IMPORTANT NOTE: You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.
Hattie McDaniel, from Kansas, played the part of the head slave at Tara - and was the first black entertainer to win an Oscar for GWTW.
Because of racial segregation, she was barely allowed to attend the Academy Award ceremony - and had to sit (separately, to other cast members) at a small table, at the back.
Even her wish to be buried in Hollywood Cemetery was denied, also because of segregation laws; but Ms McDaniel was instrumental in the journey to get them abolished.
hedda wrote: Why the movie business is so successful..
The Joker has taken over $Billion at the Box Office to date.
It cost $55M to make.
An amazing investment. A company set up less than 5 years ago and makes 1800% back on it's seed money.
It's like the American DVD distributor Alpha. They specialise in bare-bones mainly in public domain B movies cheap but work now with major studios. Their profits are superb.
Mill Creek Entertainment are known for their huge bumper packs in USA and Canada supermarkets, Mill Creek now have secured a huge deal with Sony, to help release their back catalogue.
Graphics, computers and technology are the future for screen entertainment. I briefly watched an animated soldier type action movie recently - and, only after 20 minutes, did I realise that there were no humans in it!
Just manmade humanoids, generated in an office; no studio or actors required - just technicians. When Oliver Reed died during the filming of Gladiator in Malta, the image that replaced him was indistinguishable from Reed himself.
Crowd scenes with thousands in them are easy with the new gadgetry - compared to the enormous numbers of extras needed for Moses, Cleopatra et al. The most recent innovation is age-reduction methods for know actors - as in The Irishman.
Barney wrote: Graphics, computers and technology are the future for screen entertainment. I briefly watched an animated soldier type action movie recently - and, only after 20 minutes, did I realise that there were no humans in it!
Just manmade humanoids, generated in an office; no studio or actors required - just technicians. When Oliver Reed died during the filming of Gladiator in Malta, the image that replaced him was indistinguishable from Reed himself.
Crowd scenes with thousands in them are easy with the new gadgetry - compared to the enormous numbers of extras needed for Moses, Cleopatra et al. The most recent innovation is age-reduction methods for know actors - as in The Irishman.
You forgot to mention The Crow and Final Fantasy. When FF came out it was groundbreaking with technology for the time and opened up a lot of doors. Yet it was a flop.
Crow was pretty much the same CGI that was used in Gladiator for Reed.
Them old biblical movies are amazing for the time especially the set designs.
I haven't bothered with the cinema in years; and if they re-released some old classics with lots of new footage then it might be different.
My grandmother was baffled about Cimarron winning Academy Awards.
CGI and enhanced special effects are no guarantee of movie success - no matter how good and/or lifelike they are.
However - like technicolor, new sound/stereo techniques and high dimensional image output - they can significantly improve movie quality.
But not the acting, story or soul of a production. Costs will come down and, in a few years, CGI 2 will emanate regularly from places like Sky in Elstree.
Other Elstree production facilities - as well as Borehamwood and Ealing, in the past - have been been at the forefront of cinema/movie advancement for generations.
It's why Star Wars, Mission Impossible, Bond - and other blockbusters are created on these sites. And also because of the abundance of UK technical talent.
Perhaps the best examples - and, by far, the most successful of new technology pictures - are the Pirates of the Caribbean movies, with Johnny Depp.
Five of them grossed over $4.5 billion with a 'scary but funny' methodology - where seafarers would spontaneously turn into skeletons, for example.
Or they would temporarily lose their heads for a while, or their torsos! Some of the makeup was amazing - and a few sea monsters could entice rapid monastery enrollment!
An added benefit for Jerry Bruckheimer (the brains behind them all) was the ability to make some of the movies simultaneously.
Most pirate ships, Spanish galleons and Man of War battleships look the same to mere office commuters....
Barney wrote: CGI and enhanced special effects are no guarantee of movie success - no matter how good and/or lifelike they are.
However - like technicolor, new sound/stereo techniques and high dimensional image output - they can significantly improve movie quality.
But not the acting, story or soul of a production. Costs will come down and, in a few years, CGI 2 will emanate regularly from places like Sky in Elstree.
Other Elstree production facilities - as well as Borehamwood and Ealing, in the past - have been been at the forefront of cinema/movie advancement for generations.
It's why Star Wars, Mission Impossible, Bond - and other blockbusters are created on these sites. And also because of the abundance of UK technical talent.
I must look at more at the early colour techniques in old films. I know Roy Rogers had Trucolour however I think they are lost. Cinecolor could never show green.
Forums 
