a cgi joker this time around?

[A&W]

My point, exactly.

Maybe i'm wrong, I won't refuse to admit it if i'm proven wrong. But I think a full CGI character wouldn't look real enough, in a shot where he is standing next to other human beings. Also acting like a real person I have little doubts about that.

But as I said, if I was being proven wrong, i'd admit it. In the examples you mentionned, I thought even though they were really well depicted, the Hulk and King Kong still struck me as obvious CGI, although really good CGI. It's like in The Amazing Spider-Man, in the high school battle, some shots looked definately CGI and not real actors. So if they can't even hide the CGI in those little momets, I doubt they can make it look convincing enough when they are shown standing alongside real human beings, even less if it's for an entire movie. My 2 cents.

You might be correct in this. I only want them to do it if it is going to look completely real.

I don't have any doubts as far as acting like a real person. Because of today's body and facial motion capture that is no problem. After all this is a real person acting as a person. And I really think Mark Hamil could do it.

James Camerson has talked in interviews about the facial motion capture he created for Avatar, and said this technology will be used in other movies for actors to play dead people and younger versions of themselves. You just transfer an actor's performance into a CGI scrawny, skinny, albino Joker with a face simmiliar to that of his counterpart in the Arkham Asylum and Arkham city games.

You also have to consider that the movie would be years from now. The CGI will be better than what exists today. I think they could do it. I'm sure in a couple shots the CGI might be off, but that happens with every movie as you stated. It all comes down to how good of a job they do and the budget. I think they can afford it. All the other superhero movies get CGI characters that leap in the air and perform all kinds of crazy stunts a human Joker could never pull off.

But if your right and they experimented and it just looked too fake in too many situations I would be opposed to it.

 

[PSYLENTGuardian]

Only for a completely CGI movie like that Arkham City teaser. If you're going to make one character faithful to the comics by making him CGI, you might as well do it to the rest. Do that or bust, 'cause putting a CGI person right next to a real person just feels off sometimes.

 

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

Ok, an all cgi Joker in a live action film? Dumbest idea I have ever heard.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Absolutely brilliant idea. Truly. And I just lurked 4chan.

 

[747]

And TDK was a horrible, horrible movie.

This is the most inane thing I've read on this forum so far. Seriously, alright if you don't like it but "horrible, horrible movie"?

Overall this thread is one big face-palm and that's not just counting the original poster…

 

[A&W]

This is the most inane thing I've read on this forum so far. Seriously, alright if you don't like it but "horrible, horrible movie"?

Overall this thread is one big face-palm and that's not just counting the original poster…

I guess I have to respect your right to be an unimaginative jerk. I for one want joker to be finally done justice. I want people to be amazed and I want him played by the best possible actor. You don't. That is a facepalm.
If it's done good it would be awesome and impressive. One of the best special effects ever and we would finally see the joker as he is in the comic book.
Fans are opposed to this? That is a facepalm.

 

[A&W]

Ok, an all cgi Joker in a live action film? Dumbest idea I have ever heard.

Why do all the other superheroes get CGI villains? Must be cause it's such a dumb idea right?

 

[A&W]

Only for a completely CGI movie like that Arkham City teaser. If you're going to make one character faithful to the comics by making him CGI, you might as well do it to the rest. Do that or bust, 'cause putting a CGI person right next to a real person just feels off sometimes.

Then why isn't every comic book movie completely CGI? Why have a CGI hulk or a CGI lizard in a live action movie?

 

[Majik1387]

Then why isn't every comic book movie completely CGI? Why have a CGI hulk or a CGI lizard in a live action movie?

There is a difference CGI-ing a creature compared to a human being, especially when there will be other live action human beings in the movie.
This idea is stupid.

 

[Rogue Kira]

Ok hear me out. Ledger's joker can't be immitated. A lot of people think he paved the way for how joker will be portrayed in the future. I think that's crazy talk. He did an amazing job and then he died. The last thing you want is for the next portrayal to try and immitate ledger's performance. You want something completely different and the way to be different is by immitating the comic book version.
Don't limit your options to who can both look and act the Parr. Go with CGI and use facial motion capture. He has to look 100% real. Who should play him? Mark hammil from the cartoons and video games. He is perfect. Watch footage of him doing his voice overs. He fan do it better than ledger. But it would take CGI to make him look like the comic book.
I'd not mark than just pick an actor who can act the part but don't limit our options to people who look the part. Use CGI facial motion capture to make him look perfectly like the comic book.

This can only go 2 ways good or really bad

 

[OrgasmicPotatoe]

Then why isn't every comic book movie completely CGI? Why have a CGI hulk or a CGI lizard in a live action movie?

You're seriously asking this ?

Because you either hhave to do it CGI or costume/puppets. CGI might not be at it's best yet, but it sure is thousand times better looking than costumes for characters suc as Lizard and Hulk.

For the Joker, you don't need CGI. You need a good actor, a bit of make up and hair colour and the suit, then you got a Joker.

 

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

Why do all the other superheroes get CGI villains? Must be cause it's such a dumb idea right?

Do I really have to answer this or is it not already an obvious answer. CGI is a tool to use when you cant do something practical, the reason those villains are done with that form is because it cant be done that with practical methods ala The Lizard in ASM.

Though I really feel you just being sarchastic for the sake of it.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

A CGI Joker, in a live action movie, sounds like way too much trouble. The amount of time and money they'd sink into something that would wind up crappy, and take away focus on other things.

And...why?

They could pull off all of the Joker's looks through makeup. Even the almost-non human prolonged chin and nose. They could pull off Jim Lee's Joker, for example, with prosthetics and makeup.

 

[theLegend]

This is the most inane thing I've read on this forum so far. Seriously, alright if you don't like it but "horrible, horrible movie"?

Overall this thread is one big face-palm and that's not just counting the original poster…

Seriously ...

 

[keith_v]

I think the OP's attitude toward the use of CGI reflects that of a lot of people in Hollywood right now. We may laugh and shake our head at the idea of a CGI Joker, but just a few years ago, The Day After Tomorrow used CGI wolves when real wolves would have cost a lot less and looked a lot more realistic. Green Lantern also used an entirely CGI suit when a real suit possibly enhanced by small CGI touches would have been just as good, if not better. Even a character like Gollum could have been done with makeup. I would not at all be surprised if we do see a CGI enhanced Joker in the future. It will probably look horrible and cost a ton, but some studios and directors love to do nothing more than burn through money.