Superman Returns CG Superman Ragdoll?

[Visionary]

I don't have a problem with the visual-effects, I have a problem with that horrible digital camera they're using. It makes everything look too shiny, sterile, it looks like every scene has been dipped in gloss.

 

[Cinemaman]

The CG won't be finished yet. They won't put finished CG on the trailers so no one can rip it.

Post production was ended on May 12th.

 

[bosef982]

Spare-Flair, I was listening to you -- cuz I actually agree with the falling shot but I dont mind it that much at all actually -- until you got into the whole bullet shot scene and all that pathetic nonsense of physics that you outlined.

I mean, come the **** on. You're watching a film about a guy who flies around in a cape. Not to say anything should be acceptable. But there are moments of creative liscence -- this is one of them. Get over it.

Bashing this film, being that you're somewhat in the industry, isn't going to improve your chances of succeeding in whatever endeavor you're in, nor does it make you look any cooler, nor any more unique.

It honestly just makes for some really annoying reading.

Plus, if we must, the guy doesn't track the bullet down. He just looks down fast in slow mo--which so happens to take place as the bullet's dropping. He was anticipating it dropping so knew where to look -- as to the richoett effect. This is already been explained by easy physics principal. A point blank shot that close, with such direction, against an object such as Superman would absorb the residual kinetic energy.

Now seriously, got take a pill or something and just enjoy the film.

 

[StarvingArtist]

Spare-Flair, I was listening to you -- cuz I actually agree with the falling shot but I dont mind it that much at all actually -- until you got into the whole bullet shot scene and all that pathetic nonsense of physics that you outlined.

I mean, come the **** on. You're watching a film about a guy who flies around in a cape. Not to say anything should be acceptable. But there are moments of creative liscence -- this is one of them. Get over it.

Bashing this film, being that you're somewhat in the industry, isn't going to improve your chances of succeeding in whatever endeavor you're in, nor does it make you look any cooler, nor any more unique.

It honestly just makes for some really annoying reading.

Plus, if we must, the guy doesn't track the bullet down. He just looks down fast in slow mo--which so happens to take place as the bullet's dropping. He was anticipating it dropping so knew where to look -- as to the richoett effect. This is already been explained by easy physics principal. A point blank shot that close, with such direction, against an object such as Superman would absorb the residual kinetic energy.

Now seriously, got take a pill or something and just enjoy the film.

Couldn't agree more.

Some of you seriously just can't get over yourselves and your petty, "I could do better," nitpicky egos and just lose yourself in visuals that we've never ever seen before in a Superman movie. It really is just as baffling as it is irritating.

You call yourself fans, yet all I've been reading for the past year is this is crap or that's crap. Seriously, when did the Superman fan crowd get so....fundamentalist? It's either a shade of red or an error in physics or God knows what else and automatically the film is average/crappy/blasphemy.

I'll tell you what's really pathetic; all of you who have some serious gripe or something with the movie think that the rest of us don't see what you're talking about. The truth is we do. However, it's not enough to send us into an uproar. Why? Because of one simple fact....SUPERMAN IS BACK ON THE SCREEN AND DOING THINGS WE'VE NEVER SEEN BEFORE!!!! We are fans of Superman. Doesn't that truth come before any CGI nitpick or average line delivery?

Seriously, get off your friggan high horses. This movie is going to be amazing and you all know it. If you don't think so, then don't **** on the cloud nine the rest of the world is on.

 

[bosef982]

I mean, if the CGI was god-awful. I'd understand. Of if it was even just not up to par, I'd complain too. However, the CGI in this film looks AMAZING in some shots, and okay in other shots. This could be they're not done -- I know for a fact two weeks ago they were not.

Or, it could just be translation of the shot to the trailer. Or it could just be that this was a shot they didn't need to spend SOOO much time on. Either way, the CIG we're seeing in this film is by far some of the most advanced CGI we've seen in a while, already beating Spider-Man's 2 CGI IMO.

I've got no gripes nor complaints. And the degree to which Singer has already shown his knack of adhering to physics is impressive. In fact, I believe they were even talking how they had specialists in engineering and the like on board. I'd doubt these PROFESSIONAL EXPERTS would've forgotten to describe something as obvious as if a bullet would ricohchett or not. And if not, so what? It looks cool and audiences will be too sold to even care.

 

[dark_b]

Post production was ended on May 12th.

this is a joke right?
this will not be fininshed until the premiere.

 

[Jakomus]

I don't have a problem with the visual-effects, I have a problem with that horrible digital camera they're using. It makes everything look too shiny, sterile, it looks like every scene has been dipped in gloss.

I couldn't disagree with you more! I love that effect!

 

[Jakomus]

Couldn't agree more.

Some of you seriously just can't get over yourselves and your petty, "I could do better," nitpicky egos and just lose yourself in visuals that we've never ever seen before in a Superman movie. It really is just as baffling as it is irritating.

You call yourself fans, yet all I've been reading for the past year is this is crap or that's crap. Seriously, when did the Superman fan crowd get so....fundamentalist? It's either a shade of red or an error in physics or God knows what else and automatically the film is average/crappy/blasphemy.

I'll tell you what's really pathetic; all of you who have some serious gripe or something with the movie think that the rest of us don't see what you're talking about. The truth is we do. However, it's not enough to send us into an uproar. Why? Because of one simple fact....SUPERMAN IS BACK ON THE SCREEN AND DOING THINGS WE'VE NEVER SEEN BEFORE!!!! We are fans of Superman. Doesn't that truth come before any CGI nitpick or average line delivery?

Seriously, get off your friggan high horses. This movie is going to be amazing and you all know it. If you don't think so, then don't **** on the cloud nine the rest of the world is on.

I don't think it's a case of naysayers being on their high horses. I think it's because they want this film to rule so badly, they feel the need to be vocal about things they don't like, and hopefully that will result in it being improved.

at least that's why i've done things like that on other message boards.

 

[Matt]

Who did the CGI anyway? Was it ILM? WETA seems like the ideal choice. Jackson's company has easily surpassed ILM in the grounds of realistic looking CGI.

 

[DorkyFresh]

I don't think it's a case of naysayers being on their high horses. I think it's because they want this film to rule so badly, they feel the need to be vocal about things they don't like, and hopefully that will result in it being improved.

at least that's why i've done things like that on other message boards.

well....some of the guys around here have gone so far as to say stuff such as "singer ruined X-Men and is now ruining Superman" and "everything i've seen about this movie just plain sucks."

when you read stuff like that, it's hard to think these guys actually WANT Superman Returns to succeed...

 

[Jakomus]

Who did the CGI anyway? Was it ILM? WETA seems like the ideal choice. Jackson's company has easily surpassed ILM in the grounds of realistic looking CGI.

Sony Imageworks, I think. The company that did Spider-Man 2.

 

[Jakomus]

well....some of the guys around here have gone so far as to say stuff such as "singer ruined X-Men and is now ruining Superman" and "everything i've seen about this movie just plain sucks."

when you read stuff like that, it's hard to think these guys actually WANT Superman Returns to succeed...

Oh, if you're talking about those select few, then they're most likely trolling/bitter (there's still the chance they do want Superman to succeed though). But people like Spare-Flair who are merely concerned about one aspect, I think that's brought on by dissappointment rather than hatred of the character.

 

[Cinemaman]

Sony Imageworks, I think. The company that did Spider-Man 2.

This company also got Oscar Award for best vissual effects for Spidey2.

 

[millennium movies]

I agree with spiderfalir for the landing shot and another shot he didnt mention;

supes stoping in mid air which then is follwed by a close up of the real actor

That shot the proportions of his body seem wrong in a few frames, as if he's becoming skinnier as his body is more visible. Then the real next shot he seems huge in comparison with that previous CGI shot!

Spider-Flair, i do agree CGI should be kept to a minimum. I mean they did mention in the blogs how mobile the rig was. It go back and front, up and down, and apparently turn on itself. So there you besically have all the agility you need. The rest is all about camera work!

 

[Capt. Jack]

you know i have thinking about this long and hard and i think i know why the CGI looks like CGI

BECAUSE IT IS ****ING CGI dont expect so much the only other film that delt with flying and whatnot of a high magnitude was the matrix sequels and most of the time it was very dark so the CG looked convincing whereas superman is rather light and almost always day stuff which is much harder when you cant hide the CG in darkness

so yeah it looks as good as i could imagine without it being real so who cares
unless you can do better just let it go and especially the bullet scene which looked amazing

 

[Jakomus]

you know i have thinking about this long and hard and i think i know why the CGI looks like CGI

BECAUSE IT IS ****ING CGI dont expect so much the only other film that delt with flying and whatnot of a high magnitude was the matrix sequels and most of the time it was very dark so the CG looked convincing whereas superman is rather light and almost always day stuff which is much harder when you cant hide the CG in darkness

But the main shot people are complaining about, the shot in your avatar, is as dark as any shot in the Matrix movies.

 

[Pede-Pedaw]

I've enjoyed reading this thread. I lot of good points made in here. I am also one of those guys that picks out the CG in every movie and I think to myself, "that's good CG" or "that's bad CG."

I had the same problem with a couple of the metioned shots above being obvious CG until I saw the trailer with MI:3 in IMAX. The landing shot looked great and people around me were like, "Wow! This movie looks pretty good."

As far as the backflipping/falling shot in the new trailer goes, I would have thought those shots were CG had I not seen the BTS clips of routh doing almost that exact move in the wire rig. So now, because I am unsure, I believe the Sony company deserves mad props. They also deserve a hand for all of the CG shots in the trailers that people aren't complaining about.

Peace.

I might as well post this too since I don't post that often: George Lucas listened to all of the complaints about Vader's arms in the first trailer for EP3:ROTS (they were up while he was on the examination table which a lot of people thought it made him look weak, so they put them at his sides for the next trailer and in the movie). So, maybe fanboy nitpicking is good for a film if it is still in post production. We probably will see some more polished CG come June 30. I wouldn't worry.

Just to be clear on things, I think the movie looks amazing!!!

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

The CGI looks incredible.

The rag doll physics looks incredible too, and when your questioning wheter or not it's a CGI Brandon Routh or the real one.......that's a GOOD thing. It means the illusion is working.

 

[DocLathropBrown]

Spare-Flair, you do realize that first shot of Reeve flying in the FOS was wirework in a REAL set, not rear-screen projection like the missle catching footage, right?

As for the guy being able to follow the bullet as it falls? Bullets are quicker than the human eye, but it was ground to a halt by flying into Superman. Thus, it falls at a speed that the human eye can see. Nothing odd about him seeing the bullet once it falls. All of it's speed was wiped away upon impact.

 

[The Kid]

true. I've seen bullets hit bullet proof glass and they're pretty easy to follow once they've stopped and fall to the ground...

 

[Gamma Ray]

Do you continuously re-watch the trailer looking for new things to complain about? These topics get more and more pointless by the day.

 

[ultimatefan]

One thing people don´t realize - and they didn´t realize that in the Spider-Man movies too - is a lot of that "ragdoll" effect doesn´t come from the FX, but from the suit. The suit is made to make the character look more like in the comics, so there´s padding to enhance muscle definition, no wrinkles, etc. The result is a very iconic comic-like image of Superman, but also an artificial one, where the characters looks kinda like a doll. It´s that or the "grown man wearing pajamas" feel of a plain spandex suit.

 

[Cinemaman]

The CGI looks incredible.

The rag doll physics looks incredible too, and when your questioning wheter or not it's a CGI Brandon Routh or the real one.......that's a GOOD thing. It means the illusion is working.

 

[GreenKToo]

good thing there is no pause, and rewind button in the theater,or we would never get through it.

 

[Comicfan]

good thing there is no pause, and rewind button in the theater,or we would never get through it.

How about frame by frame