If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Entertainment Weekly)   The best/worst moments in CGI from 2012. For once, we got a good Hulk   (ew.com) divider line 72
    More: Spiffy, Avengers, Hulk, Mark Ruffalo, Joss Whedon, The Incredible Hulk  
•       •       •

12175 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 09 Dec 2012 at 10:00 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



72 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-10 10:37:58 AM

Obscure Login: Prometheus was one of the worst? What the hell were they watching?

The movie sucked but the CGI was some of the best I've ever seen. That movie was gorgeous.


I think "Worst CGI" really meant "CGI in a movie we hated". Spiderman - I didn't see the movie, butg the CGI on the lizard looks OK in all the trailers and pictures I've seen...was it really bad, or was the character just bad? Crappy list.


And the Twilight baby...(never seen the movie or read the books) was there a reason it had to be CGI? Did it have vampire teeth? Buffy-esque wrinkly forehead? Did it talk? What?
 
2012-12-10 10:45:41 AM

vrax: Rev. Skarekroe: Also:

WORST: Prometheus
Ridley Scott's huge pale-as-snow bald ''engineers'' could have looked threatening, but nope, they just looked horribly unrealistic, bulky and glassy-eyed. Noomi Rapace ripping that twisty alien baby out of her belly with surgical help? We concede, well done. -Solvej Schou

I believe the Engineers were a practical effect using costumes, not CGI.

[s3.amazonaws.com image 509x960]

Yeah, and say what you want about the story, but the film was visually stunning which was even more apparent on the Blu-Ray than in the theater (theaters need to get their shiat together).


I saw it projected at 4k 3D in a theater, and it was definitely stunning to watch. Prometheus is proof that you can't have a good movie without a good script. Every other aspect of that movie was executed as well as can be done, but since the script was so weak, the movie ended up a stinker.
 
2012-12-10 10:47:30 AM

ODDwhun: As a CGI creation the Avengers hulk was really good, but in my mind the Edward Norton Hulk looks more like the Hulk to me. The Incredible Hulk version looked like a huge green human with giant muscles, but the Avengers one looks more ape-like to me.


The Norton Hulk looked too rubbery/plastic. The new one actually looked like skin, and his movements were much more natural.

/ILM FTW
 
2012-12-10 10:58:52 AM

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: Obscure Login: Prometheus was one of the worst? What the hell were they watching?

The movie sucked but the CGI was some of the best I've ever seen. That movie was gorgeous.

I think "Worst CGI" really meant "CGI in a movie we hated". Spiderman - I didn't see the movie, butg the CGI on the lizard looks OK in all the trailers and pictures I've seen...was it really bad, or was the character just bad? Crappy list.


And the Twilight baby...(never seen the movie or read the books) was there a reason it had to be CGI? Did it have vampire teeth? Buffy-esque wrinkly forehead? Did it talk? What?


The character was pretty bad. Read; lizard creature with a diabolical British accent.
 
2012-12-10 11:04:40 AM
While I really like Skyfall, I thought the CGI they did for Bardem looked pretty fake.
 
2012-12-10 11:35:05 AM
 
2012-12-10 11:43:52 AM

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: And the Twilight baby...(never seen the movie or read the books) was there a reason it had to be CGI? Did it have vampire teeth? Buffy-esque wrinkly forehead? Did it talk? What?


I don't think the Twilight vampires have fangs. Or forehead ridges. And the protagonist ones don't drink human blood. And they sparkle. And they all have X-Men powers.

WTF are they called vampires again?
 
mhd
2012-12-10 12:45:29 PM

Mugato: WTF are they called vampires again?


Because they're, like, totally goff, duh!

Signed,
Ebony Dark'ness Dementia Raven Way

/used to be Plague Incarnate, then became STD Incarnate, then just Sex Incarnate, now they're Promise Ring Incarnate
 
2012-12-10 12:45:40 PM

sno man: Earth's greater gravity isn't greater enough for that. He couldn't even pull that off on the moon....


When it was written it wasn't known how it would affect movement, so it was written that way.
My only complaint is that when ERB wrote the surface looked like moss, he meant



not

www.ceredigiongrowers.co.uk
thrown on the ground.
 
2012-12-10 12:47:29 PM
www.publicdomainpictures.net 

this..derp
Anyway TFA gave me some movies to watch
 
2012-12-10 01:07:24 PM
Anyone else think Common Gateway Interface when you hear CGI?
 
2012-12-10 04:09:32 PM

Funbags: Hulk might have looked a bit like Ruffalo, but he didn't look like he was actually present in the scenes with live action characters. Too bad the animators didn't think the latter would have been more important.


Except he actually sorta was. They even had the motion capture actor (Ruffalo or not, idk) in green so the lighting reflecting onto the other actors was correct.

media.digititles.com
 
2012-12-10 04:55:56 PM

cretinbob: I think the author had issue with the believablity of the freakishly huge jumps John Carter was making, even more than the quality or not of the movie, story or the balance of the CGI...

Yes, his complaints were about the jumps. Like most people, he never read the book.


That's not a very good defense.

One of the hardest tasks that you take on when doing an adaptation is knowing what to keep from the original, what to modify, and what to discard. It doesn't matter that the characters in the books jumped around like they had rocket boots, on the screen it looks stupid. See also Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes adaptation.

/ Now, if they wanted to keep all the nudity from the books, that would have been a bold, artistic choice.
 
2012-12-10 05:27:23 PM

Some 'Splainin' To Do: cretinbob: I think the author had issue with the believablity of the freakishly huge jumps John Carter was making, even more than the quality or not of the movie, story or the balance of the CGI...

Yes, his complaints were about the jumps. Like most people, he never read the book.

That's not a very good defense.

One of the hardest tasks that you take on when doing an adaptation is knowing what to keep from the original, what to modify, and what to discard. It doesn't matter that the characters in the books jumped around like they had rocket boots, on the screen it looks stupid. See also Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes adaptation.

/ Now, if they wanted to keep all the nudity from the books, that would have been a bold, artistic choice.


You're complaining about people making big leaps in a movie set on Mars involving multi-armed multi-colored Martians, six-limbed giant carnivorous white gorillas, and a human man who becomes the savior of them all because humans are the most amazing beings in the universe.
 
2012-12-10 06:44:59 PM

Tsar_Bomba1: vrax: Tsar_Bomba1: And I'm probably one of a few, but I thought CGI Fifield was more terrifying than practical effect Fifield.

Absolutely! After I saw the cut scene I was thinking "WTF?! You guys cut this?!?!" This was definitely a case where the CGI was the better option, in every way, by far! Ridley was wrong.


I believe I read somewhere that they couldn't get the practical Fifield Babyhead to Ridley's satisfaction.
[cdn.chud.com image 800x450]

This would have been better. Weta did the cgi.
[lh4.googleusercontent.com image 576x256]

[lh4.googleusercontent.com image 576x256]


Yeah, WETA killed it. Plus, the stills don't even do it justice. People have to see the actual scene to understand why the CGI is so much better.
 
2012-12-10 07:04:39 PM

Nurglitch: I prefer the practical-effects Fifield. He looks more like a reanimated corpse. The CGI looks better in this case, but it doesn't really make any sense. Why would Fifield go through such a change? Especially when the usual effect of the black goo is to disintegrate the unfortunate that comes into contact.




Well the worms appeared to be your standard earthworms (LV-426 worms?) until they got drenched in the goo and turned into the millipede creatures. Quite a bit different than their original form. So I can see Fifield turning into the CGI Babyhead pretty easy. And that was the original plan - but Ridley vetoed it.

Not trying to be a huge defender of the movie since it did have it's flaws. Like it said on the BluRay "Questions will be answered." And they were... but it's a bit of a rip to have to buy a special edition to find out exactly how they wanted the film to come across, all of the changes that were made and why to get the full concept of the film. I can understand why Millburn decided to try and pet the millipede creatures after watching the deleted clips/bonus content. But when I saw it in the theater I thought it was pretty stupid and not explained very well at all.
 
2012-12-10 07:49:56 PM

Keizer_Ghidorah: You're complaining about people making big leaps in a movie set on Mars involving multi-armed multi-colored Martians, six-limbed giant carnivorous white gorillas, and a human man who becomes the savior of them all because humans are the most amazing beings in the universe.


This of course, is the correct answer.
For the bazillionth time, John Cater did not rake in the bucks because the promotion was shiat, both in quality and quantity,
I'm no fan of McBurgerWorld tie ins, but they work. More than two commercials would have helped as well. And not calling it science fiction.
Yes I've read all the books more than once each. But remember, someone else out there has read them even more than me.
 
2012-12-10 08:03:02 PM

Keizer_Ghidorah: Some 'Splainin' To Do: cretinbob: I think the author had issue with the believablity of the freakishly huge jumps John Carter was making, even more than the quality or not of the movie, story or the balance of the CGI...

Yes, his complaints were about the jumps. Like most people, he never read the book.

That's not a very good defense.

One of the hardest tasks that you take on when doing an adaptation is knowing what to keep from the original, what to modify, and what to discard. It doesn't matter that the characters in the books jumped around like they had rocket boots, on the screen it looks stupid. See also Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes adaptation.

/ Now, if they wanted to keep all the nudity from the books, that would have been a bold, artistic choice.

You're complaining about people making big leaps in a movie set on Mars involving multi-armed multi-colored Martians, six-limbed giant carnivorous white gorillas, and a human man who becomes the savior of them all because humans are the most amazing beings in the universe.


Dude, you clearly missed the point of John Carter. It's because white men are the most amazing beings in the universe.

/love ERB, but he was crazy racist
 
2012-12-10 09:32:39 PM

skepticultist: Keizer_Ghidorah: Some 'Splainin' To Do: cretinbob: I think the author had issue with the believablity of the freakishly huge jumps John Carter was making, even more than the quality or not of the movie, story or the balance of the CGI...

Yes, his complaints were about the jumps. Like most people, he never read the book.

That's not a very good defense.

One of the hardest tasks that you take on when doing an adaptation is knowing what to keep from the original, what to modify, and what to discard. It doesn't matter that the characters in the books jumped around like they had rocket boots, on the screen it looks stupid. See also Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes adaptation.

/ Now, if they wanted to keep all the nudity from the books, that would have been a bold, artistic choice.

You're complaining about people making big leaps in a movie set on Mars involving multi-armed multi-colored Martians, six-limbed giant carnivorous white gorillas, and a human man who becomes the savior of them all because humans are the most amazing beings in the universe.

Dude, you clearly missed the point of John Carter. It's because white men are the most amazing beings in the universe.

/love ERB, but he was crazy racist


Oh, I know that. Mighty Whitey Tarzan, stranded and orphaned as a baby in the heart of Darkest Africa, raised by fictional ape-men because people thought gorillas were vicious monsters back then, and he grows up to be the Doctor Doolittle king of the jungle noble savage who knows more about Africa than the natives who lived there for a couple million years. At least John Carter was less of that, as there were many badass characters in the Martian Chronicles.

Too bad Disney had to be the company that made it, a bit more violence and a lot more skin would have made it a better film.
 
2012-12-11 12:12:25 AM

Jim_Callahan: Funbags: Chronicle's effects were laughably bad, particularly any scene where the characters were depicted as flying.

Not so much bad as intentionally minimal, and not just to save money. The flying was _supposed_ to look awkward, both to keep the metaphor for adolescence rolling and because it wasn't so much flying as picking themselves up with telekinesis and tossing themselves around inside invincible force-shield.


That's actually a pretty solid observation. When I think of "superhero flight" I think of someone basically liberated from gravity, when its evident that whatever change the kids underwent gave them powerful telekinetic powers, though not necessarily flight/gravity cancellation abilities.
 
2012-12-11 12:17:55 AM

Cyno01: Funba


Interesting. Looks like they did put some thought into how the actors could physically interact with a being 3x their size, but most of the scenes where they just stood in frame together, the Hulk looked like CGI. Very good, highly detailed CGI, but he didn't look made of the same stuff the actual actors were made of. The got away with the mostly CGI Iron Man, because of the inherent inexpressiveness of a metal exosuit, but a large, mostly naked human? Not so much.
 
2012-12-11 12:34:49 AM

Funbags: Cyno01: Funba

Interesting. Looks like they did put some thought into how the actors could physically interact with a being 3x their size, but most of the scenes where they just stood in frame together, the Hulk looked like CGI. Very good, highly detailed CGI, but he didn't look made of the same stuff the actual actors were made of. The got away with the mostly CGI Iron Man, because of the inherent inexpressiveness of a metal exosuit, but a large, mostly naked human? Not so much.


Well yeah, CGI is good, but its still not that good. Maybe in 10 years when Joss releases The Avengers - Special Edition.
 
Displayed 22 of 72 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report