The Official Start/Release Date & Location Thread

[TheComicbookKid]

NO offense, but the Matrix Reloaded looked horrible. Look at that 1,000 Mr. Smith fight in the park. It looked like sh--.

I mean, Davey Jones looked like a real character. But I also don't know what a fish headed man looks like. A CGI character' s lips move wrong and I can immediately tell that's not right.

No one is saying that the SFX aren't fantastic, but a human character is easier to look wrong to the eye than a fishman without lips, hair, and human fingers.

 

[matrix_ghost]

what dont you understand?
38 hours per frame. 38 hours.

this is complex rendering. it doesnt matter if ti is a human or a robot. this loks like the longest render time.

buggs can you please come here and try to explain this in a more better english why it is how it is?

I understand everything .
So it's 38 hours per frame. Meaning that it's pushed ILM's technology to the limit.
Great . But so did POTC 3 with the giant whirlpool and everything happening in it.
Yet Pirates cost 270 million and Transformers 150 million.
Reason for the billionth time , it's MUCH MORE DIFFICULT AND EXPENSIVE TO CREATE SOMETHING THAT LOOKS LIKE A HUMAN THEN A GIANT METAL ROBOT.

Can't you read everything before commenting ?
Bay shot most things in-camera. Meaning ILM had the task of creating a complex looking metal robot and insert it the plate.
ILM didn't have to animate an entire city block AND a ROBOT and HUMANS running AND big ass explosions AND car crashes in a single frame. If that would've been the case the budget would've soared well over the 200 million mark.

That is the thing with a CG superman. You can't shoot everything in camera meaning you have you have to create full virtual enviroments with fully virtual actors and objects.
To render all those stuff requires a **** load of time and money.
Just because ILM said that they spend 38 hrs to render on frame doesn't mean that they are the only studio who does that.

 

[matrix_ghost]

ok show me a book or something else where it says that teh human skin is the hardest to do.

with all due respect.....the skin still had extreme good sub surcafe scatering. the shine was amazing.

it looked organic and this is all that matter.
i also suggest to look at videos from sony imageworks where you can see that they made a realistic CGI human.it looked already good in matrix realoed and hulk.
but does this matter? no it doesnt because their aproach is idiotic. they think that CGI will solve every problem. CGI should help you to finish a scene. CGI is not there to make the whole scene.

but i wont force my opinion anymore.

Wha

 

[matrix_ghost]

NO offense, but the Matrix Reloaded looked horrible. Look at that 1,000 Mr. Smith fight in the park. It looked like sh--.
I mean, Davey Jones looked like a real character. But I also don't know what a fish headed man looks like. A CGI character' s lips move wrong and I can immediately tell that's not right.

No one is saying that the SFX aren't fantastic, but a human character is easier to look wrong to the eye than a fishman without lips, hair, and human fingers.

In your opinion of course
I thought it looked very realistic. But hey i'm also biased

As for Davey Jones , yes he looked practially photoreal. dark_b is right in saying that they got some really good software to get the skin texture just right. He looks far better then Hulk IMO.

Also the thing which really makes it difficult to get CG humans right is the fact that you have a reference.
IN SR the audience can see just how close CG Brandon looks like compared to the real Brandon. In Matrix you have CG neo and smith and you have the actors .

With something like Davey Jones or Opimus Prime , you don't have any reference. That also helps accepting something as (photo)real.

 

[AgentPat]

...it's much easier to render METAL in CGI then something made of flesh.

Did you miss the part where they said the shots in TF entail "some of the most difficult renders in ILM history?"

Look, I'm not arguing this stuff isn't mind numbingly complex, regardless of WHAT is being rendered. It's an extremely time consuming and *expensive* process, and it's a technology that seems to re-invent itself every two years. That's all besides the point, however.

I don't see any reason why Singer wouldn't be able to work on pre-production issues of whatever film he wanted while on the set of another film. Directors do that All. The. Time. Singer was supposedly working on the Logan's Run remake while on the SR shoot, IIRC.

A JLA film shouldn't *need* to cost billions of dollars (exaggeration). The first X-Men was shot for $75M. The second for $110M, and the third for $210M. F4 had a $100M budget, and F42 was done for $130M. Both of those franchises have full blown superheroes doing miraculous things like FLYING and fighting hand-to-hand with various other super beings.

If Warners handed Singer $200M to make a film (SR sequel or JLA film), does anybody *honestly* think he'd turn them down because he's too busy or that he thought the budget was too small? If you want the gig, you make it work. It's not Singer's time or budget restrictions that's delaying things here; it's Warners dragging their feet in deciding what to do.

...And that's just what *we* know. All of these things could have already been decided, just not announced yet. Wasn't that the point of this thread?

 

[TheComicbookKid]

Because some people hope the decisions that haven't been announced are that Singer's out and the WB is either going JLA or a reboot.

 

[AgentPat]

Because some people hope the decisions that haven't been announced are that Singer's out and the WB is either going JLA or a reboot.

[raises hand] I'm one of those "some people" LOL. But I still don't see much validity in the other arguments. Assuming Singer wanted to do a follow-up to SR, and assuming Warners wanted a follow-up to SR, then time, budget or complexity of effects aint gonna stop 'em. It may slow them down, but it won't stop them.

If Warners decided to throw the baby out with the bath water however, all bets are off. A JLA film could unspool in '09, or rattle around in development hell for ten years. Who knows?

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hello there!

Do YOU understand why I thought SR was amazing?

I don't possess telepathy.

However it doesn't take a twelth-level intellect to deduce a number of possible reasons why certain fans say they liked it:

1. It was a Superman movie, and they, as Superman fans loved it (unconditionally in some cases).

2. Darker Superman. It was a Superman for grown-ups, with adult, relationship problems that Superman couldn't solve even with all his powers.

3. Original idea. Giving Superman a kid.

4. Retro Nostalgia. In the form of the Fleischer 'look' (soft focus, muted colours), the Donner continuity, original (non-corporate) Lex, Action Comics #1 pose.

5. Religious parallels. A messianic Superman is something that appeals to them.

6. Emo Superman. Some people were just busting for a Superman themed melodrama, its like Sex in the City crossed with ER.

Did I miss anything...?

 

[FaT_tONle]

We had the same thing going on with a solo superman movie and batman VS superman. Same thing with Alien 5, which had Cameron as writer and Scott as director versus just Alien VS predator. The difference happened in one week when Freddy VS Jason came out. Literally the next monday following the box office numbers for that weekend, Aliens VS Predator wsa greenlit. This is Warner's guaging reaction. They did the same thing when they leaked the whole Jack Black Green Lantern thing. They wanted to see reaction. I believe this is all just to see. But the things is prior to this, one of the main things mentioned in all JLA news about it killing SR2 was how bad SR did at the BO. I honestly think this is both camps standing their ground. And most importantly, SR2 has not been greenlit. Batman Begins was greenlit by this time.

Are you serious dude? They cut Alien 5 for AvP.... HAHAHAHAHA... wow that's good stuff...

 

[TheComicbookKid]

But what's the deciding factor for SR2. First, buggs said Hulk, then he said Transformers. The deciding factor will probably be something we can't see. Waiting for Hulk in 2008 would be too late to start the casting, preproduction, and execution of JLA as WB's tentpole for 2009. WB is going to have to make this decision on their own if it already hasn't. No other blockbusters are coming out (cept Potter).

 

[Conan]

The deciding factor for Man of Steel is the script and who they have cast for the villain. If the WB likes where Singer is going for the second movie and they have a known actor lined up to play the villain for the movie I am sure the WB will say yes. If they don't like what they see then you are looking at a reboot or JLA.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

The deciding factor for Man of Steel is the script and who they have cast for the villain. If the WB likes where Singer is going for the second movie and they a known actor lined up to play the villain for the movie I am sure the WB will say yes. If they don't like what they see then you are looking at a reboot or JLA.

Exactly. I think Peters said he expected a script by year's end. So the deadline is like five months off. Of course I certainly would love to turn on the Hype tomorrow and see "Man of Steel script turned in."lol

 

[Showtime]

I am not sure why the script is going to take so long to complete at this point. I understand that people are busy but at the same time you would think they could bang out a 1st draft at least.

 

[Showtime]

The deciding factor for Man of Steel is the script and who they have cast for the villain. If the WB likes where Singer is going for the second movie and they have a known actor lined up to play the villain for the movie I am sure the WB will say yes. If they don't like what they see then you are looking at a reboot or JLA.

WB already knows where Singer plans on going with this, they have known since 2004. That might have changed, but he pitched a two to three movie story arc at that meeting.

 

[green]

Maybe, but Logan's Run, X3, etc...Singer has a history in Hollywood of lining up projects and then pulling out of them when something new and shinier catches his eye.

Singer didnt drop out of Logans Run. As with other Joel Silver productions, it never really got off the ground besides some pre-production. The studio was weary about it plain and simple.

 

[Conan]

WB already knows where Singer plans on going with this, they have known since 2004. That might have changed, but he pitched a two to three movie story arc at that meeting.

Correct but what I mean by that is action, detailed, story, etc. Things like that they don't know; they (WB) know the basic outline of the whole trilogy but not the real details of the story.

 

[Showtime]

Correct but what I mean by that is action, detailed, story, etc. Things like that they don't know; they (WB) know the basic outline of the whole trilogy but not the real details of the story.

Well they pretty much know the story arc and where it is going to go, villians and what not. The problem is due to the performance of Returns, all of that might have changed. Don't forget Returns was greenlit on a treatment, the sequel needs a really solid 1st draft.

 

[Dark Knight]

Agreed - I checked back articles and it was during the filming of the Prestige that the first offical word came out from Alan Horn

http://www.superherohype.com/news/batmannews.php?id=3993

This was on March 16th. Now BB and SR both came out at about the same time so a SR sequel is 3-4 months behind the timeframe that TDK is on. Gievn the production scale of a SR sequel this is worthy of noting. In the end once agian it comes down to WB's silence on the whole thing. It needs to be taken into consideration when discussing where we are at on this potentiial project.

Horn and the heads of WB's are going to wait to see the 1st or 2nd draft for the sequel and see if Singer and his writers will be significantly improving on Returns before they officially greenlight it. Singer just needs to bring some serious villains for Supes to battle who have not been seen before onscreen. Preferably two of these four Metallo, Braniac, Doomsday or Darkseid while Luthor of course would be there as well. The action of course needs to be
increased and at the same time Singer and the producers need to make the sequel more of stand alone film and not something that will be carbon copied from previous Superman films.

 

[Dark Knight]

The deciding factor for Man of Steel is the script and who they have cast for the villain. If the WB likes where Singer is going for the second movie and they have a known actor lined up to play the villain for the movie I am sure the WB will say yes. If they don't like what they see then you are looking at a reboot or JLA.

Exactly. If WB's doesn't see any significant improvements in the sequel story, villain and action. They won't greenlight it until improvements are made. Horn and the rest of the WB's heads along with Singer and his writers and producers should know what they need to do to make the sequel a kick A$$ sequel! We all know what they need to do....and lets hope they are not lost over there.

 

[GreenKToo]

Thats very true. I would like Brainiac and Metallo. Hugo weaving for Brainiac, and Kiefer Sutherland for metallo.

The deciding factor for Man of Steel is the script and who they have cast for the villain. If the WB likes where Singer is going for the second movie and they have a known actor lined up to play the villain for the movie I am sure the WB will say yes. If they don't like what they see then you are looking at a reboot or JLA.

 

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Exactly. If WB's doesn't see any significant improvements in the sequel story, villain and action. They won't greenlight it until improvements are made. Horn and the rest of the WB's heads along with Singer and his writers and producers should know what they need to do to make the sequel a kick A$$ sequel! We all know what they need to do....and lets hope they are not lost over there.

If Singer could do an amazing X-Men sequel for $110 million, i dont see why he cant do it for a SR sequel with a $175 or more budget.

 

[fabman]

While I liked X2 I still find it a bit... hollow, especially in the direction. It had a kind of TV feel to it. Dunno how to explain!

 

[Dark Knight]

If Singer could do an amazing X-Men sequel for $110 million, i dont see why he cant do it for a SR sequel with a $175 or more budget.

I agree. I just hope they keep the budget for the sequel at 150 million. Singer needs to make the sequel a stand alone film not some carbon copy of what Donner did. He has said that he wants to go "Wrath of Khan" for the sequel and he damn well better!

 

[Dark Knight]

Thats very true. I would like Brainiac and Metallo. Hugo weaving for Brainiac, and Kiefer Sutherland for metallo.

Hugo Weaving would be a great choice for Braniac and Sutherland would be a great choice for Metallo also!

 

[nintendo nerd]

I prefer Kevin Bacon for Metallo. But Sutherland is a great option too.