|
Post by seahawksraawk00 on Oct 13, 2021 9:06:22 GMT
It's all pretty vague, but I guess when you piece these disparate things together it does sorta sound like it's gonna be more elaborate, even though this one says it's a brief... but also that it's inadvertently funny, which is unfortunate. I imagine it would be the same voice actor as last time, who we all seem to agree was not great. Having seen the film, I can confirm we get CG Pleasance. Or perhaps it was a lookalike. It was weird and off-putting either way. Well it's essentially what they did with Tarkin with Rogue One. They got a stand-in who resembles Donald Pleasance just enough, but overlayed him with CGI to get the finer details of Loomis correct.
|
|
|
Post by Anonymous Andy on Oct 13, 2021 16:08:36 GMT
It's all pretty vague, but I guess when you piece these disparate things together it does sorta sound like it's gonna be more elaborate, even though this one says it's a brief... but also that it's inadvertently funny, which is unfortunate. I imagine it would be the same voice actor as last time, who we all seem to agree was not great. Having seen the film, I can confirm we get CG Pleasance. Or perhaps it was a lookalike. It was weird and off-putting either way. This begs the question: what's worse, a CGI Loomis or the CGI Michael mask from H20? 🤔
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Oct 13, 2021 18:46:33 GMT
Having seen the film, I can confirm we get CG Pleasance. Or perhaps it was a lookalike. It was weird and off-putting either way. This begs the question: what's worse, a CGI Loomis or the CGI Michael mask from H20? 🤔 Hmm...I have to go CGI Michael mask. Lol.
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Oct 18, 2021 18:45:05 GMT
It's all pretty vague, but I guess when you piece these disparate things together it does sorta sound like it's gonna be more elaborate, even though this one says it's a brief... but also that it's inadvertently funny, which is unfortunate. I imagine it would be the same voice actor as last time, who we all seem to agree was not great. Having seen the film, I can confirm we get CG Pleasance. Or perhaps it was a lookalike. It was weird and off-putting either way. Loomis in Halloween Kills was entirely practical
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Oct 18, 2021 19:13:18 GMT
I don't know, looking at his makeup and the shot in the movie side by side, the eye area at least seems "touched up".
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Oct 18, 2021 19:30:20 GMT
I don't know, looking at his makeup and the shot in the movie side by side, the eye area at least seems "touched up". I don't have the paid version of Peacock so I haven't looked at it since, but I can only relay the information as I've found it. It's possible that he doesn't know what happened in post-production, but this is from the makeup artist himself. Maybe he's wrong, but it would answer why I wasn't put off by that CGI face replacement thing when I always am otherwise.
|
|