Kong vs Pirates

[Sentinel X]

^Aaah!! Mutant penises with teeth!

I vote Kong too. Both are great but Kong's creativity and the amount of detail on both skull island and 1930s New York were great. The only scene that sucked was stampeed scene....everything else had top notch cgi.

 

[Kirk Langstrom]

Kong.

 

[Red Mask]

King Kong seems to have the better visual effects. They had to assimilate old Manhattan and Skull Island. Shooting the seas don't appear to be harder for Pirates.

 

[lime]

The best thing with Pirates was that the Kraken scenes where just amazing!

 

[lime]

The best thing with Pirates was that the Kraken scenes where just amazing!

 

[Deus Ex Machina]

This was posted by Dark_b in the Avatar topic:

This level of realism was not found in Kong.

 

[lime]

But it's only one character

 

[CBGB]

I hope everyone realizes that all of New York in Kong was computer generated. Same with most of Skull Island.

Plus, look at the weird shark human guy to the right of Davy Jones, realism my ***. All their money was poured into Davy Jones.

 

[Majik1387]

No one was looking for realism in any of the Pirates movies.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

All the people saying Davy Jones is superior clearly haven't seen King Kong in Blu-Ray.

 

[CBGB]

This level of realism was not found in Kong.

No one was looking for realism in any of the Pirates movies.

Apparently some do.

 

[Spider-Who?]

Davy Jones will go down as one of the best cgi characters in cinema.

That being said, Kong had so much more riding on cgi then just one main character. So many more environments, secondary characters, action pieces...my vote goes to Kong for this fact alone.

 

[Red Mask]

I thought we were discussing visual effects - not the realism of one character. Bill Nighy brought a lot of depth to the character. King Kong is still a giant gorilla who doesn't talk. It's more believable when you can relate more to the character.

 

[CGHulk]

I hope everyone realizes that all of New York in Kong was computer generated. Same with most of Skull Island.

Plus, look at the weird shark human guy to the right of Davy Jones, realism my ***. All their money was poured into Davy Jones.

He looked real to me in the second film and still does.

All the people saying Davy Jones is superior clearly haven't seen King Kong in Blu-Ray.

I own Pirates 2 and 3 and King Kong on Blu-ray, the work in all of these three films look damn impressive.

What's great in Pirates 3, at the end of the movie in the rain, where Jones is in the scene with the three leads. He carries the scenes with the real actors, It never feels like there's a CG character there. I had the same feeling with the big ape and Ann in King Kong. The work in these two films brought CG performance to a point where the technology or lack there of never got in the way of buying into the reality or quality of their performances.

 

[hobo123]

POTC for me

 

[Deus Ex Machina]

All the people saying Davy Jones is superior clearly haven't seen King Kong in Blu-Ray.

That is not true. I think WETA has a bit of a problem with compositing. This was noticible in the LOTR trilogy aswell. While the animation was impressive, the digital characters and creatures did not blend so well with their enviroment. Now if you look at Davy Jones, its like he is relly there, standing next to the actors.

 

[Kent]

^ Always with the Davy Jones. He's not the entire movie you know.

Yes, Davy Jones is a more impressive CG creation than (probably) anything in King Kong, I don't know that many would dispute this... But I feel, that King Kong has the better CGI on the whole. It's more consistent and with a higher base level of quality. For instance, I can't remember a single piece of CG in King Kong that was anywhere near as bad as some of the Kraken material in the POTC-movies.

 

[lime]

I don't know. The scenes with the bugs where so real. And the whole fight of Kong vs Rexes, looked real too. It was like Niomi was right there.

 

[Deus Ex Machina]

^ Always with the Davy Jones. He's not the entire movie you know.

I know, im sorry. Its just that I feel Davy Jones is a greater achievment than anything else in Kong (or in any other movie for that matter). Forgive me, I have this soft spot for ILM. t:

Lime, you are right those are all great shots. Even tho in the 3rd one, Naomi seems to have beem cropped into the scene.

 

[CBGB]

That is not true. I think WETA has a bit of a problem with compositing. This was noticible in the LOTR trilogy aswell. While the animation was impressive, the digital characters and creatures did not blend so well with their enviroment. Now if you look at Davy Jones, its like he is relly there, standing next to the actors.

You also have to remember that the LOTR trilogy was made a few years before POTC.

 

[CGHulk]

You also have to remember that the LOTR trilogy was made a few years before POTC.

Actually if you go back before WETA was around there was good compositiing, where CG characters and objects were beautifully composited. When a group of artists are running out of time, the compositing is were it suffers since it's one of the last things worked on by Technical Directors. The Visual Effects Supervisor on Master and Commander, Stefen Fangmeier commented on the bad compositing on the Return of the King, he said something to the fact that on these big films somethings are left by the way side where other things get more attention to make deadline.

Here's a bit of trivia, Gore Verbinski the director of the Pirates Trilogy, before he was a director he did compositing for visual effects.

 

[dark_b]

i think both movies had extreme details.
king kong had millions of hair. that sold the character. the soft hair and how it moved ,how it reacted objects around . and also how the lighting looked good.


davy jones had amazing skin IMO. it looks like real tissue. you can see subtle reflection on the skin,you can see how light goes through the skin and tentackles. and just look at the eyes. they first wanted to use the real eyes but then they made everythign 100% CGI. they eyes look ultra realistic.

 

[Kurosawa]

Pirates for me, just because I can actually sit through the movie.

 

[SuperFerret]

I don't see why Davy Jones was CGI to begin with honestly, the fact that it looks like a practical effect means that it could've been an actor with make-up. Maybe it's just me, but I think doing things practically seems like the better option.

 

[dark_b]

I don't see why Davy Jones was CGI to begin with honestly, the fact that it looks like a practical effect means that it could've been an actor with make-up. Maybe it's just me, but I think doing things practically seems like the better option.

you really think they just spend million like that?

there was no way hes face could be make up. they designe would be different.