[ SECRET POST #5896 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5896 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.



__________________________________________________



08.



















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 43 secrets from Secret Submission Post #844.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

And CGI of live action movies where it is intended to look like a living being looks at best ridiculous at worst disgusting. It Does Not Work.

[(Anonymous)]

SA

Sometimes it doesn't ("live action" Lion King and Cats movie, I'm looking at you two), but sometimes it does (plenty of scifi and fantasy movies with great CGI that make creatures look awesome).

are you saying all CGI in live action movies is bad all the time? That's a weird stance to take. Personally dislike it all, sure. But trying to argue it always is objectively bad is just plain wrong.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't think you're SA/Same Anon, which is used when you're replying to your own comment (usually with additional thoughts or corrections).

[(Anonymous)]

Sorry. I thought it was also used to mean same anon you were just talking to.

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT (anon you're replying to) is what you want.

[(Anonymous)]

i'd say it worked pretty well for the dragons in game of thrones. however, the dragon scenes were sparse and i suspect that show had a massive budget.