Budget - $80.000.000

[Rodrigo90]

This budget has had me with concerns. What could be done,and what cant be done with the money? Does it restrict things like certain villains and action scenes?

Is $80.000.000 a good or a bad thing?

[Excelsior.]

Low paying cast (i would assume), low paying director, in house effects studio. Those will cut costs.

[©KAW]

You'd have to be a genius to try and attempt to make a Spider-Man movie with 80M that competes with other big films (Batman 3 and Star Trek 2).

I don't believe this budget for a second, but I would be extremely intrigued if it were so. It would mean Sony plans on NOT using CGI for about 70% of the entire film, leaving very little room to show off its new 3D movie. Yeah, like that'll happen. Unless you think Aunt May in the kitchen is worth putting Spider-Man in 3D.

[spider-neil]

I don't believe the budget for a second, not for sony's tent pole movie.
other than spidey what other major hit have sony had?

[sweetre15]

However,Hellboy 2 the golden Army had an 80 mill budget and was still pretty awesome looking so let's see if

1.This will be the final/official budget
2. How it looks/when the film is made

[Enolc]

District 9 was done on a $30,000,000 budget.

[spider-neil]

a) HB2 and D9 weren't shot in new york

b) the visual effects needed to realistically realise a humaniod superhuman is night and day for what was required for hellboy and D9

[Oscorp]

I don't belive the budget is only 80. As Kaw said, if they want to make it 3D, they'd probably want to have lots of cool action scenes.

[weezerspider]

If this movie is half as good as District 9, I'll love it!

[Nebins]

Originally Posted by spider-neil

a) HB2 and D9 weren't shot in new york

b) the visual effects needed to realistically realise a humaniod superhuman is night and day for what was required for hellboy and D9

a) The Spidey films weren't entirely filmed in NY. They filmed a lot in other cities that looked like NY. I'm sure the new film will do the same.

b) Not exactly. I would say what Hellboy 2 and District 9 did were much more difficult than anything the Raimi movies accomplished. The effects in District 9 were absolutely incredible. The sheer cast of characters for that budget would be enough to make any VFX Director lose their mind. And all of them fit perfectly in to the scene. A lot of people had no idea they were even CG. That's a far cry from anything in the Raimi films. Spidey always looked fake when he was swinging around.

[spider-neil]

Originally Posted by Nebins

a) The Spidey films weren't entirely filmed in NY. They filmed a lot in other cities that looked like NY. I'm sure the new film will do the same.

b) Not exactly. I would say what Hellboy 2 and District 9 did were much more difficult than anything the Raimi movies accomplished. The effects in District 9 were absolutely incredible. The sheer cast of characters for that budget would be enough to make any VFX Director lose their mind. And all of them fit perfectly in to the scene. A lot of people had no idea they were even CG. That's a far cry from anything in the Raimi films. Spidey always looked fake when he was swinging around.

the effects in hellboy were mythical creatures so a lot of leeway as far as the general audience, 'oh, the way that three headed moves looks totally fake'.
the effects in D9 was more about shaders (the way the scenes were rendered) than anything and how the 3D creations were placed in the scene with the correct lighting.

spider-man is a about someone who looks human but can do superhuman things, even though no one has actually 'SEEN' someone jump one hundred feet in the air, even though no one has 'SEEN' someone swing from a web, even though no one has 'SEEN' someone pick up a car, people HAVE seen points of reference, people picking up heavy objects (for example large rocks) people swing from ropes (action movies) picking scaling buildings (rock climbing/abseiling).

people instinctively know what looks corrects so that presents a much harder challenge for the visual effects house. its exactly the same as avatar and D9, the challenge facing the effects people on avatar was much greater than D9 because people KNOW what correct skin texture, facial ticks and naunces exist in a normal face compared to D9 where the face is completely alien so they have more leeway in selling the image to the audience.

sony should be spending more money to perfect spidey's effects not less.

[©KAW]

Nope, even with three headed monsters it should be counted as the quality CGI or not, it's doesn't get a pass from me. Which is why I love Pan's Labyrinth, extremely great looking monster effects. No excuses.

[spider-neil]

Originally Posted by ©KAW

Nope, even with three headed monsters it should be counted as the quality CGI or not, it's doesn't get a pass from me. Which is why I love Pan's Labyrinth, extremely great looking monster effects. No excuses.

I'm not talking about the quality of the render/visual I'm talking the quality of the motion.

[DACMAN]

Originally Posted by ©KAW

You'd have to be a genius to try and attempt to make a Spider-Man movie with 80M that competes with other big films (Batman 3 and Star Trek 2).

I don't believe this budget for a second, but I would be extremely intrigued if it were so. It would mean Sony plans on NOT using CGI for about 70% of the entire film, leaving very little room to show off its new 3D movie. Yeah, like that'll happen. Unless you think Aunt May in the kitchen is worth putting Spider-Man in 3D.

HAHAHAHA!!! Funny and a great point.

[Nebins]

Originally Posted by spider-neil

the effects in hellboy were mythical creatures so a lot of leeway as far as the general audience, 'oh, the way that three headed moves looks totally fake'.
the effects in D9 was more about shaders (the way the scenes were rendered) than anything and how the 3D creations were placed in the scene with the correct lighting.

spider-man is a about someone who looks human but can do superhuman things, even though no one has actually 'SEEN' someone jump one hundred feet in the air, even though no one has 'SEEN' someone swing from a web, even though no one has 'SEEN' someone pick up a car, people HAVE seen points of reference, people picking up heavy objects (for example large rocks) people swing from ropes (action movies) picking scaling buildings (rock climbing/abseiling).

people instinctively know what looks corrects so that presents a much harder challenge for the visual effects house. its exactly the same as avatar and D9, the challenge facing the effects people on avatar was much greater than D9 because people KNOW what correct skin texture, facial ticks and naunces exist in a normal face compared to D9 where the face is completely alien so they have more leeway in selling the image to the audience.

sony should be spending more money to perfect spidey's effects not less.

What District 9 accomplished was about much more than just the shaders. It takes more than a good shader to make something look believable. The lighting, comping, texturing, and rendering are all just as important. Good lighting and comping can make up for a mediocre shader. District 9 did all of that flawlessly as well as the animation. Yes they used mocap but we all know that's not the end all be all of animating a film. While, yes, I agree that making a CG human is less forgiving, it doesn't mean that Spider-Man would be more difficult than District 9 was. Believable animation is the same for both. Those aliens were the first time in any movie I've seen that I believed the animated characters were living breathing creatures. Everything down to the little ticks they had was done expertly. Not once in the original Spider-Man movies did I believe the CG. What they couldn't do with a $200 million dollar budget District 9 did with $30 million.

[©KAW]

Originally Posted by spider-neil

I'm not talking about the quality of the render/visual I'm talking the quality of the motion.

Yeah, so what. Either way, if they're going to use CGI, then it's their job to make it look great. I don't care if it's a mouse size man with three heads and a baboon's ass.

[spider-neil]

Originally Posted by ©KAW

Yeah, so what. Either way, if they're going to use CGI, then it's their job to make it look great. I don't care if it's a mouse size man with three heads and a baboon's ass.

well bottom line for me is spidey's effects imho are more difficult to achieve than D9 or HB, we're going to have to agree to disagree on that one.

[Naite22]

The budget will be at least 150 mill... This is a spidey movie, and it WILL earn it all back.

[Ajendo]

Not really. Some of the effects in the first spidey movie were flawless, (spidey ddging GG's razor bats in the burning building) the key is to keep the effects consistent and not wasting time and money on trying to render shots that don't need CG rendering. If something can be done via practical means, then it should be done and not CGI'd and made to look like crap while they're doing it as was the case numerous times in Raimi's movies.

[Naite22]

Originally Posted by Ajendo

Not really. Some of the effects in the first spidey movie were flawless, (spidey ddging GG's razor bats in the burning building) the key is to keep the effects consistent and not wasting time and money on trying to render shots that don't need CG rendering. If something can be done via practical means, then it should be done and not CGI'd and made to look like crap while they're doing it as was the case numerous times in Raimi's movies.

Uhhh... That was CG??? If so, then YES, it did look flawless.

[Ajendo]

Yeah, it was CG much to everyone's surprise.

[spider-neil]

Originally Posted by Ajendo

Yeah, it was CG much to everyone's surprise.

I was blown away when I saw the wireframe render about a year after the movie. wow

[Nebins]

Think you could find the link to that? I haven't seen it.

[spider-neil]

Originally Posted by Nebins

Think you could find the link to that? I haven't seen it.

I saw it on a special effects web site. that's all the information I have as I saw it years ago.

no wire frame but here is the scene again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GAXZDl0WKA

[©KAW]

One scene (lasting about 11 seconds) out of a 2 hour film. It's the lack of consistency that's Sony Imageworks' problem.