Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2023 15:11:33 GMT
People are saying that this fan's animation is better than the BBC one. Can't say I disagree.
|
|
|
|
Post by medicusitic on Dec 9, 2023 1:28:53 GMT
The animation styles they choose are always so incongruous with the original soundtracks. This is the worst one yet, but the cheap and soulless 90s flash animation style doesn't fit either. What I'd love to see are animations designed to emulate hand-drawn, on-model, painted-background 1960s cartoons. Work on the basis of approximating what an animated version of Doctor Who might have looked like in 1966, maybe taking inspiration from the annuals and Polystyle comics of the time. It wouldn't have to be especially polished or high-budget, just period-accurate. They are cheap and know classic fans will fork over money irrespective of the quality for the most part. That money has to go towards the tons of CGI Russel wants done to make his stories seem big. The style you suggest would be better, but they won't do it. Mainly due to cost, I'd imagine.
But do we know the sales figure of these animations? What are the profits per a disk? The ROI? Since they are still making these I'd imagine they have to make at least a profit.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Yak Emperor on Dec 9, 2023 1:30:26 GMT
The animation styles they choose are always so incongruous with the original soundtracks. This is the worst one yet, but the cheap and soulless 90s flash animation style doesn't fit either. What I'd love to see are animations designed to emulate hand-drawn, on-model, painted-background 1960s cartoons. Work on the basis of approximating what an animated version of Doctor Who might have looked like in 1966, maybe taking inspiration from the annuals and Polystyle comics of the time. It wouldn't have to be especially polished or high-budget, just period-accurate. They are cheap and know classic fans will fork over money irrespective of the quality for the most part. That money has to go towards the tons of CGI Russel wants done to make his stories seem big. The style you suggest would be better, but they won't do it. Mainly due to cost, I'd imagine.
But do we know the sales figure of these animations? What are the profits per a disk? The ROI? Since they are still making these I'd imagine they have to make at least a profit.
Not hard to make a profit when the budget's about £2.50 |
|
|
|
Post by medicusitic on Dec 9, 2023 1:37:58 GMT
They are cheap and know classic fans will fork over money irrespective of the quality for the most part. That money has to go towards the tons of CGI Russel wants done to make his stories seem big. The style you suggest would be better, but they won't do it. Mainly due to cost, I'd imagine.
But do we know the sales figure of these animations? What are the profits per a disk? The ROI? Since they are still making these I'd imagine they have to make at least a profit.
Not hard to make a profit when the budget's about £2.50 I'd really like to get a solid answer on what the average ROI on these things is. People keep saying this is a niche interest so it has to be cheap, but the Underwater Meance dvd has 571 reviews on Amazon which probably translates into at least a few 1000 units in sales (its safe to assume the majority of buyers dont leave reviews and people buy these outside of Amazon). Shada's animation has 1,200 so does Galaxy 4 (both DVD + Blu Ray) and Power of the Daleks has 1900 (if you combine both versions), and Evil of the Daleks has 1,900 (if you combine both versions). That doesn't exactly make these as niche as people think. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 28, 2023 16:38:37 GMT
Amazon has this down as being released in 2099. It better be worth staying alive for.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 28, 2023 16:42:07 GMT
The Daleks in Colour Blu ray has a 2.5/5 rating from 36 reviews. Guess it wasn't the brilliant success that it was claimed to be.
This is a great piece from one of the reviews on there:
Apparently, today's viewers won't accept B&W TV or films and won't watch anything longer than 75 minutes in length. That can be the only excuse for this disastrous enterprise. Are modern audiences so limited by what they'll watch? Does it all have to be bright colours, fast cuts and CGI effects? I thought the rise of streaming services and box sets meant that people would invest in longer series - with stories that build up over time and establish atmosphere, character and suspense.
|
|
|
|
Post by rushy on Dec 28, 2023 16:47:37 GMT
I'm tempted to see this just to appreciate the original more
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 28, 2023 16:50:22 GMT
I'm tempted to see this just to appreciate the original more It starts off decently, but it goes off the rails. Cook's editing is awful and shows contempt for the audience by using the "flashback" technique to show things that happened only a few minutes ago - just in case the people watching are dumb enough to forget. Then their escape from the city is edited to feel like some sort of heist movie. I mean, what was the point of this? Was massacring a classic piece of TV really necessary in order to appeal to a new audience? |
|
|
|
Post by iank on Dec 28, 2023 20:36:22 GMT
I think it was more about appealing to RTD and company's ego than anything else.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2024 13:45:22 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by The Yak Emperor on Jan 2, 2024 14:58:04 GMT
Man I'm tired of this whole "free speech all opinions are equal" the conservatives are trying to get across. No they f*cking aren't. Some opinions are terrible and should be repudiated. |
|
|
|
Post by UncleDeadly on Jan 2, 2024 15:13:09 GMT
People are saying that this fan's animation is better than the BBC one. Can't say I disagree. You're quite right; the lip-synching isn't perfect but the modelling/drawing is far better and it's much more engaging. This i would probably buy. It's frankly embarrassing that fans on youtube can do a better job than the so-called professionals. But then, the same is true of the colourisations. Honestly, not content with bastardising the literary content of Doctor Who beyond all recognition, these people are hopeless on the technical aspects, as well. If the amateurs can do better, just what are they being paid for..? |
|
|
|
Post by The Yak Emperor on Jan 2, 2024 15:56:31 GMT
People are saying that this fan's animation is better than the BBC one. Can't say I disagree. You're quite right; the lip-synching isn't perfect but the modelling/drawing is far better and it's much more engaging. This i would probably buy. It's frankly embarrassing that fans on youtube can do a better job than the so-called professionals. But then, the same is true of the colourisations. Honestly, not content with bastardising the literary content of Doctor Who beyond all recognition, these people are hopeless on the technical aspects, as well. If the amateurs can do better, just what are they being paid for..? It was the same with the "Dalek Tales" that came out over a decade ago. Then the BBC release their own Dalek animated show and it's just so atrocious in comparison. |
|
|
|
Post by Ludders II on Feb 23, 2024 14:37:28 GMT
I've supported the animations thus far, even though I was dubious about The Underwater Menace I still bought it.
But I'm not buying this one. It looks shocking. Enough is enough.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cherry Pepsi Maxil on Feb 23, 2024 17:22:38 GMT
I enjoy the serial enough to buy it, but the animation itself is poor. They never really topped the animation for The Invasion in my opinion. That one was so moody and effective compared to the later ones. Here's the US cover for The Celestial Toymaker.  |
|
