So the movie is going to be about the past (redrawn flashbacks and stories?) and we will get no 'current' story?
That means the Strawhats would have to have the older appearance, not the 'newly introduced' manga one.
It would be very confusing to some, since the anime won't be at that point at least for another year, but they characters have changed in the manga.
Wow OP movie in 3D huh? That sound pretty awsome! I remember way back when 3D was starting out and got very popular now. People just found a new way to enjoy movies that all. I think my first movie in 3D was "My Bloody Valentine" now that was crazy, definitely worth in 3D.
Wait a second... Oda stated in Vol.0 that Strong World was the last movie to show Luffy being 17 years old. Doesn't that mean now that Luffy was already 18 when he went to Marinford?
Well, that only means this movie is a Spin off, and not a tiny bit of cannon stuff!
I guess its like a what if, Luffy went to marineford with the rest of the Strawhats instead of the Impel Down crew. Though maybe they'll be there too. I wonder if the anime will throw in enough filler so they dont hit timeskip till this time next year?
You never know though, those 3D pictures of the SH's in Jump may not necessarily be the complete/final designs for the film; especially considering that the character designs in the manga after this timeskip will/have changed...and will only be *officially* shown in the coming chapter (598).
Nevertheless, a 3D OP movie is just awesome. I really hope the story is going to be stronger than the previous movies. Strong World was good but CAN be drastically improved upon in 11.
It's an alternate retelling with partially noncanonic content. The event occurred, and most of the actors were there.Originally Posted by beastboy
Well. how long was the One Piece movie 10 advertised?? I'm sure it'll be awhile before this movie comes out - though I think it's been confirmed as a 2011 movie. I would really like to see a movie with the new version of the GAang (sorry, still love ATLA).
I don't like that.
Why can't they make a more normal animation with quality and render things to a 3D camera? I am very sure that character positioning and etc in today's in all made in computers. I don't know why they can'd do that...
A lot of people seem to fall into the trap of thinking computer animation is "easier" or "faster" than traditional animation. After all, most feature film animation in the states is all CG now, right? But this is an enormous misconception. There are a few things that are easier in 3D animation due to the use of computers, true. But saying "easier" isn't really right, it's just different. However, that said, the traditional rules of animation still apply, even if the methods, practices and concerns are different.
The average Pixar film take 4 years to make (right now, 1 film comes out a year, there are generally 4 films being worked on at any one time).
OP movie 11 I'm almost positive did not have a 4 year production time. It's likely closer to half that (that is just a guess, no one quote me on that. Also, granted, it's also going to be a shorter film, given that it's a double feature). Also, need to consider how experienced the studio that's making it is with 3D animation. I don't know anything about animation studios in Japan, nor do I even know who's making this one. So I have no idea if they're any good.
Something might seem like it would be easier to do a certain way, but realize that's not always the case. As an example, I recently had a conversation with a stage lighting technician. I was drooling over how gorgeous the tiny little dust motes looked in the beam of a bright stage light. He just thought that was the most bizarre thing to think was amazing. But making dust look convincingly realistic in CG is freakin' hard!
This post is getting long (oops, how did that happen?), so I'm going to stop there. But, even if I'm not sure exactly what you mean in your post, or many details about the film itself, I'm 90% sure the answer is going to be "because of time and money." Because that's just how it works with any film. It's hard for me to get my hopes up about this film because I understand the devotion proper 3D animation needs (and I'm a snob about it, that's freely admitted), and this movie looks to be more publicity stunt than serious movie. But I'm an optimistic person and know when it's time to turn off serious mode, so hopefully I can still enjoy the film. One blurry photo isn't enough to make a judgment on.
Last edited by Shiki_Dance; October 02, 2010 at 07:52 AM. Reason: grammar
Okay, sorry for not being clear.
I mean that I am very sure that traditional animation can be done to support 3-D imagery.
Either way, I am almost sure it's to save expenses. Usually animes use CGI images or 3D backgrounds to save some money...
Ah, ok, I understand what you mean.
I think there's a preference issue. I personally don't like when the environments are CG and the characters 2D, because I think the look clashes and doesn't work. It's so completely obvious when, for example, the Thousand Sunny and the ocean is 3D but nothing else is. It just looks like "conspicuous CG." Most of the time. I think it could be done well, but it would require a lot of work (which means more research and more problem solving, so therefore more time, and more people, so therefore more money). It's forgivable in a weekly animation where you have to realize the budget constraints they have (modeling the ship once and doing a few camera passes is indeed easier - but it's still a bit jarring how different it looks compared to everything else). Sometimes it works pretty well, depending on the style of animation and getting the toon-shading to work just right (I don't think the style of One Piece lends itself to this, though).
In this case, if they want to make the film stereoscopic, they pretty much have to make the characters 3D as well. It's hard to explain without showing an example, which I can't do unless I had a monitor that supports 3D (lol...). But you get this weird effect where your brain is trying to decide whether something belongs in the foreground or background so it's all weird and jittery. Even if they did get past that issue, it would mean the 2D characters basically look like sheets of paper floating in a 3D environment with no depth to them at all.
I will admit that I have not worked with stereo very much (only just recently, so I'm new to it), so I could be wrong. But this is what I think.
Last edited by Shiki_Dance; October 02, 2010 at 08:43 AM. Reason: clarification
There are two things stated in this sentence:Quote:
1. It's cannon. And cannot be other way since we heard on Shiki in Impel Down arc.
2. It's Luffy's last adventure as a 17 years old. I think that "Adventure" is meant to be taking his Nakama to some odd island, and that's why Marineford doesn't count.
Either way, I think that the sentence is true after all because movie 11 will not be cannon or anything else.
Last edited by Fox666; October 11, 2010 at 12:04 AM.