Is special effects technology finally ready for the Hulk?

[co2]

Hulk has hit the screen..large and small..in varous forms though the years. The first live action Hulk was of course the TV show. And though it had to be realised by practical means, it was the only way to achieve it at the time. Lou was probably the best way to bring the Hulk to life at the time.
Then in '03 CGI had replaced a lot of practical effects and we had an opportunity to see the Hulk on the big screen, not being protrayed by a man. Many slandered that version of the Hulk, though I think it was without a doubt cutting edge computer generation for that time. The problem really was..technology hadn't yet reached the level we wanted it to be at to achieve the Hulk we all really wanted. Maybe they should have waited if just for that reason.
Here we are, 5 years later. Technology moves so fast, and after seeing something like Transformers, there is no doubt that it can create things leaps and bounds ahead of what we had 5 years ago. Special effects technology..specifically CGI..I believe is finally at a place it needs to be to present the Hulk in the fashion he should be...we shall see soon I think.

Anyone think CGI technology is not ready to deliver the Hulk as we want him?

 

[Naite22]

^ You can't compare HULK to a movie like TransFormers... No doubt that TransFormers had beautiful CGI all the way through, but those things created by CG were ALL machines, with a metallic finish which, by now, is obviously obtainable through CG. In other words, the Transformers in the movie were INorganic objects! I garantee that had the Transformers been organic giant creatures, they wouldn't have looked quite as believable. Skin-tones are not at all perfect when created through pure CG, YET!... We're making impressive progress, but we're not there yet, at all.

Hulk in the 2003 movie was anything but believable! I'm not bashing the movie here, it's merely a fact. It had its moments, but overall it was B-A-D. And like I've said a thousand times before, if Hulk in the next movie doesn't look REAL, than they have no ****ing movie! They can do it if they want to, it's just a matter of having a talented enough team... and of course enough time to do it in! I'm anticipating the first teaser trailer very much! I just wanna see a glimps of the Hulk, to really see how he works in the film. I have no doubt however, that this here Hulk will look a lot BETTER than Hulk in Ang Lee's movie!

If they can make a Hulk as believable as the giant spider in Return of the King, than I think I'll buy it! And they SHOULD be able to.... But only time will tell.

 

[SpaghettiHULK]

I think that the Ang Lee's ILM Hulk was really awesome at its time. Almost perfect.

 

[Naite22]

^ Opinions vary and that's fine... but how can any one say that Hulk in the 2003 movie was PERFECT!!?... that's just crazy! it had F-A-K-E written aaaaall over it!

 

[FrostBite]

Settle down Naite, I'm no mod but you can express that opinion without totally ramming it down another's throat.

The problem wasn't the CGI; up close the Hulk was pretty incredible even showing pores to some extent. (Coming from someone not so fond of the film.) The problem was only in artistic direction, as well as the way the effects interacted with said model. The model didn't look good stretched when he grew in size, as well as the effects hitting the skin looked a bit smudged in areas leaving a rather rubbery feel at time.

I personally believe that the exact opposite is coming to us this time. I don't see a photo-realistic Hulk in the near future, what I do see based off of concept art and promotional images is an incredibly artistic beast like Hulk. This is a good company, maybe not the best, but good. I have no doubt they'll have any trouble making the Hulk believable.

Also now that the Hulk is at a steady 9 feet it may be easier to apply certain effects to the model. Also a more condensed smaller model on screen the less cartoony is likely to look.

 

[Scooter]

Looked great in 2003, should look even better now. I doubt the special effects are something to worry about.

 

[Obi-Ron]

Looked great in 2003, should look even better now. I doubt the special effects are something to worry about.

QFT

 

[EmeraldBeast]

Looked great in 2003, should look even better now. I doubt the special effects are something to worry about.

You need not worry about the CGI as it is being handled by one of the best at this particular CG. The Chronicles of Narnia, War of the Worlds, I am Legend, etc. are part of what he has done. Along with Stan Winston, you have an awesome team. Here is a link to view his work: http://www.aaron-sims.com/creatures.html

 

[deathfromabove]

You need not worry about the CGI as it is being handled by one of the best at this particular CG. The Chronicles of Narnia, War of the Worlds, I am Legend, etc. are part of what he has done. Along with Stan Winston, you have an awesome team. Here is a link to view his work: http://www.aaron-sims.com/creatures.html

the lion still looked fake and the creatures in i am legend flat out sucked. hopefully stan will help him raise the bar.

 

[M.E.H.Z.E.B]

Settle down Naite, I'm no mod but you can express that opinion without totally ramming it down another's throat.

As a mod, I endorse this statement.

 

[Crook]

You need not worry about the CGI as it is being handled by one of the best at this particular CG. The Chronicles of Narnia, War of the Worlds, I am Legend, etc. are part of what he has done. Along with Stan Winston, you have an awesome team. Here is a link to view his work: http://www.aaron-sims.com/creatures.html

Ooh, that's not particularly encouraging.

ILM handled most of WOTW, and I thought the creature cg in I Am Legend and Narnia didn't raise the bar in sfx work, as they should have.

The CG is actually my most feared part about this production. They didn't exactly have the ideal amount of time to work on Hulk, in comparison to other cg-fests. And to boot, we don't even have ILM or WETA anywhere near this project...

IMHO, this film could have the best comic book film script ever written. But it WILL fail if the CG isn't absolutely top-notch. It's the deciding factor for it's success.

 

[Naite22]

the only thing that will convince me that the hulk in the new movie looks real, is seeing him in motion, with my own eyes!... seeing IS believing!

 

[November Rain]

Dude, Ang's Hulk looks state of the art even now after 4 1/2 years out...

You go and show me any 4 1/2 year special effects that still look state of the art now, and then come talk to me...

 

[Nivek]

I LOVE armchair Special Effects experts! They dont know Wed Clay from an XYZ axis, but they can tell you till the cows come home when somethings look fake. Give 'em a tasty cookie!

 

[FrostBite]

Ooh, that's not particularly encouraging.

ILM handled most of WOTW, and I thought the creature cg in I Am Legend and Narnia didn't raise the bar in sfx work, as they should have.

The CG is actually my most feared part about this production. They didn't exactly have the ideal amount of time to work on Hulk, in comparison to other cg-fests. And to boot, we don't even have ILM or WETA anywhere near this project...

IMHO, this film could have the best comic book film script ever written. But it WILL fail if the CG isn't absolutely top-notch. It's the deciding factor for it's success.

One man didn't do all the effects. The man linked to is a concept artist, he came up with the DESIGNS or did no one check out the link? One man does not make up an entire effects team.

I personally thought the Lion looked great, the movie just sucked, but I'll have to agree on the creatures in I Am Legend no matter how much I enjoyed it. In my mind they should have just been prosthetics we don't ALWAYS need CG in movies.

Oh and the fact you believe that CG is only good when done by ILM or WETA is laughable to me. Right Narnia raised no bars, that Academy Award Nomination was definitely thrown out there for pity sake.

Rhythm and Hues has worked on other movies. Not all the best, but their work wasn't bad. They created over 100 effects for X-men 2, and worked on Superman Returns (while thats not my favorite film, I do think it looked good.)

So far I'd say Rhythm and Hues is about 50/50 as of right now. A lot of their children's movies work is alright such as Alvin and the Chipmunks. But we've never seen them actually do ANYTHING on this scale.

So let's wait and see before jumping to conclusions hm?

 

[DoctorJones]

2003's Hulk was a mixed bag. When he was photo-real in daylight, he looked like a stop-motion model.

I hope it can be pulled off, but I think R&H have made life easier for themselves by having a very dark, moody looking Hulk. We're in for a treat if the Hulk matches the detail seen in that computer-generated concept art.

 

[M.E.H.Z.E.B]

I LOVE armchair Special Effects experts! They dont know Wed Clay from an XYZ axis, but they can tell you till the cows come home when somethings look fake. Give 'em a tasty cookie!

Yup, that's so, true, it could actually be a fact.

 

[Khemik@L]

I think they will do a good job

 

[Ahura Mazda]

I honestly thought that bar a couple shots the Hulk in 2003 was great and this is based as my viewing as an uneducated fan (in so far as special effects are concernned). The problem with the movie was not the sfx but really the mixed bag the story gave which was not pleasing for many. This movie if it delivers on the story will probably be a success as I assume the sfx will at least be good enough for it to be put on the big screen.

 

[EmeraldBeast]

Yup, that's so, true, it could actually be a fact.

What is actually a fact is that whomever works on the effects, whether it be R&H, along with the concept artist (Aaron Sims) and Stan Winston is still under the scrutiny of Marvel to get this character right. I don't think they would hide all this media from us (trailers, posters and such) if they weren't really striving to put out a great product. We all know that producing a human being from CGI is difficult at best and yet we are being overly critical without seeing anything. I also know that five years down the road, technology is advanced yet some movies (SM3) didn't take full advantage of that. Not to say TIH won't, but IMO we can't sit back behind a computer and say how somethings gonna turn out or say the movie is gonna suck if you don't agree with the CGI. It would be unfair to the makers of this movie who are putting the best effort forward. I know I busted my behind working on stuff to make it totally believable. We deserve the benefit of the doubt. Besides, while the zombies or whatever they were called in I Am Legend looked bad, maybe they werent under the same scrutiny this movie will be. Also, the crew I reiterate is top notch is this area. Please give us a chance. Thank you.

 

[The Hulk]

the biggest problem with the first hulk was the model didnt stay consistant. his face changed that many times it was a joke. other than that i still have no problem with the cgi at all. some times hulk looks better than other times, but id say all movies with cgi suffer from that. there is one scene that comes to mind, when hulk is walking towards his father, and the water is running down his body. that looked fantastic! and thats just one example. after just watching hulk, it was on yv sunday night, and then spiderman 3 last night again, i think the cgi in hulk was better and that came out 4 years before. i think the cgi in marnia was fantastic. i have no doubt that this hulk will look stunning, and im sure abomination will too, as long as they have not stuffed up his look to much.

 

[ultimatefan]

The main challenge I think will be giving him the right sense of mass and weight. CGI still has a tendency to make things look "rubbery" but it definitely progressed a lot since the first one.

 

[Sarg92]

I personally think that the CGI in this movie will be great. Why are they holding out on us? My guess is to perfect the CGI.

Let me give you an example, take the Killzone 2 game for the PlayStation 3. Sony showed one CGI test footage back in 2006. After that footage they showed nothing. Nothing for an entire year. Why? Because they were perfecting the graphics so much to look brilliant as possible, to raise a bar in the gaming graphics world. Now when they showed their new footage in 2007, everyone was in awe, some not believing it was actual gameplay but the thing is that was footage showed at Pre-Pre-Alpha stage which is early in development. Wait until they actually finish it, the graphics will be amazing.

This will be the same for The Incredible Hulk in my opinion. They are going to make it look real as possible however some people will still moan it doesn't look real and is not good enough when they know nothing at all on the subject they are moaning about!

 

[El Payaso]

For me the things that made Hulk look fake back in 2003 were the bright plastic green color (and same for the purple) and the fact that his face wasn't too monstrous. Given those circumstances I'd say the CGI in Ang's Hulk was pretty good, except for some shots.

 

[webhead731]

I just hope there is alot of action in this movie. And I hope it looks good.

Is that POSSIBLE to pull off for the team?