by "Benjamin Pavsner" <pavsnerp@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
May 22, 2006 at 12:55 PM
1. Stewart and McKellan play characters that can still age, so even if they
make an X Men movie in another 5 years, the fact that Xavier and Magneto
age
won't be THAT much of a problem. Unless Blade turns them into vampires in
X
Men III. That would complicate things.
2. CGI won't erase what Marsters said, Five years from the end of Angel.
"David B" <bothecat3@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:446A94D3.F86256CC@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "(Harmony) Watcher" wrote:
>
> > "Benjamin Pavsner" <pavsnerp@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> > news:axoag.24419$Sl4.17279@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > What I've heard from Marsters in the BrVS mag (maybe the Angel mag.
It
was
> > > one of them) is that of a Spike movie isn't done in a certain amount
of
> > time
> > > (I think he said about 5 years from the end of Angel) he's
absolutely
not
> > > interested. He said that since Spike isn't supposed to age as a
vampire,
> > > Marsters would have aged enough (he'd be in his mid/late 40s) that
it
> > > wouldn't work.
> > >
> > But he's wrong. CGI can do wonders these days. Aging and wrinkles will
not
> > appear after the CGI people process the shots.
>
> In X-Men 3 they used CGI to make Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellan look 2
decades
> younger. I watched a clip of it the other day and it looked weird.
Hopefully it
> works better on the big screen.
>
>
>
>
