Pearl harbor vs. transformers

6057_3cbf.jpeg (77 KB)

| Send to Facebook | Send To Twitter
  • Leave A Comment

    Notify of
    Inline Feedbacks
    View all comments

    oh wow, never seen THIS before!


    I’ve seen a bunch of these popping up here & there, and really don’t see what the big deal is. It’s a very common practice for a movie/TV show to grab one of thousands of stock clips of just about anything, then have their CGI folks add, remove or otherwise tweak it to get it looking the way the director wants, all for a fraction the cost of actually going out and filming original footage. If a studio isn’t willing to fork out the cash to rent a helicopter to take a few aerial shots of a city, it shouldn’t… Read more »


    Both Michael Bay films. So what’s the problem?


    Last time I checked, films were about telling a story (good or bad) not about what their filmaking budget is. Films use both originally shot and stock footage. I am sure if you look hard enough you might find footage that was used in both a big budget film and also in a low budget independent film. I think Battle: Los Angeles and Skyline used similar shots, along with the same F/X house.


    I agree with all the above that it’s not a big deal, in no way does it lessen the experience of the movies. And yes, reusing stock footage is common practice.


    Both movies were terrible, reguardless of recycled footage


    thank you.


    The exact same thing happened with The Island and Transformers 3. There’s a car chase scene on a freeway that they pretty much took scene for scene… it’s not uncommon, considering getting a scene right could take thousands of dollars and multiple takes for the perfect shot.