The Incredible Hulk CGI Thread

[TheBeastWithin]

Since we have comments about the '03 film...

I'll admit, when Hulk first came out, I thought it was great. It looked like someone had given effort to elevate the material. I even brought others with me to watch it a second time. What confused me at the time was all of the negative word-of-mouth.

Then, the DVD came out. It's about then I realized how flawed a film Hulk was. For one, the origin story was massive. Alot of people talk about how much time Spider-Man spent on it, but when you think about it half of it was origin and the other half was Silver Age comic extravaganza. Hulk, on the other hand, spent the first act of the film just discussing Banner's origin. We don't get a closed door to that until the movie ends. Then, sporadically, the dialogue drops lines about Hulk's origin that are so confusing that it took a few freeze-frames in the montage and some repeat viewings just to understand what was being said.

I'm reading comments, mostly from Godman, claiming that Hulk was just too intelligent for most viewers. Here's a definition of that word in the Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary:



Ask yourself: Was it in good judgment or sound thought to make a film about the Hulk (the angriest man in the world) predominantly into a drama? How, then, was it an "intelligent" film? The answer is that it wasn't. What it was, however, was muddled and tedious. That's not the same as being an intelligent film.

Very keen observations on Hulk. I think you nailed how I also felt about it, liking it first then, after repeat viewings, realizing that I disliked more about it than I liked, for some of the reasons you mentioned. I honestly can't even watch it anymore. Having Hulk as my favorite superhero since I was a kid and getting a completely new Hulk film addressing everything I, and most regular moviegoers, had issue with in the first film has me very excited.

 

[FrostBite]

It's not necessarily about the writing; Stan's writing drew from mythology and science. Thor was chockful of Norse mythos, and TIH/Iron Man relied on some deal of science. Okay, so looking back on it gamma exposure gives you cancer, transistors aren't that powerful, and Thor wasn't blonde. But he tried.

The issue, rather, is the mature content. Comics nowadays seem to have this thing about being "Frank Miller extreme" or "Mark Millar edgy," where they put in violent or sexual elements in whether it's appropriate to the story or not. Take the Bruce Jones run on TIH. How does horror appeal to kids? How about The Ultimates? Do little kids want to see their heroes killing, raping, and/or eating each other? Outside of a few books like Ultimate Spider-Man or Marvel Adventures, comics aren't aimed at pre-teens anymore let alone children. They're made strictly for teens and adults, and the longer it continues the more the demographic ages and loses interest.

Agreed, and when there are comics appropriate for kids? They are god awful. I decided to pick one up and it was so dumbed down that as a kid I would have been insulted reading it. It was like of a blue beast like X-men ... trick or treating. (And no, this wasn't one of the joke comics they do, it was meant to be serious.)

I'd like adult comics starring our favorite heroes in runs, but also runs where children and pre-teens continue to see them in good stories, not watered down trash for them. I should be able to pick up a childs comic book and go "Awesome story" not, "...why did I buy you this?"

 

[Cth]

So glad we're not getting this:

 

[Shivsguy616]

Lol, why would we ever get that?

 

[Sarg92]

Lol, why would we ever get that?

There are some people in favour of a regular guy being painted green like Lou Ferrigno and then have some clever camera shots to make him look big.

 

[Shivsguy616]

But even then, that wouldn't be a calm green fat man...

 

[M.O.Steel]

There are some people in favour of a regular guy being painted green like Lou Ferrigno and then have some clever camera shots to make him look big.

But even then, that wouldn't be a calm green fat man...

yeah. lou ferringo didn't look like that. and even if, they would use a body builder with much more muscle definition, and use prosthetics and make-up to make him look like they want him too. he wouldn't look like a giant overweight dude through a green filter.

 

[Khemik@L]

So glad we're not getting this:

LOL! Just the thought that this could have been what we could have gotten is gonna gimme nightmares for a LONG time

 

[GoblinWhirlwind]

I'd choose Spidey 3 over a Hulk that wasn't CGI.

 

[Spade]

Is that concept art from the last movie?

 

[GoblinWhirlwind]

Is that concept art from the last movie?

Lmao OWNED.

 

[ironwez20]

lol john goodman as the hulk

 

[Khemik@L]

Is that concept art from the last movie?

Kindah looks like the Concept Art for the first "Green Giant" Vegetable Movie:

GREEN GIANT:
The Movie
No Meat is safe!
​

 

[terry78]

Kindah looks like the Concept Art for the first "Green Giant" Vegetable Movie:

GREEN GIANT:
The Movie
No Meat is safe!
​

I'd watch that. And I'm not even being facetious.

 

[Mel4Prez]

CGI IS RUINING MOVIES!!

http://arts.guardian.co.uk/filmandmusic/story/0,,2281466,00.html

 

[Godman]

CGI IS RUINING MOVIES!!

http://arts.guardian.co.uk/filmandmusic/story/0,,2281466,00.html

I agree, when you don't NEED to use it

Best article to do with CG ever...I'm starting to hate over use or LAZY use of the stuff

 

[LostInnocence]

CGI IS RUINING MOVIES!!

http://arts.guardian.co.uk/filmandmusic/story/0,,2281466,00.html

Yeah, you just entered a board full of people who argue over CGI but love it nonetheless.

 

[Mel4Prez]

I agree, when you don't NEED to use it

Best article to do with CG ever...I'm starting to hate over use or LAZY use of the stuff

CGI is fine when it is used sparingly, however when you try to use it on a central figure such as Hulk, it just ruines it for a lot of us. We end up looking how comic the movements look and when you start thinking about that the magic is gone. I would prefer that they use a real life actor than this. It's like shrek the 4th

The article states the case for less CGI perfectly.

 

[Godman]

CGI is fine when it is used sparingly, however when you try to use it on a central figure such as Hulk, it just ruines it for a lot of us. We end up looking how comic the movements look and when you start thinking about that the magic is gone. I would prefer that they use a real life actor than this. It's like shrek the 4th

The article states the case for less CGI perfectly.

I agree. Should be a real muscular guy, but have him done like the huge dude in 300. The entire movie needs to be 300ish so that Hulk can fit in it and not look stupid.

 

[NoirMan82]

I agree. Should be a real muscular guy, but have him done like the huge dude in 300. The entire movie needs to be 300ish so that Hulk can fit in it and not look stupid.

The thing is, you can't find a guy that has Hulk's...unique anatomy. Prosthetics would also look pretty bad (Juggernaut anyone?) CGI is fine for things like Hulk, as long as people can use their imagination and suspend their disbelief long enough to have a good time. I mean, don't you think people in the 70's noticed the blotchy paint job on Ferrigno, or the cocked gren contacts on Bill Bixby? But back then people could just enjoy things and didn't have the internet to go whine about everything they don't like.

 

[Spade]

No offense, but Alec Gillis hasn't produced a good suit or practical effect since Aliens, and it's primarily because of the exact same reason CGI tends to suck: bad designs coupled with limited time. So he's not exactly one to talk.

As for the rest of the article, it only convinces me that films today need a longer post-production and better acting. No, I'm not joking about the latter. If the actors can't give an organic performance, then either they have a limited imagination or need to work on their craft. That's a pallid excuse. Still, I do agree with one thing: overuse. I've seen many films where practical effects could have been attempted. CGI should be used when the real thing isn't feasible or believable. But then again, if there was more time and skill applied CGI could have limitless capabilities.

 

[JeetKuneDo]

I'm reading comments, mostly from Godman, claiming that Hulk was just too intelligent for most viewers. Here's a definition of that word in the Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary:

Ask yourself: Was it in good judgment or sound thought to make a film about the Hulk (the angriest man in the world) predominantly into a drama? How, then, was it an "intelligent" film? The answer is that it wasn't. What it was, however, was muddled and tedious. That's not the same as being an intelligent film.

I'm not even going to pretend that I'm not going to steal that.

 

[M.O.Steel]

The thing is, you can't find a guy that has Hulk's...unique anatomy. Prosthetics would also look pretty bad (Juggernaut anyone?) CGI is fine for things like Hulk, as long as people can use their imagination and suspend their disbelief long enough to have a good time. I mean, don't you think people in the 70's noticed the blotchy paint job on Ferrigno, or the cocked gren contacts on Bill Bixby? But back then people could just enjoy things and didn't have the internet to go whine about everything they don't like.

while i don't think it was great either, it would have been much worse if they used a CG body with vinny's head. and i think that is the exception, not the rule.

hulk's anatomy is not as unique as some of the other characters that stayed CG-free, especially the new which looks like big lean body-builder.

i think if you watch LXG with jekyll and hyde, i think it really would look good to use a real individual with "CG enhanced". i don't think it needs to be either one or the other.

 

[The Shape]

I'm a guy that's all for practical effects. As the article says, nothing beats the real thing, and I firmly believe that. Obviously, there are instances where CGI is necessary. I, for one, love when it's used in a stylized format, or someplace that isn't meant to be grounded in reality. For example, Sin City and 300 are obvious choices where this applies. Even Speed Racer, in which an entirely different universe was created.

However, when making a Hulk movie that's set in a real-world environment, having a completely CGI Hulk running around can put a damper on things for me. Call me old fashioned, but seeing two computerized monster doesn't have the same effect on me that watching real, practical action does. There's nothing like it, IMO.

 

[Nivek]

I agree. Should be a real muscular guy, but have him done like the huge dude in 300. The entire movie needs to be 300ish so that Hulk can fit in it and not look stupid.

Please dont soil 300 by even mentioning it.