm just the messenger.

You really should include the entire metro area. Take Atlanta. The largest city in the south that hosted the Olympics, has a professional baseball, football, basketball, and hockey team.

The "City of Atlanta" only has a population of 420,000. That makes it smaller than Fresno, Mesa, and Virginia Beach.

However, look at the number of the people living in the Atlanta Metropolitan Area. 5.4 million. That puts her up in 9th place between Miami and Boston.

The "City of San Francisco" has a population of only 805,000. However since it's the cultural center of the area, the San Francisco metro includes San Jose (which is larger) and Oakland and has 7.6 million people.

 

[DaveyNY]

Because every last insignificant detail of STiD needs to be masticated to death.

Good thing you can't get STDs from masturbation.

I believe that the reference was to 'chewing'...,
Not... 'getting calluses on ones hand'.

 

[Ovation]

Why San Francisco/Oakland? Why not the entire Bay Area? It's pretty much one large megacity from the Golden Gate to South San Jose and around the South Bay and up north again to San Pablo Bay.

I honestly don't know? I'm just the messenger.

You really should include the entire metro area. Take Atlanta. The largest city in the south that hosted the Olympics, has a professional baseball, football, basketball, and hockey team.

Not anymore. It moved to a proper hockey city--Winnipeg.

 

[Shazam!]

Just saw the latest trailer... they fixed the upside down flags!

 

[SalvorHardin]

Since it was bumped, I'll quote myself from the other thread

There was some talk a few weeks ago about the flags. I noticed they seem to have fixed it, they're not upside down anymore.



before

 

[F. King Daniel]

That's interesting. Were real flags replaced by CG? Or were the flags CG all along?

 

[Shazam!]

My money would be on CG all along.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I guess that way they can ensure they flutter in just the right way.

 

[Shazam!]

It's vital that they do.

 

[Kemaiku]

That's interesting. Were real flags replaced by CG? Or were the flags CG all along?

The second image is also slightly better lit and clearer, the first is probably an earlier pass/render, the second image for the new trailer and completed film being corrected in several ways.

 

[mos6507]

My money would be on CG all along.

It's amazing how much money is spent doing things in CG which could be done in a much simpler way. Maybe that's why the studios wind up having to shaft FX companies like R&H, because they are just trying to do too many shots in CG.

 

[Squiggy]

It's amazing how much money is spent doing things in CG which could be done in a much simpler way.

The simpler way is much more expensive.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

It's amazing how much money is spent doing things in CG which could be done in a much simpler way.

The simpler way is much more expensive.

Yes, the logistics of filming on location are anything but simple.

 

[Squiggy]

If it was cheaper, then it would still be done. Hollywood's business is to make as much money as possible, not to advance computer graphics for shits and grins.

 

[The Wormhole]

So, just what are those airships supposed to be anyway?

 

[Kemaiku]

Chav harvesters.

 

[M'Sharak]

It's amazing how much money is spent doing things in CG which could be done in a much simpler way.

The simpler way is much more expensive.

That's really what it comes down to.

Abrams favors using practical sets and practical effects wherever and whenever possible, but he's also known for spending his time and available budget as efficiently as he can; if CGI is more cost-effective for a particular scene, then CGI is what will be used. While there certainly is a systemic problem in the industry with ruinous demands being made upon effects companies, I don't think Bad Robot are on anyone's list of abusers; Abrams runs tightly-scheduled productions which come in on time and under budget, and the contractors get paid for work performed.

 

[mos6507]

If it was cheaper, then it would still be done. Hollywood's business is to make as much money as possible, not to advance computer graphics for shits and grins.

No, I think in the age of Avatar they think everything has to be CG. Don't underestimate the fad-factor, here. The studios are NOT Roger Corman frugal.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

No, I think in the age of Avatar they think everything has to be CG.

Based on what?

 

[Flake]

If they can create a believable photorealistic scene in a computer that means they do not need to shoot on location then you can bet they choose the cgi cos it's cheaper now !

Majority of the avengers final act in manhattan was shot in some studio with bluescreen and ILM constructed the city in CGI