00:00
00:00

Reviews for "Macrocosm"

You yourself constantly admit that there are plot holes, so I won't point them out, aside from the obvious, if he just created the world, then what world was he living in?

And I can see why you nitpicked on animation. While the computer scenes were amazing, your cartoon animation was a bit rough. Maybe it was my computer though.

But dont think of this as a big nitpick of your work. It's a standard you've set for yourself, and by god have you made yourself one high standard. A standard of excellence and phenomenal stories. A standard of beautiful animation to carry out these stories. A standard that you have surely carried through with in this animation.

Bravo Pahgawk, and I expect to see you in the next round of NATA. If you don't then your opponent must be God on Earth.

Pahgawk responds:

Thanks :)
I see what you did there with that last sentence. Very nice!
...also I guess I just imagined that, in this strange reality I've made, the "world particle" is like a component of particles, sort of like how when we collide particles in real life, they're there before, but we're only just discovering them. Except I'm not actually sure how it works, and if the new particles we find are little parts that make up the other particles we know of, or if the act of smashing them apart creates the new ones, so I guess I shouldn't be talking until I do a bit more research. It all goes over my head anyway, though.

not sure if the supercollider sort of imagery at the start is suppose to be the creation of a smaller world or if its simply the computer model shown later it seems like conflicting material.

if the collision of mater represents the big bang then you would expect the world to be simple and less defined or for time to move at a faster rate to catch up to the world that created it. if its a computer model then the initial imagery wouldnt be needed .

not sure if you will respond but was this partially inspired by the higs partical experiments ?they lable the higs partical the god partical some times for no reason

Pahgawk responds:

It was more inspired by this short story than anything else: http://qntm.org/responsibility

As for the computer and particle stuff, that was more for visual interest, really, and to segue from the real world, where we have this type of scientific experimentation which still has the potential to lead to exciting and unexpected results, into more of a fantasy world where we actually get the unlikely and unexpected results. Once the model of the particle/world is constructed, the model IS the particle, for all intents and purposes. It makes it hard to apply any realistic logic to it because it's so unrealistic. The timing issue, which is a part where the short story and my movie differ a lot, mainly has to do with the fact that I just didn't have the time to add that level of complexity before the deadline, but also because in a fantasy world I felt it would be safe to take out that step and keep things making enough sense given the context of the already unrealistic world.

that was awesome :D smooth animation, nice lighting effect and story was very good too

That was pretty good! I liked the animation effects you used and how the music was in-sync with the animation.

The music was very nice kinda relaxing but at the same time a bit upbeat. The shading from the light coming off the screen and just the darkness was good. I didn't like how when showing the disaster it was very grainy even for a T.V. I also just liked the character's design especially the little beard he has going on so good job. The credits were very enjoyable but the music I think could've been a little more on the dark side.
5/5
5/5
Favorited

Pahgawk responds:

I'm realizing now that the grain on the TV was just one of those effects I put in out of habit rather than because of reason. I think I was on autopilot for the majorityof the time that I Was making this. Thanks for pointing it out. I'll try to be more aware of these things next time