His webslinging still looks off

[Tony Stark]

Again, good for you. Some people do accept mediocrity. Other people want to get their money's worth.

You're right, where do I get my money back for that piece of crap called Superman Returns?

 

[The Kid]

And some people acknowledge quality while others need to put things down to feel better about themselves. Whatever helps you to sleep.

I have no agenda against raimi or his movies. I just want the best spider-man I can get. And I'm not afraid to speak my mind about it.

 

[ultimatefan]

I have no agenda against raimi or his movies. I just want the best spider-man I can get. And I'm not afraid to speak my mind about it.

Oh yeah, it´s so brave to rant in front of your computer about a movie on an anonymous Internet board...

 

[Nebins]

Side? I could seriously care less if you don't want to be here talking about this. I'm not concerned with kiddie playground games where everyone chooses sides and hides behind someone else who thinks for them. I'm just excercising OUR right to freely discuss this kind of topic. Don't like it? Leave.

If you could care less about sides why are you on here quoting every person who disagrees with you and then tell them they are wrong. If there were sides trust me you would be the last kid on the other side of the red rover line in this "kiddie playground game." You don't even have a base for your argument. It's solely "I can tell its CGI so it's bad". Like I said before, show me a movie where you can't tell it's CGI.

 

[The Kid]

Oh yeah, it´s so brave to rant in front of your computer about a movie on an anonymous Internet board...

Yes, it actually is. You act like that was supposed to be insulting to me. I'm not afraid of having my own opinion, and sharing it with people who I know for sure are full of bias. I don't care about the consequences of dissent anymore. We shouldn't be afraid to say what we want to say. I'm glad I can do it, and I'm glad we all can.

 

[ultimatefan]

You know what, this guys likes to argue, not to debate, and it´s been like that for a while. I should have put him on my ignore list way back. That´s his rightful place.

 

[The Kid]

If you could care less about sides why are you on here quoting every person who disagrees with you and then tell them they are wrong. If there were sides trust me you would be the last kid on the other side of the red rover line in this "kiddie playground game." You don't even have a base for your argument. It's solely "I can tell its CGI so it's bad". Like I said before, show me a movie where you can't tell it's CGI.

I still think hulk has the best visual fx out of every comicbook movie though it's hard to say whether that's true when I actually don't know what was cgi vs what was actually V doing all that crazy cool stuff. If there was cgi in begins, I didn't see it. I was going to say fantastic four, mostly for Johnny's flame fx but now I remember the awful doom vs Thing battle which looked like ****. I don't remember how Mr. Fantastic's fx looked. oh and terminator 2 still is on the top for me as far as brilliant cgi work is concerned. The sequel was ok, but seems like nothing compared to t2 and there's one part that makes me wonder why they let that cgi shot pass quality control. it's when arnie's head is knocked off by the She-terminator. I'm hesitant to say this next but looking back, the stuff achieved in batman forever and batman and robin no matter how you view them, those fx were really cool. My fav is the money shot of robin in forever.

 

[Nebins]

I still think hulk has the best visual fx out of every comicbook movie though it's hard to say whether that's true when I actually don't know what was cgi vs what was actually V doing all that crazy cool stuff. If there was cgi in begins, I didn't see it. I was going to say fantastic four, mostly for Johnny's flame fx but now I remember the awful doom vs Thing battle which looked like ****. I don't remember how Mr. Fantastic's fx looked. oh and terminator 2 still is on the top for me as far as brilliant cgi work is concerned. The sequel was ok, but seems like nothing compared to t2 and there's one part that makes me wonder why they let that cgi shot pass quality control. it's when arnie's head is knocked off by the She-terminator. I'm hesitant to say this next but looking back, the stuff achieved in batman forever and batman and robin no matter how you view them, those fx were really cool. My fav is the money shot of robin in forever.

I agree with you on the Hulk. That movie had great visual effects. I don't remember the Batman titles but the rest did have great effects. You can still tell it is CGI though. I don't mean to talk for everyone but I think this is what everyone is saying here. You can have great effects but it's nearly impossible to get it to the point of where you can't tell it's CGI. Which means there is always room for improvement. While you can tell Spider-man is CGI in some scenes these movies are still ahead of the game in CGI.

 

[The Kid]

I agree with you on the Hulk. That movie had great visual effects. I don't remember the Batman titles but the rest did have great effects. You can still tell it is CGI though. I don't mean to talk for everyone but I think this is what everyone is saying here. You can have great effects but it's nearly impossible to get it to the point of where you can't tell it's CGI. Which means there is always room for improvement. While you can tell Spider-man is CGI in some scenes these movies are still ahead of the game in CGI.

*shrugs* i think we can. Hulk was a billion times harder to do than spidey. And Nothing in either film has topped this yet and it's just some trailer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7GtVwXET3k

 

[Visionary]

You could tell Hulk was CGI 99.9% of the time you saw him, most people thought he looked rubbery. I could easily point out the non-human looking CGI movement in Lord of the Rings, including Gollum. Human CGI is the easiest to tell it's CGI, the eyes know how a human being is suppose move and when it's not perfect (which no human CGI is), you can tell. That's the way it's gonna remain until they perfect it. Which is probably about 7 to 10 years away...or maybe more.

 

[Weapon M]

I kind of understand what you are saying, but the same time I understand why he looks like he does. This is a movie, he has to look realistic when he is web-slinging..

Same time: This is a movie, so they could make it look much more graceful, and eloquent up in the air like they do in the comic books. It always seems like when you look at the panels of Spider man, (from the best artists) he is dancing in the air. That's what's so beautiful about Spider man sometimes. He looks better then Superman/ Batman etc. when he is up in the air, he's spinning in the air, pirouetting through the webs. He is having fun, he's a young man.

He's free up there. Above all his problems. It's almost as if it's a way for him to let things go.

I think they should capture that when he web swings. I don't necessarily see that when I am watching these movies as much. Looks a lil stiff.

 

[Nebins]

*shrugs* i think we can. Hulk was a billion times harder to do than spidey. And Nothing in either film has topped this yet and it's just some trailer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7GtVwXET3k

I remember first seeing that trailer. It definitely gives the movie a different feel than it actually had. The quality of that trailer is kind of bad but it still looks like good CGI.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

You could tell Hulk was CGI 99.9% of the time you saw him, most people thought he looked rubbery. I could easily point out the non-human looking CGI movement in Lord of the Rings, including Gollum. Human CGI is the easiest to tell it's CGI, the eyes know how a human being is suppose move and when it's not perfect (which no human CGI is), you can tell. That's the way it's gonna remain until they perfect it. Which is probably about 7 to 10 years away...or maybe more.

the cgi in the spidy1 teaser trailer with the two towers were amazing, spidey1 had perfct cgi, then in spidey2 there were more cgi shots and now in spidey3 there will be even more cgi shots, thats great to hear.

 

[Visionary]

*shrugs* i think we can. Hulk was a billion times harder to do than spidey. And Nothing in either film has topped this yet and it's just some trailer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7GtVwXET3k

Take it from someone who was here on these boards when this trailer was released, people b:tched about the realism and called the Spidey in that trailer cartoony too, just like you're doing with him in the movies. Same with Hulk.

 

[The Kid]

You could tell Hulk was CGI 99.9% of the time you saw him, most people thought he looked rubbery. I could easily point out the non-human looking CGI movement in Lord of the Rings, including Gollum. Human CGI is the easiest to tell it's CGI, the eyes know how a human being is suppose move and when it's not perfect (which no human CGI is), you can tell. That's the way it's gonna remain until they perfect it. Which is probably about 7 to 10 years away...or maybe more.

All they have to do is Mo-cap to get realistic movement. And 99.9 percent? give me a break.

 

[The Kid]

Take it from someone who was here on these boards when this trailer was released, people b:tched about the realism and called the Spidey in that trailer cartoony too, just like you're doing with him in the movies. Same with Hulk.

I was here too but I wasn't a member. I've been at this site since it was spider-man hype. i just never signed up to the boards since they were too wild for my taste.

I'm more focused on the epic shot of the helicopter in between the buildings but if you say that's what people were saying about spidey back then, then I'll take your word for it. I think it looks good and would have liked to have seen more swinging like that in the movie but as usual basically all of spidey's good swinging is in the trailers and then there's the cgi moneyshot stuff at the end of the movies.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

I was here too but I wasn't a member. I've been at this site since it was spider-man hype. i just never signed up to the boards since they were too wild for my taste.

I'm more focused on the epic shot of the helicopter in the between the buildings but if you say that's what people were saying about spidey back then, then I'll take your word for it. I think it looks good and would have liked to have seen more swinging like that in the movie but as usual basically all of spidey's good swinging is in the trailers and then there's the cgi moneyshot stuff at the end of the movies.

i love the cgi shots at the end of the spidey movies, nothing can top that.

 

[Visionary]

All they have to do is Mo-cap to get realistic movement. And 99.9 percent? give me a break.

What, I've watch the Hulk movie too, and you can tell he's CGI everytime he's on the screen, hated the tranformation scene. As much as I loved Gollum, the same can be said for him. Not even Mo-Cap can give off realistic human movement (which they used with Hulk and Gollum) and it was still off to the eyes. Especially when you're talking about a character moving 50-60mph...while web-swinging through the air. Human CGI is far from perfected, we're years off from that happening.

 

[The Kid]

What, I've watch the Hulk movie too, and you can tell he's CGI everytime he's on the screen, hated the tranformation scene. As much as I loved Gollum, the same can be said for him. Not even Mo-Cap can give off realistic human movement (which they used with Hulk and Gollum) and it was still off to the eyes. Especially when you're talking about a character moving 50-60mph...while web-swinging through the air. Human CGI is far from perfected, we're years off from that happening.

I know what you're saying. I've read again and again that the hulk's cg wasn't as good as it could have been but to me anyway he looked very well done. Here's my redub on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sx4MSGSqJdE, not the brest quality but easy enough to see how he looks. My only problem was the part with the bridge where I could see they didn't properly render some of the skin texture very well. Gollum is also excellent. I've looked for flaws in him and if there are some they're hard for me to spot. The benefit gollum had was that the animators could rotoscope Andy Serkis previous performance since he did everything on set. I think the same was done for king kong so the big monkey really looked just brilliant. The dinosaurs were really bad though. They must have run out of money.

I don't even think they need mo-cap for spidey's web swinging. Parts in harry potter are just that radcliffe kid on a broom in front of blue screen and it came out pretty well I'd say. CGI is fun for really dynamic shots that zoom through stuff but I find them gimicky and less impressive than what raimi did in darkman. I enjoy the cgi stuff for what it's worth, but darkman hanging from a helicopter like he did was much more thrilling. Would it have been as good if it was a cartoon darkman doing it? I lean towards it generally being cool but less believable.

ah, and here's my experiment with intergrating cartoon animation into live action comic book movies: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWtzEJTemWI

 

[The Kid]

woops quadruple post

 

[The Kid]

gone

 

[The Kid]

gone

 

[Spade]

I had no issue with the Hulk, and have even less an issue with the webslinging. To me it's a pet peeve that doesn't detract from the film enough to stop me from enjoying the film.

 

[ultimatefan]

Bottomline is, if anyone tries to say that the people who´re making the Spidey FX lack competence or hard work, that´s simply not true and no one who has any knowledge of that area will agree with that, period. The FX for the Spidey movies are currently among the top work in the market today and the crew will continue to evolve from a movie to the other. It will never be perfect for the simple fact that a human being can´t move like that and we know that instinctively. The vast majority of people who have seen the movies agree that the FX are amazing and there aren´t any problems that prevent them from enjoying these scenes. No complaints will change that.

 

[dark_b]

i dont think that this thread was opened because the CGI would be bad. it is about how it is made and when it is used. the CGI black spidey at the beginning of the teaser just shows how good it is.