The Incredible Hulk CGI Thread

[Godman]

Not saying that it's right or that I agree but the studio cares more about money than then a director being a visionary. Ang Lees Hulk was hated by most and dropped off the face of the earth after a big opening weekend do to bad word of mouth. Now you shouldn't really care about that because the most important thing is that you like the film but there is a reason that Ang Lee wasn't invited back.

I agree...it's the bizness of making money as quick and as easy as possible.

 

[GreenKToo]

Now this is the HULK I know. I liked Ang's Hulk alright, but this one is just wow to me.

 

[odiin]

disagree all you want, the CG in the street fight is good enough to match the best of 03's. You've seen it in normal, little sh**y yahoo video size, if you watch it in HD, which gives you a bigger picture, litterally, you'll see the improvements.




i'll try but i doubt i'm doing it justice, you really have to see it in motion.

yeah, i suck at this, but if you get a chance, watch it in HD, its much better.

This.

I hadn't watched the clips in HD until just recently, and even though I thought they were very good I could understand how some people could be disappointed, but let me just say this to everyone who has passed judgment on this before looking at it in HD: The hell is wrong with you??? Get to it! The detail is absolutely incredible, but unfortunately a lot of it is lost when compressed into SD. The CG in this movie is amazing, everything from the stubble on his face to the pulsating muscles in his back. Go look at in HD, how it was filmed and meant to be seen, and then try to say with a straight face that it looks bad.

 

[Gamma Ra]

After watching those AWESOME clips over and over again and seeing the difference in the earlier clips as compared to the latter...I maintain that the haters have done their job.

 

[Obi-Ron]

Nonsense. They were making improvements all along, regardless of fanboy whining.

 

[lordofthenerds]

I have to say that this particular shot is the best of Hulk I've seen so far in this movie, especially in motion. He looks almost photo-realistic here.

 

[Showtime]

I love his mop haircut, that is what my hair looks like right now. I need a haircut.

 

[Dotten]

The only thing I can nitpick on is that his mouth is to big. Like in that last image.

But other then that, this looks amazing. I think this can be just as great as Transformers (I know some of you hated that movie, but I don't give a rats ass. I loved it).

Rambo was great earlier this year, Iron Man was fantastic, Indana Jones was great and now I just hope TIH can follow up and be what it looks to be from clips and trailers: An incredible movie.

This is already the best popcorn-year ever. I'm so excited, we've still got TIH, Hellboy II and TDK. Oh heavy heaven

 

[Anjow1060]

I think the CGI is fine, but I don't think it matches the tone of the movie. The "seriousness" of it. I'm only speaking from what I've seen in trailers and clips and such, but idk. CGI makes everything look so simple and like it weighs 2lbs. That's a blanket statement about CGI in general. Oh well, hopefully Norton and the story saves the movie.


Where's Mr. Thau when you need him? lol

- Jow

 

[TheBeastWithin]

same here... but, watch the street fight in HD and IMO, the CG matches 03's, the best of 03's.

Absolutely right. The streetfight looks flawless.

 

[Mercurius]

Ang Lee's Hulk was a problem in the way they chose to present it. The story was lousy, and the comicbook tricks were goofy.

But the CGI itself, with that incredible photo realism, was nothing short of great.

This new one is crap, Iknow they spent a lot of money and whatnot, but the rendering delivers cartoonish characters.

Even LoEG's CGI was far better. These new scenes only stress what I thought: the Hulk design is exaggerated (even for Hulk, take a look at the muscles) and cartoonish, and Abomination is one of the weakest pieces of design I've ever seen.

The movie should be much better storywise than the 2003 one, but the CGI is a much, much inferior one. And it shows quite clearly.

 

[odiin]

Ang Lee's Hulk was a problem in the way they chose to present it. The story was lousy, and the comicbook tricks were goofy.

But the CGI itself, with that incredible photo realism, was nothing short of great.

This new one is crap, Iknow they spent a lot of money and whatnot, but the rendering delivers cartoonish characters.

Even LoEG's CGI was far better. These new scenes only stress what I thought: the Hulk design is exaggerated (even for Hulk, take a look at the muscles) and cartoonish, and Abomination is one of the weakest pieces of design I've ever seen.

The movie should be much better storywise than the 2003 one, but the CGI is a much, much inferior one. And it shows quite clearly.

All that shows quite clearly is the fact that you are completely insane.

 

[Sarg92]

Ang Lee's Hulk was a problem in the way they chose to present it. The story was lousy, and the comicbook tricks were goofy.

But the CGI itself, with that incredible photo realism, was nothing short of great.

This new one is crap, Iknow they spent a lot of money and whatnot, but the rendering delivers cartoonish characters.

Even LoEG's CGI was far better. These new scenes only stress what I thought: the Hulk design is exaggerated (even for Hulk, take a look at the muscles) and cartoonish, and Abomination is one of the weakest pieces of design I've ever seen.

The movie should be much better storywise than the 2003 one, but the CGI is a much, much inferior one. And it shows quite clearly.

I do not understand why the CGI haters say that this CGI should be like the CGI by ILM.

This is by R&H not ILM, both companies deliever great CGI but with different styles. In a way CGI is art and both companies have their styles which show in their art.

Take a Van Gogh to a Picasso, both look amazing but look different and have different styles because they are from different artists.

 

[NoirMan82]

gross. The back scene is the best I have seen so far and the turning head with fire behind him is absolutely garbage. His anatomy is strange around the neck. I HATE 2008 CGI.

I'm a fan of photo realism and 2008 isn't it whereas 03 had a thing going for it WAY ahead of it's time.

This what I meant by cherry picking. You took the best (of a finished film) and you're trying to compare it to the new one. No one is saying Hulk 03' CGI was bad. It was in certain parts, but not overall. ILM did fantastic work, R&H is doing good work, that's the thing. The CGI in TIH isn't the best I've ever seen, but it's not the digital Holocaust you think it is. You can say all you like, but FACTUALLY only one person here has agreed with you. The masses have spoken and they don't share you voice. But hey, that's fandom, y'know. Everyone has certain things they are looking for. I'll bring an extra friend to the movie to cover your abscence.

 

[Marvin]

i personally think it's gonna look great when it's finished and on the big screen at 24fps

i'm still worried that R&H are focusing on detail modeling
and animation
(which by the way are amazing)

but compared to a perfectly lit rubber ball that's just sitting on the floor

the high detail smooth moving cgi stands to get way more critiques than the stuff that doesn't look like well drawn pictures but simply real...weak model or not

point in case

as great as this looks..with all the stubble, wrinkles and sweat...

looks like pretty cgi when compared to this

unfortunately in todays world it's not weather it looks real or not...but rather if it looks like cgi!

and yes i know i'm comparing finished work to possibly unfinished but the point still stands....i can smell R&H's work a mile away(pretty pictures)

 

[NoirMan82]

i personally think it's gonna look great when it's finished and on the big screen at 24fps

i'm still worried that R&H are focusing on detail modeling
and animation
(which by the way are amazing)

but compared to a perfectly lit rubber ball that's just sitting on the floor

the high detail smooth moving cgi stands to get way more critiques than the stuff that doesn't look like well drawn pictures but simply real...weak model or not

point in case

as great as this looks..with all the stubble, wrinkles and sweat...

looks like pretty cgi when compared to this

unfortunately in todays world it's not weather it looks real or not...but rather if it looks like cgi!

and yes i know i'm comparing finished work to possibly unfinished but the point still stands....i can smell R&H's work a mile away(pretty pictures)

I beg to differ. The new photo looks a lot better than the old one. The face of 03' Hulk is way to clay-looking and doesn't have the color depth of TIH hulk. It's a no contest for me.

 

[Batman137]

First time posting on the hulk thread. I HATED the '03 version. But i think im gonna see this one

 

[odiin]

I beg to differ. The new photo looks a lot better than the old one. The face of 03' Hulk is way to clay-looking and doesn't have the color depth of TIH hulk. It's a no contest for me.

I didn't know how to say it, but that's what I was thinking. In that shot in particular the 2003 Hulk does look real, but it doesn't look like skin. It looks like a really, really, really, good clay sculpture or something. To me, they both look realistic in their own way, but the '08 Hulk is the only one that actually looks like it actually has LIFE.

 

[GreenKToo]

I beg to differ. The new photo looks a lot better than the old one. The face of 03' Hulk is way to clay-looking and doesn't have the color depth of TIH hulk. It's a no contest for me.

I agree. Not that the 03' cgi Hulk was bad or anything, I just think this new one looks better.

 

[Marvin]

hulks skin really shouldn't be soft and human like (unless your superman, if you bulletproof to a degree you skin should look tough)

just a thought

 

[Marvin]

I beg to differ. The new photo looks a lot better than the old one. The face of 03' Hulk is way to clay-looking and doesn't have the color depth of TIH hulk. It's a no contest for me.

i can see where you coming from

the new work has so many amazing factors, and honestly it sucks but it's gonna get grilled for that final factor

at this point it's got that pretty picture vibe

if they could just switch eyes maybe

and the teeth look like holograms...

 

[Scooter]

Some of those '03 Hulk images aren't DVD captures, aren't representative of the film. Isn't that the problem we had with this new Hulk? That we weren't looking at finished work? Granted, we still haven't seen the "final" stuff from Letterier and crew, but we should at least compare - if we are set on making comparisons - the best of what we've got so far.

Someone with a Hulk DVD get to it.

 

[NoirMan82]

i can see where you coming from

the new work has so many amazing factors, and honestly it sucks but it's gonna get grilled for that final factor

at this point it's got that pretty picture vibe

if they could just switch eyes maybe

and the teeth look like holograms...

A picture can say a 1000 words, but moving pictures can write a novel! The novel that the new clips wrote is called "I Kick Major Ass, Regardless of What Came Before".

 

[dcHulk]

A picture can say a 1000 words, but moving pictures can write a novel! The novel that the new clips wrote is called "I Kick Major Ass, Regardless of What Came Before".

LOL...Amen brother!

 

[Marvin]

personally i'm way more interested in Letterier's camera work and iconica visually story telling than photo realism

those new clips are awesome and this going to be the bench mark superhero brawls and what not

i don't really care about the level of cgi when we have a director like louis

but

that doesn't mean i can't call bs when i see it

objectively (which shouldn't really apply to art)
that 03 shot(not the whole film) looks more "real" than anything we've seen yet from this film...

but the performance in this is greater than pretty much all of ang's "emotion driven" film.