Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(io9)   This no-budget science fiction short looks better than most movies   (io9.com ) divider line
    More: Cool, budget science fiction, science fiction short, sucker punches, robot soldiers  
•       •       •

7717 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 03 Mar 2012 at 12:12 PM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



45 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2012-03-03 08:41:20 AM  
Impressive.
 
2012-03-03 08:49:57 AM  
That was exactly as billed, which is rare, but appreciated.
 
2012-03-03 09:04:17 AM  
Hell Yeah!
 
2012-03-03 09:20:58 AM  
No budget except for the professionally priced software used to make it.
 
2012-03-03 10:15:29 AM  
Holy shiat! That looks good. Kinda Robo-copy but good!
 
2012-03-03 10:16:07 AM  

Mugato: No budget except for the professionally priced software used to make it.


Maybe they stole it over a torrent like everyone else does?
 
2012-03-03 10:18:27 AM  
Why can't SyFy channel movies be this good? They at least have a small budget.
 
2012-03-03 10:23:13 AM  

basemetal: Why can't SyFy channel movies be this good? They at least have a small budget.


You have to look at the Execs there. When the gal who is in charge of programming says that she hates science fiction, you pretty much have all the explanation that you need...
 
2012-03-03 10:29:05 AM  

hubiestubert: That was exactly as billed, which is rare, but appreciated.


/qft
 
2012-03-03 10:30:53 AM  

Gwendolyn: Mugato: No budget except for the professionally priced software used to make it.

Maybe they stole it over a torrent like everyone else does?


Well since the article says they're the guys who did the Green Lantern, and Rise of The Planet of The Apes I kind of doubt it.
 
2012-03-03 11:44:40 AM  
Too bad this is one of those i09 links, anyone got a better one?
 
2012-03-03 12:22:44 PM  

Mugato: Well since the article says they're the guys who did the Green Lantern, and Rise of The Planet of The Apes I kind of doubt it.


Yeah they used the trial version.
 
2012-03-03 12:23:26 PM  
Better Link

Better Link 1080p option......
 
2012-03-03 12:30:13 PM  
No-Budget. As in the Hollywood accounting version of what 'no-budget' means.

Looks interesting though but didn't get me wet and moisty downstairs.
 
2012-03-03 12:38:13 PM  
www.vernoncomputersource.com
says, "eh, I'll allow it..."
 
2012-03-03 12:41:50 PM  

Mr. Underhills Lunch Bill: Better Link

Better Link 1080p option......


Sweet, thanks for the link.
 
2012-03-03 12:46:11 PM  
As software gets better, Hollywood studios get more anachronistic and superfluous.

How long before the RIAA and MPAA try to outlaw this kind of software?
 
2012-03-03 01:05:19 PM  
An accurate Fark headline and a good link on i09? On my Fark?

That was bad ass.
 
2012-03-03 01:14:29 PM  
Take my money please
 
2012-03-03 01:16:04 PM  
Like Robocop without the man-face.
 
2012-03-03 01:18:29 PM  
Saw it a few weeks ago... and on a second viewing, I still say DAMN, I'd love to see that get made feature-length, provided the folks who made it retain complete creative control.

Sadly, Hollywood being the vast pit of suck that it is, if it DOES get made as a feature, the studio will suck everything good out of it.
 
2012-03-03 01:29:53 PM  
Bookmark,
 
2012-03-03 01:59:01 PM  

zulius: says, "eh, I'll allow it..."


Yeah, we've seen this movie before...

img585.imageshack.us
 
2012-03-03 02:02:48 PM  
Not bad, not bad.
 
2012-03-03 02:23:54 PM  
No budget means some dude sitting at home making a movie, not some multimillion dollar company with some free time on their hands.
 
2012-03-03 02:40:13 PM  

Mugato: No budget except for the professionally priced software used to make it.


And doesn't everyone have the time to do something like this on a weekend?

/Time is money.
//Still good.
///Storytelling is back?
 
2012-03-03 02:47:54 PM  
Speaking of low-budget SciFi films.....

WHAR "IRON SKY"? WHAR??
www.blogcdn.com
 
2012-03-03 02:48:21 PM  
Haven't seen the link yet as I'm on my phone, but I find CG movies are getting worse. Seems like it peaked around 2003, and has gotten shiattier and shiattier.

I watched 'Moon' and nearly crapped my pants. Finally a sci-fi movie that looked real again! Then I learned it was actually LOW budget, so they had to use models.
They made those models look infinitely more real with a limited budget than the top production companies do these days with computers and infinite money.

Absolutely ridiculous. Film making needs to get back on track.

/looking forward to checking out the link when I hit my laptop
 
2012-03-03 02:48:43 PM  

GreatGlavinsGhost: Mugato: No budget except for the professionally priced software used to make it.

And doesn't everyone have the time to do something like this on a weekend?

/Time is money.
//Still good.
///Storytelling is back?


That's the thing about these kind of projects. You have a company that already has all the software and people ready to do something like that. It becomes more of a personal project instead of work which yields much better results but takes a much longer time since they also need to do work to get paid as well.

The robot gave off the impression of the aliens from District Nine. The subtle movements of the head and eyes. It's those subtle movements that change it from OK work to outstanding work.
 
2012-03-03 02:51:16 PM  

TV's Vinnie: Speaking of low-budget SciFi films.....

WHAR "IRON SKY"? WHAR??
[www.blogcdn.com image 400x228]


Did you miss the trailer and release date being announced?

Link (new window)
 
2012-03-03 02:53:23 PM  

sure haven't: Haven't seen the link yet as I'm on my phone, but I find CG movies are getting worse. Seems like it peaked around 2003, and has gotten shiattier and shiattier.

I watched 'Moon' and nearly crapped my pants. Finally a sci-fi movie that looked real again! Then I learned it was actually LOW budget, so they had to use models.
They made those models look infinitely more real with a limited budget than the top production companies do these days with computers and infinite money.

Absolutely ridiculous. Film making needs to get back on track.

/looking forward to checking out the link when I hit my laptop


Summation of above post:
i.qkme.me
 
2012-03-03 02:57:13 PM  
A very impressive short and I'd love to see it make the transition to a feature. That being said, I'm very weary of misleading articles like this that highlight a superior independent project and then lead the reader to believe it was made as "a labor of love with no funding".

IMDbPro lists the budget for this project at an estimated $25K. Yes, it's remarkably low for the quality of work, but Aaron Sims runs one of the best CG design companies in the country. In his position he has access to personnel and equipment that he can get for far less than usual professional rate or trade for services. And SAG actors are never free unless they are under a waiver agreement for student films.

So let's cut the gushing "labor of love" crap and recognize this film for what it truly is: a promotional short, likely funded through Sims' own company, designed to generate investor or studio interest in producing a feature version. And I hope he succeeds because it looks great.
 
2012-03-03 03:01:35 PM  
Part of the problem with big budget studio movies is the fact that it's a studio, with all the producers and coordinators and directors and art directors and executives and hangers-on that that comes with. It's a matter of too many cooks spoil the broth. Every god damn someone who wants to prove they have the power and the vision to affect the movie's look puts their two cents in and no consensus of direction is ever achieved. The VFX artists are kept making pointless change after pointless change to satisfy the ego of whoever that we're rendering new artwork right up until the deadline delivery date. So despite having however many years and millions of dollars behind the movie it's really just slapped together in the last month or two of production. All the previous time and money is pissed away making revisions to find out that they liked what they had in the first place.

/I'm not bitter at all
 
2012-03-03 03:03:37 PM  
In fact, it's already been picked up:

Link (new window)
 
2012-03-03 03:18:09 PM  
what? If 'better than most movies' means the Netflix one-star list, then yeah.
 
2012-03-03 03:42:10 PM  
this has been knocking around for at least a year, It is impressive art direction, story will be the hard part. They have to stretch this to 90 minutes and not with running around shooting at each other for half of that either. That movie about the space ship stranded over Johannesburg was a great short, but it felt stretched by too much running around shooting at each other.
 
2012-03-03 05:46:24 PM  
It looks good, but it also looks like a video game and feels a bit like every other "man trapped in a robot body finds his conscience and has a change of heart" story we've seen before.
 
2012-03-03 06:58:23 PM  

gravethoughts: A very impressive short and I'd love to see it make the transition to a feature. That being said, I'm very weary of misleading articles like this that highlight a superior independent project and then lead the reader to believe it was made as "a labor of love with no funding".

IMDbPro lists the budget for this project at an estimated $25K. Yes, it's remarkably low for the quality of work, but Aaron Sims runs one of the best CG design companies in the country. In his position he has access to personnel and equipment that he can get for far less than usual professional rate or trade for services. And SAG actors are never free unless they are under a waiver agreement for student films.

So let's cut the gushing "labor of love" crap and recognize this film for what it truly is: a promotional short, likely funded through Sims' own company, designed to generate investor or studio interest in producing a feature version. And I hope he succeeds because it looks great.


Came here to say this, but you said it far more betterer than I could have. Great post.
 
2012-03-03 09:02:22 PM  
Good find subby. Thanks.
 
2012-03-04 01:15:26 AM  

Cyno01: Bookmark,



Without question.
 
2012-03-04 01:55:27 AM  
Oh hey. It's that guy from Alias and Heroes.
 
2012-03-04 02:04:23 AM  
But seriously, there are a lot awesome effects-laden shorts on Vimeo and Youtube.

The Gift (new window)

World Builder (new window)

Plot Device (new window)

Beyond Black Mesa (new window)
 
2012-03-04 03:29:22 AM  
SyFy is making half a billion a year out of productions like crocosaurus - they've found a business model that works when most of their audience torrents higher quality production stuff and no longer buys the DVD boxed sets.

The Star Trek "New Voyages" people are doing it "out of love" - but it helps that they've got a few fans who are willing to dump some serious cash into it. Even then they are only managing an episode every year or so and you probably wouldn't tune in if it was shown in regular TV. Stuff like Star Trek: Hidden Voyages is more par for the course when it comes to "science fiction made for the love of it".
 
2012-03-04 04:56:09 AM  

Lsherm: zulius: says, "eh, I'll allow it..."

Yeah, we've seen this movie before...

[img585.imageshack.us image 400x270]


Not even close.
 
2012-03-04 01:22:05 PM  
meh... I guess I'm spoiled. It didn't look any better than BSG II, not to say I didn't love SciFi's BSG, but despite all the production that went into this, it's not raising the bar.
 
Displayed 45 of 45 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report