laytonian said:

Ingela said:

I think some of you folks have no vision or grasp of what art is/can be, and are stuck in myopic states. And I'm not talking about inserting a chi Prince into a movie, but creating and entire world and movie digitally where the everything has the same tone and feel and you are not limited by anything but the artists and directors imagination. [Edited 1/14/17 13:54pm]

If the director is so bloody imaginative then (s)he can invent their own world and not bother doing a Prince biopic

jaawwnn said:

Ingela said:

I think some of you folks have no vision or grasp of what art is/can be, and are stuck in myopic states. And I'm not talking about inserting a chi Prince into a movie, but creating and entire world and movie digitally where the everything has the same tone and feel and you are not limited by anything but the artists and directors imagination. [Edited 1/14/17 13:54pm]

Hi Ingela,

I don't think it's a matter of a lack of imagination, it just strikes many of us as a tacky idea for an artist of Prince's calibre. I work in computer graphics myself so I know the field well, but I've never been a huge fan of excessive use of CGI in film. I'm yet to see a CGI based film that is anywhere near as beautiful as the work of Tarkovsky or Bergman for example.

I agree with this however:

“... a groundbreaking film style is the only way I'd like the Prince story told rather than a silly cheap lifetime story of the week.”

I've seen a couple of Prince documentaries and they all had the same feel – an uninspired collection of talking-heads relaying a narrative that anyone with an interest in Prince already knows.

A biopic is a difficult thing to get right - I haven't seen it, but the recent Miles Davis film was pretty awful by all accounts. Like many here I think that a thoughtful documentary would be a much better idea. As you say, it should be a work art in its own right, which is why I mentioned Steve Mcqueen (Hunger, 12 Years A Slave). He's an admirer of Prince (see my previous comment) and has been an important and highly respected artist in the UK for over 20 years. Given access to rare footage, vault material and so on, I think that someone like this would take an interesting, creative and tasteful approach to examining Prince's cultural significance.

[Edited 1/20/17 7:38am]

fen said:

[Edited 1/20/17 10:45am]

Ingela said:

fen said:

Hi Ingela,

I don't think it's a matter of a lack of imagination, it just strikes many of us as a tacky idea for an artist of Prince's calibre. I work in computer graphics myself so I know the field well, but I've never been a huge fan of excessive use of CGI in film. I'm yet to see a CGI based film that is anywhere near as beautiful as the work of Tarkovsky or Bergman for example.

I agree with this however:

“... a groundbreaking film style is the only way I'd like the Prince story told rather than a silly cheap lifetime story of the week.”

I've seen a couple of Prince documentaries and they all had the same feel – an uninspired collection of talking-heads relaying a narrative that anyone with an interest in Prince already knows.

A biopic is a difficult thing to get right - I haven't seen it, but the recent Miles Davis film was pretty awful by all accounts. Like many here I think that a thoughtful documentary would be a much better idea. As you say, it should be a work art in its own right, which is why I mentioned Steve Mcqueen (Hunger, 12 Years A Slave). He's an admirer of Prince (see my previous comment) and has been an important and highly respected artist in the UK for over 20 years. Given access to rare footage, vault material and so on, I think that someone like this would take an interesting, creative and tasteful approach to examining Prince's cultural significance.

[Edited 1/20/17 7:38am]

Do you think Pixar films are tacky? As someone who gave up on Disney films from the 60-90's before the advent of cgi. The expense of quality work was too expensive and I have now gone back to enjoying almost every cgi movie this year. It made the art of the story and visuals and music pop. And the main point I want to make is that the limitations going forward are only in the hands and minds of the artists. Imagine if Disney could use Cgi on a Fantasia film today. I call people closed minded because they have limited preconceptions on what cgi is or could be. So that's the very definition of closed minded or ignorance if we wanted to make a blanket statement. But even going back just 6 years, you can see the pontential in cinematic visuals in for Star Wars games commercials for example. Take this example from six years ago! [Edited 1/20/17 9:01am]

Hi,

No, I’m not a fan of Pixar. I recognise that their films are expertly made and often cleverly scripted (in their own way), but I’m not an admirer. We’re straying from the subject here, but I’d argue that the more traditional techniques of Studio Ghibli are much more beautiful, and their films more imaginative.

I think it’s the prospect of recreating personalities and historical events in CGI that troubles me. An abstract, experimental film of some kind might work – perhaps asking digital artists and film makers to respond to Prince’s music visually in their own way (in fact, the Sign O The Times video was quite influential in this field). I’m still not convinced that it would be a great idea though.

With regard to being “closed minded”, there are arguably much more interesting things going on in the vanguard of computer graphics and creative coding than the kind of CGI that you see in Hollywood films. With respect, I’m not sure that sharing the trailer for a computer game is doing your cause any favours. How would any of that aid the telling of Prince’s story, that couldn’t be better achieved by more traditional methods? Yes, keep an open mind regarding the advances in CGI, VR and where it might lead as a creative medium, but just because something can be done doesn’t mean that it necessarily should. That said, I’m not in the habit of discouraging people’s creative ideas, so I’d be happy to be proved wrong.

As I said, I work at the fringes of experimental computer graphics myself (focusing on how code can be used creatively), so I’m not sure it’s fair to accuse me of being ignorant to this field. I’m not putting this forward as a fine example digital art or anything, it’s just a rough experiment of mine, but this is the kind of area that I work in:

morningsong said:

fen said:

Ingela said:

fen said:

Hi,

No, I’m not a fan of Pixar. I recognise that their films are expertly made and often cleverly scripted (in their own way), but I’m not an admirer. We’re straying from the subject here, but I’d argue that the more traditional techniques of Studio Ghibli are much more beautiful, and their films more imaginative.

I think it’s the prospect of recreating personalities and historical events in CGI that troubles me. An abstract, experimental film of some kind might work – perhaps asking digital artists and film makers to respond to Prince’s music visually in their own way (in fact, the Sign O The Times video was quite influential in this field). I’m still not convinced that it would be a great idea though.

With regard to being “closed minded”, there are arguably much more interesting things going on in the vanguard of computer graphics and creative coding than the kind of CGI that you see in Hollywood films. With respect, I’m not sure that sharing the trailer for a computer game is doing your cause any favours. How would any of that aid the telling of Prince’s story, that couldn’t be better achieved by more traditional methods? Yes, keep an open mind regarding the advances in CGI, VR and where it might lead as a creative medium, but just because something can be done doesn’t mean that it necessarily should. That said, I’m not in the habit of discouraging people’s creative ideas, so I’d be happy to be proved wrong.

As I said, I work at the fringes of experimental computer graphics myself (focusing on how code can be used creatively), so I’m not sure it’s fair to accuse me of being ignorant to this field. I’m not putting this forward as a fine example digital art or anything, it’s just a rough experiment of mine, but this is the kind of area that I work in:

Like I've said, it's a nascent tool for movies that's quickly advancing. Their is so much new experimental stuff going on especially with machine learning giving it a boost. People don't even realize how much of it is in movies today. Most car chases and car crashes and cities are all mostly done by computers now. It's a tool with so many limitless possibilities that it boggles my mind when people say things like "tacky" when talking about it. Especially from someone who works in computer graphics. I find that odd and baffling.

Again, it’s the whole notion of creating a CGI biopic that I find distasteful. But I’ll just leave it at that.

Ingela said:

Here's something a few years old that explains where it can go...

Perhaps we can live without Prince biopic altogether.

I’m familiar with all of these advances Ingela, I just have mix feelings about them (and I do mean mixed). The nature of the relationship between technology, AI and art is an important subject. Of course new technologies should be explored, but we shouldn’t lose sight of what’s essential in artistic expression, or go too far in extracting humanity from our art. To bring the conversation back to Prince, I always felt that his “real music for real musicians” mantra was a little too reactionary and dismissive of new ways of making music, but we should be equally wary of straying too far in the opposite direction. The question should always be to what extent a technology aids and advances human expression and thought, and to what extent it supplants, diminishes or inhibits it. Conceptually, I just think it’s a bad idea I’m afraid.

[Edited 1/20/17 14:15pm]

fen said:

Ingela said:

Here's something a few years old that explains where it can go. The point being Prince was a very unique person. He was visually stunning and of unusual stature. He had a very unique manner about him. And as polished and stylized as he was, anyone, regardless of how great an actor will certainly take away from any biopic. I personally think something stunning and amazing can come of it made this way. That's my own opinion. Another from a couple of years ago.

This one I watched. The one thing these people have done that you haven't is acknowledge what people would be repelled by. Another thing, Prince isn't here to give a 360 image of his unique expressions, it would always be another person's interpetation of them just as if it were a reallife human actor portraying him.


The other I will watch later.

morningsong said:

Ingela said:

morningsong said:

This one I watched. The one thing these people have done that you haven't is acknowledge what people would be repelled by. Another thing, Prince isn't here to give a 360 image of his unique expressions, it would always be another person's interpetation of them just as if it were a reallife human actor portraying him.


The other I will watch later.

What? You're only seeking confirmation bias. There's more to it than that lol. Yes yes movies will always be black and white and computers will only be capable of 8 bit sound. Horses will always be better than cars and who needs cell phones? Lol.

You just want to fight. I find internet fighting boring. Therefore you have the wrong person for all that.

morningsong said:

morningsong said:

Actually, while many who think a CGI biopic isn't what they want to see, although nursing was my career, moviemaking is one of my hobbies.

I learned Lightwave back when they had to import 400+ digital animators to make the movie Antz. Then I had to learn Maya for a project as well. I'm no stranger to metanurbs and polynurbs, although they're not my strong suit...So I can speak to the issue a bit more from that perspective.

CGI has come pretty far over those 20 years, however, they haven't come far enough for my to want a CGI P anything.

Sorry.

Holograms, CGI, any of that can never recreate what I saw in live performance...ever. And I wouldn't want to see it anyway.

You seem to feel that given more information, the people who are opposed will change their collective minds because you feel they'll see the error of their ways...Well, some folks may, but I doubt it.

I have arguably as much information on this topic and even a modest amount of real world experience and while I'll grant you that progress has been made in this area, it'll never be enough for me to want to see P recreated in this way.

Sorry.

Oh...You dropped something...Be careful not to trip over it, the floors in here are slippery.

Namelessfan said:

Ingela said:

Ingela said:

The reason I think it would be great is that we've all seen Prince impersonators. Very repellent idea. Prince was uniquely beautiful even for a man. And I'd rather see him as an artistic representation in its own world rather than an impersonator. Secondly I've seen a lot of CGI movies this year, and they all feature music. Even when its hyperstyalized like on Sing, it was a very fun movie. Music and CGI go hand in hand. It could make Prince as pretty as we know him. Make all the super bowl performance or any performance as beautiful as the film maker wants it. This year audiences rushed to see CGI movies. From Sing, The Secret Lives of Pets, Zootopia, Finding Dory, Moana, Jungle Book, on and on.....So it's safe to say CGI movies were the most popular movies this year. Critically and financially. People love CGI movies. To this day, the highest grossing movie ever is still Avatar. So most people are with me on CGI. Critics and audiences. Music and CGI works phenomenally well. But my biggest reason is as a Prince fan, I would be vomiting seeing a Prince impersonator representing Prince on the big screen. And I know that CGI has the best potential to not only be the best format for it, but offer the best possibilities to make an amazing film not limited by anything but the imagination. And most likely to make the most money and bring the most people to the man and introduce the most new generations to the man and his music. Here's a nice article on the state of the movie 2016 Here's a snip, hit the link for the entire article. There's more and not just about computer generated movies. Just a good read. http://www.filmbuffonline...-10-films/ 2016 In Review: What The Top 10 Films Say About The State of Cinema January 3, 2017 William Gatevackes Featured Stories If there is one constant in Hollywood, it’s that money gets things done. So, if we want some idea where Hollywood is going in the future, we have to look at the highest grossing films of the past year. What secrets do they hold? What truths do they tell? Let’s find out as we look at 2016 in review. Below is the list of the top ten films of 2016, as of January 1, 2017, courtesy of Box Office Mojo: 1. All Bow Down Before The Computer Animated Feature: I imagine a lot of “serious” film journalists are now scouring their hard drives, pulling up all their “When will the comic book film die? ” articles and replacing “comic book film” with “Computer animated film.” There are three CGI cartoons in the top ten, with four more on the list before you reach #20: Moana at #12, Trolls #16, Kung Fu Panda 3 #17 and Sing at #18. The films are beginning to challenge the superhero film for money making dominance. The films offer family-friendly fare–cute characters and gags for the kids, a decent plot for the adults–that really bring in and entertain the whole family. But there is also another thing these type of films offer… [Edited 1/22/17 14:19pm]

I understand everything you're saying and the reasons for saying and feeling that way, but you asked

"What would you guys think of a CGI Prince biopic?"

You were answered numerous times, but you're clearly not hearing the answers.

I'd be worried cause I know biopics can be messed up. Like the one about Aaliyah.

EmmaMcG said:

Ingela said: