CG Venom vs. Prosthetics Venom

[blitz]

^ he wasnt all cgi


he was played by Bill Nighy, the didnt use cgi all that much on him

haha are you kidding me, John Knoll ILM VFX supervisor said it was all CGI on cgtalk.com and the article on VFXworld.com also said he was all CGI.

 

[Eddie Brock]

haha are you kidding me, John Knoll ILM VFX supervisor said it was all CGI on cgtalk.com and the article on VFXworld.com also said he was all CGI.

exactly, which is why Venom COULD be all CGI

 

[Frenzy]

I heard they're gonna put the money into developing a 'real symbiote' and actually let it loose on Grace so he has some idea of how to 'tweak' his acting to suit the character.

Apparently there's an alien symbiote already on eBay - starting bids around $32.50c -

 

[Eddie Brock]

sweet, aliens on Ebay..

 

[blitz]

exactly, which is why Venom COULD be all CGI

Well ILM did Davey and SPI is doing Spidey so it might be good but SPI aint no ILM...but then again SPI could totally surprise me and out do ILM, so we'll just have to wait.

 

[Eddie Brock]

whoa, holy lot-of-letters Batman!

 

[superkong 500]

exactly, which is why Venom COULD be all CGI

Yep,in the Potc panel knoll even said that they could have use nighty's eyes but they didn't look right I think it had to do with the rest of the eye area something that didn't match(maybe for lighting reasons too) so they prefered to cgi the whole thing.But even then his eyes looked like they were bill's eyes. Pretty amazing and realistic,only gollum and kong have achieved that level of realism before,anyway this is not to bash raimi or anything like that but they are probably using more prostetics for budgetary reasons,even though raimi likes venom now(lets believe he does) sandman its still he's favorite and has much more screentime as the main baddie, so I think that since sandman required a lot of cgi and consumed a lot of the budget,they had to come with less expensive ways to create venom and only use cgi when absolutely nescessary.

 

[SpiderB]

You're using THIS as an example? It's like saying because you see a bad oil painting, oil paints are no good. Who said this was the height of prosthetic work?

Seriously. And the problem with the Thing is the fact that he CAN'T exist realistically in motion. He only works in still frames. Even if they'd made him with CGI, it still would have looked awkward, simply because a man made out of rocks like that really wouldn't be able to move at all. So it's always going to look wrong no matter how they do it.

Venom on the other hand is a normal, fluid creature. He can easily be done with prothetics. I'm sure his mouth will be CG at times and that's fine. I feel sorry for today's CG-dependent generation. People now think that's the only way to do these types of things, and anytime prosthetics or animatronics are mentioned they immediately forget we're in the 21st century now. Practical methods have come a LONG way, people. It's not the 80's anymore.

 

[The Kid]

You're using THIS as an example? It's like saying because you see a bad oil painting, oil paints are no good. Who said this was the height of prosthetic work?

And who's saying all prosthetics are bad? Was I misinterpreted? I'm saying prosthetics for the hulk would be just as good as those for the thing since they're both so huge and impossible to create realistically with prosthetics.

 

[Rocaa]

The costume that Topher wears probably is a "buffing" up suit. This is a unique suit that allows the images caught on film to be edited easier with CGI graphics. The suit would be the baseline and size. With CGI they will imput the symbiote texture over the costume to make it look as the real venom in the comic books. I personally didnt know he'd have to be suited up but then again its a easier job for the graphical designers to do their job with already a bulky baseline which only needs to add texture to it.

 

[Dragon]

And who's saying all prosthetics are bad? Was I misinterpreted? I'm saying prosthetics for the hulk would be just as good as those for the thing since they're both so huge and impossible to create realistically with prosthetics.

They're totally different animals. The Thing has almost no human-musculature. He has human-like limbs but no muscle tone or even joint system like a normal human. The Hulk does. Despite his mass, his musculature is perfectly human in nature.

And the problems with the Thing were totally design-related. His arms could have been bigger. His body could have been less like rocky muscles. His brow could have been bigger. They could have made the rocks more "rock-like", either duller and more rough or more polished in appearance. They chose not to do these things. And as for the photo you posted- further underlining my point. Bad lighting, ridiculous pose, goofy facial expression. None of that having anything to do with prosthetics or the limits thereof.

 

[Spider-Bite]

Prosthetics and puppetry are capable of MUCH more than audiences have been conditioned to realize. Look at the Lycans in Underworld. Look at Doc Ock's tentacles in SM2. The only way Venom will have any real presence is if he's done practically, with a small amount of CG when absolutely necessary(when he's transforming, etc.).

Bottom line, Venom is shaped like a human being. He walks upright, has two legs, two arms, and a head. There's no reason to make him CGI. That's the mistake they made with The Hulk. And don't give me any of that "there's no person in the world big enough to play him" stuff. They can make muscle bodysuits that look totally realistic and are entirely flexible. Example? Mr. Hyde from League of Extaordinary Gentlemen. Heck, there's also a deleted scene on the Scary Movie 3 dvd with Charlie Sheen made up as the Hulk with prosthetics, and it puts the actual Hulk movie to shame.

the problem with the Hulk was the movie, story, action sucked. Hulk himself looked cool I thought. you also have to remember he was like 12 feet tall.

 

[Eddie Brock]

Seriously. And the problem with the Thing is the fact that he CAN'T exist realistically in motion. He only works in still frames. Even if they'd made him with CGI, it still would have looked awkward, simply because a man made out of rocks like that really wouldn't be able to move at all. So it's always going to look wrong no matter how they do it.

Venom on the other hand is a normal, fluid creature. He can easily be done with prothetics. I'm sure his mouth will be CG at times and that's fine. I feel sorry for today's CG-dependent generation. People now think that's the only way to do these types of things, and anytime prosthetics or animatronics are mentioned they immediately forget we're in the 21st century now. Practical methods have come a LONG way, people. It's not the 80's anymore.

that doesn't matter
the fact is, if CGI works, why stop using it?
there would be an obvious drop in quality

 

[Spider-Bite]

the tongue will have to be CGI.

 

[Eddie Brock]

obviously
otherwise it will look like a dead animal

 

[Fran]

howcome people have a hard time believing that an actor (Bill Nighy) played Davy Jones... except that he wore a grey suit and mo-cap makeup?

it can be done.

 

[Eddie Brock]

howcome people have a hard time believing that an actor (Bill Nighy) played Davy Jones... except that he wore a grey suit and mo-cap makeup?

it can be done.

it was all CGI
3 sources have already confirmed it
get over it, that's the fact

 

[storyteller]

The problem with venom is that artist have messed with his design too much over the years

Though not fully transformed, venom doesnt increase his size beyond this.

While lately before the new owner, venom was sized up like this.


So topher being in a suit inst a stretch if we assume they are going for original venom and not it came from outer space dude.

 

[red_x]

it was all CGI
3 sources have already confirmed it
get over it, that's the fact

He wasnt denying it. Bill acted his parts out.

 

[The Kid]

They're totally different animals. The Thing has almost no human-musculature. He has human-like limbs but no muscle tone or even joint system like a normal human. The Hulk does. Despite his mass, his musculature is perfectly human in nature.

And the problems with the Thing were totally design-related. His arms could have been bigger. His body could have been less like rocky muscles. His brow could have been bigger. They could have made the rocks more "rock-like", either duller and more rough or more polished in appearance. They chose not to do these things. And as for the photo you posted- further underlining my point. Bad lighting, ridiculous pose, goofy facial expression. None of that having anything to do with prosthetics or the limits thereof.

Again... I don't really care about the rock vs muscles stuff. This is about big-ass heros and villains being brought to the screen..when did I say anything about the lighting or rock polish, pose or goofy face? I'm saying the thing's comicbook appearance is about as difficult to duplicate in live action as it is for the hulk without some cgi. Prosthetics alone will not be enough. That's my pointy point point. It's seriously not something I thought would lead to any sort of argument since it's so plain to see. He's huge.

Could prosthetics really be used to create some of comic's most hulking characters accurately enuff size-wise without the aid of cgi or clever camera tricks?

 

[Dragon]

Again... I don't really care about the rock vs muscles stuff. This is about big-ass heros and villains being brought to the screen..when did I say anything about the lighting or rock polish, pose or goofy face? I'm saying the thing's comicbook appearance is about as difficult to duplicate in live action as it is for the hulk without some cgi. Prosthetics alone will not be enough. That's my pointy point point. It's seriously not something I thought would lead to any sort of argument since it's so plain to see. He's huge.

Could prosthetics really be used to create some of comic's most hulking characters accurately without the aid of cgi or clever camera tricks?

Well, considering that the Thing is 6 feet tall, and shorter than Mr. Fantastic, I don't see how any of this applies. And the Hulk and the Juggernaut aren't much larger. They are powerful beings, not giants. Going back to my point, the key is in knowing how to film, frame and light the characters to give them a more imposing presence.

As far as Juggy, he wasn't fully depicted because he was in a film that made him an idiot henchman, instead of someone who could take on the entire team of X-men, or Magneto himself (Being that his armor is magical, Magento would have no control over it).

Regarding the Hulk, If anything, in the movie, the Hulk's size took away from him, because he looked, for all his height and girth, weaker than he is in the comics.

The key is not to lean on CG as a crutch, but to make it a tool.

 

[Grobb]

The problem with venom is that artist have messed with his design too much over the years

Though not fully transformed, venom doesnt increase his size beyond this.

Really like that pic

 

[lordofthenerds]

I think its time to shed some light of what the Q&A said into this thread. According to it everythings prosthetics in the mouth except for the tongue. And his suit is black latex.

 

[Mr. Vice]

I think Venom should be CGI.

 

[The Kid]

Well, considering that the Thing is 6 feet tall, and shorter than Mr. Fantastic, I don't see how any of this applies. And the Hulk and the Juggernaut aren't much larger. They are powerful beings, not giants. Going back to my point, the key is in knowing how to film, frame and light the characters to give them a more imposing presence.

As far as Juggy, he wasn't fully depicted because he was in a film that made him an idiot henchman, instead of someone who could take on the entire team of X-men, or Magneto himself (Being that his armor is magical, Magento would have no control over it).

Regarding the Hulk, If anything, in the movie, the Hulk's size took away from him, because he looked, for all his height and girth, weaker than he is in the comics.

The key is not to lean on CG as a crutch, but to make it a tool.

I agree in so far as spiderman's concerned because it completely kills the realism to see a energetic cartoon character suddenly bouncing around every time macguire exits frame. But I can't think of doing the hulk/thing/juggy/any HUGE comic hero justice without fully realizing them through cgi. It's come to such a point where the distinct lines between what's really captured on set and what's added later in a computer are being erased.

roar