Paramount's Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles - Part 6

[Zaron]

Oh Man ... no one is saying that. In any case of course THAT would be CGI. What's being said is that there wasn't even a practical suit made for ANY scenes. The turtles will always be 100% cgi in every single scene. Even just standing around.

Of course that flip would be CG no matter what the case. Wha are you smoking lol. Doesn't mean proper real suits wouldn't be much better in select scenes. Especially with CG enhancements.

This is exactly what I was saying several pages ago. Any time I mention that a mix of practical suits and CG could be used, people pretend I'm asking for the 90s suits, and that the movie uses absolutely no CG. For pete's sake, most movies with HUMAN characters have plenty of CG shots. No sane human being expects them to use practical effects 100% of the time.

 

[Marvin]

The CG looks FINE yes... But CG is CG. It will always be detected by the human eye until further development. We just aren't there yet.

Don't be too sure. Especially when it comes to environments and props.
Safe to say Ironman already has people at a loss scene to scene between practical and cgi. Then there is the little issue of how many folks were duped by Gravity...

They are using mocap so human beings are involved. It's a CGI suit instead of a rubber one.

There is alot of augmentation and supplication. Mocap still comes with it's fair share of key framing. Hulk for example. Lest you are ready to believe even Ferrigno could move like 2012 hulk.

 

[TWayneP]

Given post I was quoting, I figured the comparison was apt. This isn't a matter of 90's' or even 60's suits working today, clearly. It's a matter of folks suggesting CGI simply lacks the "texture" and presence or practical suits and because of that simple element alone, "such and such" > "such and such". Regardless of the pros and cons to both sides.

As for the Apes in particular, humans in suits simply can't replicate an ape. I'd say the same about a human as a dragon or a horse. CGI tech however...

I've said it before, I see the turtle situation no differently than I do the District 9 one. And guys in suits would not have improved that production/result, but hurt it.

Right, the apes are a different story, it all depends in your subject matter and design of the characters. Personally I couldn't care less about planet of the apes, so that matters not to me. This is TMNT and It does matter to me. They are very humanoid so a practical suit vs CG is a legitimate debate. That's why I would say just mix them. Best of both worlds by far. The movement of CG and the realism of practical. Even if the practical suits are only used in SOME scenes, it all adds to the believability. With this film being 100% CGI it will just be harder to swallow. That's all.

That being said, I understand that it couldn't be done With these particular designs of the turtles. CG makes sense, I'm cool with it, but that's where most have a problem, is the designs. They don't even lead to any possible physical suits, where as a more subtly, traditionally designed turtle would.

People do take this to extremes when it does not need to go there. You do have to argue within the times lol. A practical suit now is much more advanced than what a practical suit could achieve in even the 90s. It would have been compelling and so much more interesting to see real suits, and work put into it.

That's kind of why I respect the new Robocop SO much, not everyone liked the suits, but they put the effort forth with practical suits and it really paid off. A mix of CG and Realism knocks it out of the park, and is just so impressive and versatile.

 

[Marvin]

This is exactly what I was saying several pages ago. Any time I mention that a mix of practical suits and CG could be used, people pretend I'm asking for the 90s suits, and that the movie uses absolutely no CG. For pete's sake, most movies with HUMAN characters have plenty of CG shots. No sane human being expects them to use practical effects 100% of the time.

Why even go there if you don't have too. If someone told Peter Jackson right now that he should try and incorporate such things into his Gollum work he would give them a double or maybe even triple take. Same for Davy in pirates.

Whyyyyyyyyy?
After it's been a tried, tested and celebrated/show stealing method for a good few years now...

Next we'll be suggesting they go back to the methods of antiquity for the startrek ship battles(and what not).

 

[TWayneP]

Don't be too sure. Especially when it comes to environments and props.
Safe to say Ironman already has people at a loss scene to scene between practical and cgi. Then there is the little issue of how many folks were duped by Gravity....

I'm sure because I can usually tell. But I am VERY critical on these things. I understand, and It's cool that CG is getting so advanced though to fool people like that. Every year it improves and I'm constantly impressed, but never really fooled

Thinking on it more there have been one or two times where I questioned the CG, one of them being in batman begins (batman walking away from the stairwell full of bats was a digital model)

But with that said, these turtle models aren't the best of the best CG. They are great! And will get the job done, but they will not make you rub your eyes in disbelief lol. Unfortunately.

 

[TWayneP]

Why even go there if you don't have too. If someone told Peter Jackson right now that he should try and incorporate such things into his Gollum work he would give them a double or maybe even triple take. Same for Davy in pirates.

Whyyyyyyyyy?
After it's been a tried, tested and celebrated/show stealing method for a good few years now...

Next we'll be suggesting they go back to the methods of antiquity for the startrek ship battles(and what not).

Again, I think your taking it to extremes here, you don't need to follow up with that lol. You don't have to go there either ya know.

Were talking about tmnt, not apes, not D9, not Star Trek, not gollum. Lordy lol.

 

[Broseph44]

I'm sure because I can usually tell. But I am VERY critical on these things. I understand, and It's cool that CG is getting so advanced though to fool people like that. Every year it improves and I'm constantly impressed, but never really fooled

Thinking on it more there have been one or two times where I questioned the CG, one of them being in batman begins (batman walking away from the stairwell full of bats was a digital model)

But with that said, these turtle models aren't the best of the best CG. They are great! And will get the job done, but they will not make you rub your eyes in disbelief lol. Unfortunately.

They won't make you rub your eyes in disbelief maybe, but that doesn't mean it won't do that for other people.

 

[Marvin]

Again, I think your taking it to extremes here, you don't need to follow up with that lol. You don't have to go there either ya know.

Were talking about tmnt, not apes, not D9, not Star Trek, not gollum. Lordy lol.

We're talking about Guys in suits vs Mo cap.
And I'm firing off (past) examples where it's been a no brainer in hindsight. All of these productions have literally crossed the same breach that TMNT are facing now, only with the benefit of an unconditioned audience not fighting them the entire way. I also think it's a pretty fair question. Why ask such a thing of Liebesman but not Jackson? surely gollum could have been done practically. I've seen it. The greatest reason why I'm citing of these past examples is because you've seen them at their best and fully realized where you've seen nothing but unfinished premise from this production. Without such reference, of course it's going to fall short of your expectations of practical

As for star trek, I feel it keen to point out that the technology advanced and the production approach moved forward, and that is the same situation here. A step forward. I'd argue zombies should always remain practical. Not so much for anthropomorphics.

Right, the apes are a different story, it all depends in your subject matter and design of the characters. Personally I couldn't care less about planet of the apes, so that matters not to me.

Apes or not, it was about the misconception that the texture of practical trumps all that the pixel can offer regardless of circumstance. But still I suppose you're right.

That's kind of why I respect the new Robocop SO much, not everyone liked the suits, but they put the effort forth with practical suits and it really paid off. A mix of CG and Realism knocks it out of the park, and is just so impressive and versatile.

I don't find it all that versatile. I personally think people are as, if not more impressed with Ironman, but I really can only speak for myself.
I think it helps in a few ways:
-the seamless transition into the cgi required shots.
-the stress and limitation on the actor(not to mention time in make up).
-the options for stunts and such again without the worry of transition or design...
-they can design accessories and armor without a thought of weight/cost/practical design...etc

I watched the new robocop film and given just how little of Murphy was in there, I found myself wondering why the suit looked like it needed to fit the well statured Kinnaman. Given how the other robots in that film looked....

 

[CGHulk]

 

[jmc]

Don't be too sure. Especially when it comes to environments and props.
Safe to say Ironman already has people at a loss scene to scene between practical and cgi. Then there is the little issue of how many folks were duped by Gravity...

Metallic and environmental elements are easy to fool the eye with, humanoid characters are different. We're not at the stage yet where we can fool the human eye with characters, in fact it may be near impossible to get there due to the human brain picking up even the most subtle of imperfections.

 

[Marvin]

Metallic and environmental elements are easy to fool the eye with, humanoid characters are different. We're not at the stage yet where we can fool the human eye with characters, in fact it may be near impossible to get there due to the human brain picking up even the most subtle of imperfections.

Another generalization about cgi I felt I should comment on is all.
As for humanoids that aren't metallic, I actually think it can be done. I think those ape posters are almost there actually.

The real issue is faces I think. Humans are just too good at looking at humanoid faces. The same issue occurs with animatronic faces....
And it's safe to say if they want to make fans happy, it's gonna take more than 'make up' to pull off practical turtle heads.

 

[TX85]

The CGI looks great to me and even better than I expected

 

[dark_b]

i liked of course the first movie. but practical suits can never look like flesh and real skin. they always look dry. so sometimes Stan Winston made them wet.

skin has an effect called subsurface scattering. here its explained.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsurface_scattering

when you see Mikey you can see how the light goes inside the skin and scatters the blood inside. the skin looks soft and alive. it looks fantastic. they found a great green color that works with red blood.

 

[HopeOfTheFuture]

Aprils father will have been double crossed by Shredder and mutated into Master Splinter.

Search your feelings.

You know this to be true.

Either that (unfortunately) or Shredder is just making this up hoping April will give away information about the Turtless, manipulating her with lies.

:-(

 

[dark_b]

Rick Baker's makeup in the 2001 Apes remake was far better than the 1960's make up. Of course the 1960's film is 100% better than the 2001 version which is the most important thing.

the make up was so good that people to this day dont understand how they made face proportions look so good. the jaw,nose and forehead. it makes no sense that there is a human face under the mask.

its scary how good it looks.

 

[Lord]

About CGI, while Gollum starts to look more animated, i find Davy Jones to be near perfect

 

[dark_b]

Davy Jones was so good in 2006 that people in the effects industry didnt know that he was 100% cgi. they thought that it was an actor with cgi nose removal and cgi eyes.

 

[craigdbfan]

He was damn good. I was also convinced that he was part prosthetic back in the day.

Boy was I wrong. Personally I consider him to be the best CGI humanoid ever to grace the screen in terms of how convincing he was for audiences. I don't think that CGI will ever age badly. ILM truly outdid themselves in that instance.

 

[Naite22]

Saw the trailer. Overall feel was cool enough. The humor bits seemed stylized and not cheesy. However, it was a weird teaser in its execution. And it's CLEAR that they still have very little to show off (for some reason). And that's not a good sign at this point.

I think the design of the turtles are cool enough. I don't mind it. But that CG (ESPECIALLY the eyes!) needs major_work, and I hope they have people working on this 24/7 at this point. Compared to Caesar in the Dawn of the Apes teaser trailer, this here is just shameful. It really, really is. There's no getting around it. A creature like Caesar in that teaser looks 100% real (the eyes looks "alive"). Even when knowing that it's a fully CG rendered monkey, I still can't see it's CG in those shots shown. It's beyond impressive. The shots of the turtles in this teaser are truly so 6 years ago. Pre-Avatar. And with Avatar, that whole "dead-eyes-look" issue had a major evolutionary step forward. This here is a step backwards, at this point. I know/hope they'll improve this much before release, cause it aint gonna fly. If the turtles aren't "alive" this movie is already dead... Go ahead. Try to defend it.

 

[craigdbfan]

I disagree with every single point you made about the turtles. Every single last one.

 

[Naite22]

I disagree with every single point you made about the turtles. Every single last one.

Good for you, I guess

 

[OutOfBoose]

However, it was a weird teaser in its execution.

Nothing weird about it. They lack finished footage.

And it's CLEAR that they still have very little to show off (for some reason). And that's not a good sign at this point.

It's pretty heavy CG-wise - that's the reason.

I think the design of the turtles are cool enough. I don't mind it. But that CG (ESPECIALLY the eyes!) needs major_work, and I hope they have people working on this 24/7 at this point.

Don't expect any changes in the scenes you saw. Motion capture is finished, most likely. They animated it based on actors facial expressions. If it looks bad for you, then my condolences.

Compared to Caesar in the Dawn of the Apes teaser trailer, this here is just shameful. It really, really is. There's no getting around it. A creature like Caesar in that teaser looks 100% real (the eyes looks "alive"). Even when knowing that it's a fully CG rendered monkey, I still can't see it's CG in those shots shown. It's beyond impressive. The shots of the turtles in this teaser are truly so 6 years ago. Pre-Avatar. And with Avatar, that whole "dead-eyes-look" issue had a major evolutionary step forward. This here is a step backwards, at this point. I know/hope they'll improve this much before release, cause it aint gonna fly. If the turtles aren't "alive" this movie is already dead... Go ahead. Try to defend it.

You're trying too hard hating it. Caesar is a monkey. It's not a fiction creature. Monkeys have similar facial features to humans. It's much easier to give them human expressions. I'm not saying it's nothing special. Weta did outstanding job. But these two examples are incomparable. Now, Avatar. Blue people have also VERY similar faces to humans. Two major differences - eye size and noses. The rest is literally the same. They even painted eyebrows to them to make them even more human looking. Now find photos of people without eyebrows. All of them are scary and look unhuman. Just like the turtles. Turtles have super-exaggerated appearances. It's much harder to make them look believable. Saying all that, I think, they did a good job. Maybe there's a room for improvement, but I'm satisfied with what I got.

 

[dark_b]

turtles designs are always created with the bandanas on. thats the finished design. when you take the masks off you get a very different head and face.

every turtle in comics,movies and cartoons looked strange and weird without the bandana.

is bandana the right word?

 

[CGHulk]

I'm not liking the nose.

 

[Nathan]