Transformers Negatron: Discussion Thread for those that hate the way this movie is heading

[cryptic name]

edit

 

[livrule]

Well most of the cgi for Spiderman, was animating Spiderman himself. We as humans know the human body and it's movements way too well, so it's hard to make a believable cgi stunt double of a human figure and make it 100% indistiguishable from the real thing. Dinosaurs on the other hand have been extinct for millions of years, so no one really know's how they moved, etc to compare it to the movie versions movements, so we accept the cgi dinosaurs in JP for what they are.

Let them try and animate another living creature, one that exists today, that we compare it too. A great example of this is 'Lake Placid', where the Alligator was cgi. We knew it was cgi because we have them alive today.

TF's cg will be great. Most cgi involving non-organic organisms usually are.

Good point ... well made.

 

[The Kid]

Well most of the cgi for Spiderman, was animating Spiderman himself. We as humans know the human body and it's movements way too well, so it's hard to make a believable cgi stunt double of a human figure and make it 100% indistiguishable from the real thing. Dinosaurs on the other hand have been extinct for millions of years, so no one really know's how they moved, etc to compare it to the movie versions movements, so we accept the cgi dinosaurs in JP for what they are.

Let them try and animate another living creature, one that exists today, that we compare it too. A great example of this is 'Lake Placid', where the Alligator was cgi. We knew it was cgi because we have them alive today.

TF's cg will be great. Most cgi involving non-organic organisms usually are.

I disagree. sometimes the digital human double is just animated like a rubbery cartoon character and it shows. The matrix reloaded and revolutions suffered from this same problem. Animators just didn't do a good job.

Agreed on innanimate objects. Those are easiest to make convincing since you don't have to concentrate on making them alive, adding breathing, muscle tone etc. All you need to focus on is the proper physics...

 

[zanos]

Xena the warrior princess is minor and you never mentioned it in your posts to me and all his stuff is cult fanboy stuff like Rodriguez,he's not a director i'd consider as a top guy in the league of true top tier guys

He's recognized as the guy that brings the fanboys stuff to life but he's not critically received like the film makers i mentioned so i'm not wrong,i never said he wasn't good or liked by critics, i said he's not in the top echelon by a long shot and Spidey has been massive but a lot of that is to do with the character and the property not Raimi,it's like Donner and Superman.

Well not quite. Donner brought respect and depth to a character that most ppl didn't exactly take very seriously even amongst comic book fans. While I'm sure alot of ppl would have seen the film Donner was largely responsible for it's popularity and the reason why it's a classic. Raimi's revenge of the nerds version of Spider-man is not really comparable. His characters lack any wit or charm and you could could care less about them either way.

 

[Golgo-13]

I disagree.

Don't take this the wrong way but sometimes i think some of you disagree with others because it make's you look cool, or whatever- and nothing more.

Since you disagree with me, answer me this: name one movie where a cgi human was indistiguishable from a real human, due to great animation......

 

[The Kid]

That's a trick question. If it looks indistinguishable, how is anyone supposed to know it's cgi? When it's dinosaurs or whatever, of course it is, but when it's people, well, that's harder to figure out.

but then it seems like a silly question too especially after we've gone through three star wars prequels about which people needed to be told the clone troopers were all cgi because they appeared so real. (and I dunno, maybe that little independent film called pirates of the carribean had some digital doubles. It's so hard to tell now... harry potter, I know featured some digital flying harry stuff, but again, hard to tell) I know this is the negatron thread and I should just not care when people say things that aren't true though. So back to optimist prime for me!!!

 

[CFlash]

That's a trick question. If it looks indistinguishable, how is anyone supposed to know it's cgi? When it's dinosaurs or whatever, of course it is, but when it's people, well, that's harder to figure out.

but then it seems like a silly question too especially after we've gone through three star wars prequels about which people needed to be told the clone troopers were all cgi because they appeared so real. (and I dunno, maybe that little independent film called pirates of the carribean had some digital doubles. It's so hard to tell now... harry potter, I know featured some digital flying harry stuff, but again, hard to tell) I know this is the negatron thread and I should just not care when people say things that aren't true though. So back to optimist prime for me!!!

Because you can do some research before spouting off on stuff you don't really know anything about. No offense.

Anyway, the folks in Pirates 2 where all real. They superimposed things like Davy Jones tentacle beard.... (which by the way behaved and looked awesome IMO... and was brilliantly researched by the ILM folks).

In any case, I think Golgo13 meant human beings that looked like us. Storm Troopers and people in Armor aren't much different than robots in terms of difficulty in animation. Spidey on the other hand (because of the skin tight suit) is VERY human and extremely difficult to get right. I think they did a fine job in the Spidey movies.

I think a lot of people were thrown off by the bright colors and Raimi's speeded up camera. There are probably places where you THINK it's CGI but really... it's flesh and blood. That's what's great about the Spider-man movies: it's hard to tell when Raimi switches back and forth (IMO).

 

[nosebleed.]

Anyway, the folks in Pirates 2 where all real. They superimposed things like Davy Jones tentacle beard.... (which by the way behaved and looked awesome IMO... and was brilliantly researched by the ILM folks).

sorta...Nighy was onset but its not just tentacles that were animated but everything. Nighy was just there for motion reference.

 

[CFlash]

sorta...Nighy was onset but its not just tentacles that were animated but everything. Nighy was just there for motion reference.

Really? I don't think he was just there for "motion reference" (in the classic sense). His mannerisms, facial expressions, look in his eyes, everything are there on the film. They just "worked' the tentacles and extra stuff on top of it. But, I'm not an ILM animator. t: I have no idea.

 

[HHHDan]

... I think this thread has gone off track...! t:

 

[nosebleed.]

Really? I don't think he was just there for "motion reference" (in the classic sense). His mannerisms, facial expressions, look in his eyes, everything are there on the film. They just "worked' the tentacles and extra stuff on top of it. But, I'm not an ILM animator. t: I have no idea.

When I said "motion reference" I meant motion reference for EVERYTHING including his facial mannerisms and all that jazz. Hence the reference marks all over his face. ILM should have zero problems animating mechanical beings if they can do such wondrous work with organic figures.

 

[CFlash]

When I said "motion reference" I meant motion reference for EVERYTHING including his facial mannerisms and all that jazz. Hence the reference marks all over his face. ILM should have zero problems animating mechanical beings if they can do such wondrous work with organic figures.

Doh! I thought you meant the classic broomstick stand-in thing. I should have read more carefully.

 

[The Kid]

Because you can do some research before spouting off on stuff you don't really know anything about. No offense.

Anyway, the folks in Pirates 2 where all real. They superimposed things like Davy Jones tentacle beard.... (which by the way behaved and looked awesome IMO... and was brilliantly researched by the ILM folks).

In any case, I think Golgo13 meant human beings that looked like us. Storm Troopers and people in Armor aren't much different than robots in terms of difficulty in animation. Spidey on the other hand (because of the skin tight suit) is VERY human and extremely difficult to get right. I think they did a fine job in the Spidey movies.

I think a lot of people were thrown off by the bright colors and Raimi's speeded up camera. There are probably places where you THINK it's CGI but really... it's flesh and blood. That's what's great about the Spider-man movies: it's hard to tell when Raimi switches back and forth (IMO).

No its very easy. watch the scene in spidey 1 when pete's jumping across roof tops. Then watch the part with goblin at the macy gray parade, then watch the part in spidey 2 when ock takes mj. Lots of bad cgi in them at certain points that's too obvious. The matrix had the same problem. Due to time constraints the cgi just couldn't be done very well I guess.

 

[AyeCapn]

No its very easy. watch the scene in spidey 1 when pete's jumping across roof tops. Then watch the part with goblin at the macy gray parade, then watch the part in spidey 2 when ock takes mj. Lots of bad cgi in them at certain points that's too obvious. The matrix had the same problem. Due to time constraints the cgi just couldn't be done very well I guess.

exact same problem with the Warg attack scene in The Two Towers. They admit as much in the DVD commentary. They just didn;t have time to do it properly.

 

[CFlash]

No its very easy. watch the scene in spidey 1 when pete's jumping across roof tops. Then watch the part with goblin at the macy gray parade, then watch the part in spidey 2 when ock takes mj. Lots of bad cgi in them at certain points that's too obvious. The matrix had the same problem. Due to time constraints the cgi just couldn't be done very well I guess.

Seen those movies multiple times. And none of those scenes are as bad as the horrendous Neo+Agent Clones scene in Matrix Reloaded or any scene in Blade 2 with Wesley Snipes doing summersaults.

Maybe the problem is that I'm very familiar with Sam Raimi's cutting and action style and I was sucked into the Spidey movies "world". If too many parts the Spider-man movies had stunt people doing everything it would be like the Spider-man movies from the 1970's... and that would suck more.

 

[That-Guy]

As long as we're casting votes for All-time Worst CGI Somersault Caught On Film," I'd like to nominate Star Wars Episode III for that god-awful scene at the beginning where CHRISTOPHER LEE of all people does a nosedive off of a balcony and does 3 flips in the air. I mean, granted, it was bad enough to begin with that George Lucas had to throw a scene in there where someone does a ridiculous acrobatic move that would probably result in his neck getting broken... but not only that, he used the MOST unbelievable person in the entire movie to do it! I mean seriously, the guy is in his eighties!!!

 

[Boiiinng]

I mean seriously, the guy is in his eighties!!!

You're faith in the force is most disturbing.

 

[Golgo-13]

As long as we're casting votes for All-time Worst CGI Somersault Caught On Film," I'd like to nominate Star Wars Episode III for that god-awful scene at the beginning where CHRISTOPHER LEE of all people does a nosedive off of a balcony and does 3 flips in the air. I mean, granted, it was bad enough to begin with that George Lucas had to throw a scene in there where someone does a ridiculous acrobatic move that would probably result in his neck getting broken... but not only that, he used the MOST unbelievable person in the entire movie to do it! I mean seriously, the guy is in his eighties!!!

In the words of Borat..."WWWHHHHHAAAATTTT!" I actually like that Count Dooku somersault flip, and eventhough you knew it was cgi, it still looked slick.

Now the fight scene in Blade 2, with Blade and Nyssa somersaulting in front of those lights, looked like a video game. Even the film makers during the commentary say it doesn't work as well as they hoped. Humans done in cgi don't come out 100% flawless, period. And those that thought the clones in the Star Wars PT were real ppl in suites, are just being plain naive.

 

[gkokujin]

then watch the part in spidey 2 when ock takes mj.

oh gawd that was PAINFULLY hideous. along with the Agents vs Neo.

 

[SolidSnakeMGS]

This is what I hate. you guys piss on bay for what he does best, then squirt your paste all over 300 which is like a bay-meets-lotr kind of thing. damn. Michael bay's films are great entertainment. YEAH, I SAID IT. Go to the movies and enjoy yourself and stop whining.

No, no, no. Sorry, Wesyeed, you're cool but that post was dumb.

Bay does not make good entertainment. He makes mindless crap. He's like the McDonalds of filmmakers; he creates junk that has no redeeming qualities.

300 actually told a story and while it was heavily CGI'ed, I think it worked for the story. Ever watch a Bay movie? Notice how everything explodes, and we get slow motion shots from 1000 different angles. That is Bay showing off, trying to wow and woo the audience, because he cannot provide the substance, only the cliched, laughably ridiculous, over the top dumb action crap.

Even though his films are to some people exciting looking, he's a pretty poor filmmaker. His shots are uninspired and leave nothing to the imagination (like his 37390 different shots of stuff exploding) and he actually has to SHOW his characters as being cool (such as yet another Bay cliche where the characters are walking in slow mo in front of something else that is exploding) because he cannot convey that through narrative.

By the way, did you even notice this thread? Its for those that are not optimistic about the film? So stop whining about us whining and go waste your money on another Bay piece of trash. t:

 

[SolidSnakeMGS]

As long as we're casting votes for All-time Worst CGI Somersault Caught On Film," I'd like to nominate Star Wars Episode III for that god-awful scene at the beginning where CHRISTOPHER LEE of all people does a nosedive off of a balcony and does 3 flips in the air. I mean, granted, it was bad enough to begin with that George Lucas had to throw a scene in there where someone does a ridiculous acrobatic move that would probably result in his neck getting broken... but not only that, he used the MOST unbelievable person in the entire movie to do it! I mean seriously, the guy is in his eighties!!!

Hum, Yoda was in his 800s or whatever and did you see what he was doing?

And Dooku only did one somersault.

 

[Elisha Cuthbert]

No, no, no. Sorry, Wesyeed, you're cool but that post was dumb.

Bay does not make good entertainment. He makes mindless crap. He's like the McDonalds of filmmakers; he creates junk that has no redeeming qualities.

300 actually told a story and while it was heavily CGI'ed, I think it worked for the story. Ever watch a Bay movie? Notice how everything explodes, and we get slow motion shots from 1000 different angles. That is Bay showing off, trying to wow and woo the audience, because he cannot provide the substance, only the cliched, laughably ridiculous, over the top dumb action crap.

Even though his films are to some people exciting looking, he's a pretty poor filmmaker. His shots are uninspired and leave nothing to the imagination (like his 37390 different shots of stuff exploding) and he actually has to SHOW his characters as being cool (such as yet another Bay cliche where the characters are walking in slow mo in front of something else that is exploding) because he cannot convey that through narrative.

By the way, did you even notice this thread? Its for those that are not optimistic about the film? So stop whining about us whining and go waste your money on another Bay piece of trash. t:

Um, Michael Bay doesn't write the scripts. He's a director. So how exactly do you want him to make his characters look cool without showing it or writing it in the script, which he doesn't do?

 

[IKnowSomeJudo]

Um, Michael Bay doesn't write the scripts. He's a director. So how exactly do you want him to make his characters look cool without showing it or writing it in the script, which he doesn't do?

By hiring a good writer? Crucial part of being a good filmmaker is knowing talent when he sees it, which, I'm afraid, is what Bay lacks.

 

[Elisha Cuthbert]

By hiring a good writer? Crucial part of being a good filmmaker is knowing talent when he sees it, which, I'm afraid, is what Bay lacks.

Yeah well, Tim Burton doesn't hire that great of writers usually either but I don't see you guys criticizing all of his movies as crap. Same with Ron Howard.
The point is, even if his film scripts suck, Bay is a good (or at least half-way decent) DIRECTOR, and that's an important distinction.

 

[CFlash]

Yeah well, Tim Burton doesn't hire that great of writers usually either but I don't see you guys criticizing all of his movies as crap. Same with Ron Howard.
The point is, even if his film scripts suck, Bay is a good (or at least half-way decent) DIRECTOR, and that's an important distinction.

Hmmm. Maybe that's because good directors (like both of the ones you mention) can make even the lamest scripts great on film. While others destroy what might otherwise have been good films... like Michael Bay with Pearl Harbor and The Island.

Michael Bay has made great popcorn movies (a.k.a. music videos). But he's not a good "director"..... in fact, he's consistently ranked as one of the worst directors of all-time. He's Ed Wood but with mega-budgets.