I really enjoyed this lecture as it basically dealt with how nothing is original anymore, and why references and parodies of other films are so appealing.
There is unconscious intertextuality which means the author has been influenced by another piece of work they have seen in the past and are taking certain aspects of the original without realising it.
Then there is self-conscious which means that the author is aware that he is taking aspects from other works, for instance in parodies and spoofs.
One example that I noticed and have tried to explain to a friend in the past is the similarities between characters from Starcraft and Warhammer 40k
Now one person could easily argue that Starcraft is 'ripping off' Warhammer 40k by making their character so similar. It is essentially a human in a large suit of armour, a breathing apparatus on the back, and an oversized gun. The whole 'Power Armour' system was first made popular in the novel Starship Troopers, later made into a film in 1997.
The whole look of the armour from Starcraft and Warhammer 40k is extremely similar to Astronauts. Therefore while people will state that these characters are copying others from other works of fiction, they are just following the similar idea of our current technology progressing, and what would be required to walk on the surface of other unknown planets.
This lecture was based on semiotics and how iconic a characteristic or object can be. The opposite of iconic is arbitrary and a scale can be shown, showing opposite ends of the spectrum.
As we move from iconic towards arbitrary, the images start looking less like what they are supposed to be describing. For instance, with the word 'woman' although it doesn't actually look like a woman, we know exactly what it means, while someone who doesn't understand English will recognise the other 3 images and not the most arbitrary. This could also be shown with Live Action Film, 3D Animation, 2D Animation, and then regular text from a book.
We also covered how certain characteristics and features of characters in films and animation can mean various things and help viewers understand characters more.
Denotation: What the sign is in the most basic level of understanding.
Connotation: What it suggests and implies, a more subtle meaning.
Myth: The ideological or political meaning of the thing.
Dr Isaac Kleiner - Half Life 2
Denotation: Wears a lab coat, shirt, tie and glasses. Only has a small amount of hair left. Has a slightly crazed grin and is overall happy.
Connotation: Lab coat and glasses can show a sign of above-average intelligence. Shirt and tie can show professionalism. Crazed grin and hand position can hint at 'mad inventor' type character. Missing hair and dirty coat can show stress in life.
This lecture was focused on realism, and the amount of effort we go to in order to achieve it in animation and modelling, often with horrible results. One of my favourite parts of this lecture, was the idea of the uncanny valley.
In animation, you would assume that the more lifelike and human that a character seems, it would be easier to relate to. However, as a character becomes 'almost human' it will also show 'non-human' attributes. Examples of this could include jerky movements, dead eyes, or an incorrectly moving mouth. We then enter the 'uncanny valley'.
It is named after the dip that occurs in the line in this graph:
[IMAGE NOT WORKING WILL ADD LATER :( ]
An example of this can be shown in the following videos.
Tin Toy is a short film by Pixar made in 1988. Although the animation itself was praised, viewers were extremely disturbed by the baby in the animation. I was also quite unsettled when I first saw the baby crawl into the room. I feel the main thing about it is the jerkiness of movement and rubberiness of the skin.
Thankfully Pixar changed the way they modelled/animated humans due to the negative reaction towards to baby, if not, there's a possibility the first Toy Story film would've had similar 'human' characters *shudder*
When I first saw the trailer for Heavy Rain back in 2006, I was confused as to what everyone was talking about when they were praising the animation detail. The mouth moves incorrectly and completely ruins the realism of the scene. There's a similar problem with the eyes, in my opinion, they show no emotion and just stare at you.
Half Life 2 was realised two years before this trailer and yet, personally, it featured much better facial animation, and is still better than some games today. Even with the latest installment, the graphics aren't as great as games such as Mass Effect 2, and Crysis, but the facial animation allows us to connect with the characters much more easily and they seem more realistic.
