The Incredible Hulk CGI Thread

[goldenchylde]

The monkeys ants and prairie dogs were such a minor part of the movie. Most of the audience was thinking "whoa, how are they gonna get past those ants? Haha those monkey's are monkeying around. Ha look at those silly prairie dogs"...only ppl on boards like this think "why didn't they render those ants better? Those monkey's don't have enough polygons for me to be entertained. Those prairie dogs look too waxy for me to laugh at them." Could ilm make better monkey's and ants, yea, if they were making a movie where monkey's and ants were the stars, but why bother in indy 4. Any extra money used on ants would take away from the shots that need more attention. Would you guys have been happy if they doubled the CG budget and got Harrison Ford and Shia lookalikes for cheap to make ants look photo real?

 

[Negative Creep]

I didn't care for Indy 4.

 

[Nivek]

The monkeys ants and prairie dogs were such a minor part of the movie. Most of the audience was thinking "whoa, how are they gonna get past those ants? Haha those monkey's are monkeying around. Ha look at those silly prairie dogs"...only ppl on boards like this think "why didn't they render those ants better? Those monkey's don't have enough polygons for me to be entertained. Those prairie dogs look too waxy for me to laugh at them." Could ilm make better monkey's and ants, yea, if they were making a movie where monkey's and ants were the stars, but why bother in indy 4. Any extra money used on ants would take away from the shots that need more attention. Would you guys have been happy if they doubled the CG budget and got Harrison Ford and Shia lookalikes for cheap to make ants look photo real?

Kinda goes back to what I was saying about people being to full of themselves to not let go of their suspension of disbelief. They focus on these details and not the bigger story.

 

[goldenchylde]

Kinda goes back to what I was saying about people being to full of themselves to not let go of their suspension of disbelief. They focus on these details and not the bigger story.

Agreed. People think critiquing Cg makes them seem smart.

 

[Jaspertian1105]

Beyond all this CGI crap all i want to see is the real Hulk on screen. With TIH we are getting it, with Ang Lee s movie we didn't get the Hulk regardless of how good you thought the CGI was. You can love the movie ( i will never love it, i never walked of a movie so disappointed in my life) but for me it didn't represent the Hulk.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Did this thread just turn into an IJ4 bashing thread?

 

[Jaspertian1105]

I haven't seen IJ4, i love all three IJ movies but i wont see this one, i dislike Spilberg and Shia Lebouf even more

 

[Knightsaber Priss]

The monkeys ants and prairie dogs were such a minor part of the movie. Most of the audience was thinking "whoa, how are they gonna get past those ants? Haha those monkey's are monkeying around. Ha look at those silly prairie dogs"...only ppl on boards like this think "why didn't they render those ants better? Those monkey's don't have enough polygons for me to be entertained. Those prairie dogs look too waxy for me to laugh at them." Could ilm make better monkey's and ants, yea, if they were making a movie where monkey's and ants were the stars, but why bother in indy 4. Any extra money used on ants would take away from the shots that need more attention. Would you guys have been happy if they doubled the CG budget and got Harrison Ford and Shia lookalikes for cheap to make ants look photo real?

Come on. Compare Raiders of the Lost Ark with it's myriad of location shoots to the sterile feel of a CGI created back drop.

 

[Negative Creep]

Come on. Compare Raiders of the Lost Ark with it's myriad of location shoots to the sterile feel of a CGI created back drop.

Yeah, it's not the same. Indy 4 didn't have the feel of an Indiana Jones film at all. I was thoroughly disappointed.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Since we are off topic I'll through in my two cents.

I have no problem with CGI in an Indy movie but I was unimpressed and shocked that the jungle chase was so poorly staged and that the CGI was wholely unconviencing. Speilberg, who should be bulletproof when it comes to action scenes, did a piss poor job and so did ILM. Also I hate CGI animals and I hate the way that they are used in this and just about everyother flick. I smelled GL stench in that overly cutest, terrible CGI swinging Monkey scene and at the first part of the flick.

CGI isn't the problem, how it's used is.

 

[terry78]

I think people had less problems with the CG Alvin and the Chipmunks than they did with these.

 

[I Am The Knight]

Well, Alvin and the ******* is not Indiana.

Or Hulk, for that matter.

 

[Negative Creep]

Heh, GTA

 

[I Am The Knight]

I love it...But I've been thinking about changing it, I've had it since I joined The Hype.

 

[Negative Creep]

Don't, it's a great signature Made me think of the very funny radio stations in that game.

 

[I Am The Knight]

Thanks. I loved those radio stations. VCPR was my favorite...

 

[Negative Creep]

Yeah, I loved them too. I don't remember them so well so I looked up that station you mentioned on Wikipedia. VCPR was hilarious. Good times

 

[Hoblin]

Kinda goes back to what I was saying about people being to full of themselves to not let go of their suspension of disbelief. They focus on these details and not the bigger story.

I agree completely. It's the idea that the story is trying to convey that is the most important thing. It's the narative that matters. When someone watches a black and white movie or reads a books they don't complain about bad special FX. Of course it would be silly to do that (and that's my point), because everyone knows the idea that the movie/book was trying to convey. But for some reason when it comes to modern movies and CGI, people don't care about the idea or the narative, they want it to look real. And if it doesn't look so jaw-droppingly real that it blows their minds, they complain about it. "Oh, you could totally tell that was fake." - Good for you. While you're over telling that things are fake, I'll enjoy the movie.

Some of my friends complained about the prairie dogs in Indie 4. They said it was unneeded and took them out of the movie. How the hell can someone complaint about some CGI prairie dogs that HAD 10 SECONDS OF TOTAL SCREEN TIME DURING THE OPENING CREDITS OF THE MOVIE?!

So yeah. I love Hulk. The CGI looks good to me. w00t!

 

[I Am The Knight]

Creep:

Good times indeed, my friend.

 

[jimslimbo]

I agree completely. It's the idea that the story is trying to convey that is the most important thing. It's the narative that matters. When someone watches a black and white movie or reads a books they don't complain about bad special FX. Of course it would be silly to do that (and that's my point), because everyone knows the idea that the movie/book was trying to convey. But for some reason when it comes to modern movies and CGI, people don't care about the idea or the narative, they want it to look real. And if it doesn't look so jaw-droppingly real that it blows their minds, they complain about it. "Oh, you could totally tell that was fake." - Good for you. While you're over telling that things are fake, I'll enjoy the movie.

Some of my friends complained about the prairie dogs in Indie 4. They said it was unneeded and took them out of the movie. How the hell can someone complaint about some CGI prairie dogs that HAD 10 SECONDS OF TOTAL SCREEN TIME DURING THE OPENING CREDITS OF THE MOVIE?!

So yeah. I love Hulk. The CGI looks good to me. w00t!

Thats reminds me of when people were complaining about i am legends cgi. And for me i thought it was good enough, it didn't take me out of the story at all. And i was still able to enjoy that movie for the awsomeness that it was.

 

[Mel4Prez]

I agree completely. It's the idea that the story is trying to convey that is the most important thing. It's the narative that matters. When someone watches a black and white movie or reads a books they don't complain about bad special FX. "

The problem is the that bad CGI keeps getting in the way of being able to actually enjoy the movie.

 

[Comicfan]

The problem is the that bad CGI keeps getting in the way of being able to actually enjoy the movie.

Same happens with bad acting, bad plots, bad makeup, bad sets, bad stories...

Is not like CGI is the worst thing that can happen to a movie

 

[Kirmit]

The problem is the that bad CGI keeps getting in the way of being able to actually enjoy the movie.

Only if you let it, personally I can get through most movies without batting an eyelid at the cgi, if everything else in the film is good and really most of the general public don't give a damn as long as it's a good movie, it's only people that analyse it that have a problem.

 

[M.O.Steel]

Same happens with bad acting, bad plots, bad makeup, bad sets, bad stories...

Is not like CGI is the worst thing that can happen to a movie

you're exactly right. so then why are you so forgiving for the CG? all the stuff you mention do hinder a movie, and they usually get creamed by the critics if teh acting is terrible, or if there's no plot. the same courtesy should for extended to the effects.

CG isn't the worst thing to happen, doesn't mean they can't fix it and keep pushing it beyond imagination.

 

[Comicfan]

you're exactly right. so then why are you so forgiving for the CG? all the stuff you mention do hinder a movie, and they usually get creamed by the critics if teh acting is terrible, or if there's no plot. the same courtesy should for extended to the effects.

CG isn't the worst thing to happen, doesn't mean they can't fix it and keep pushing it beyond imagination.

I know, and that why I critic the CGI of this nnew HULK