The Amazing Spider-Man This movie NEEDS the real spider-man

[Rumpy Bulge Dubz]

This is what I'm talking about...you just can't compare monsters, aliens, blobs etc with the work that is required to make superpowered human beings, they are the one thing that always look fake to the human eye/brain, as of course we have the real world examples of people around us to compare it to.
Just because they use the same method, CGI, does not mean they are comparable in the way of measuring quality of sfx.
You can only measure it against other examples of CG humans.

I just think they could've done better than what they gave us, like someone else stated a good hand full of pages back. There were parts of the chase scene in which they could've used actual stunt men/acrobatics instead of CG. I happen to think that's true and judging from the burning building scene, it's going to be difficult to convince me that the effects in the chase scene was the absolute best they could accomplish

that's all I'm saying and I'm ending my opinion there. I see where you're coming from david, but I just don't agree, sorry.

 

[spider-neil]

we see people run, jump, lift, climb all the time. the human brain is conditioned to know what that looks like so even when human is presented jumping 100 foot in the air we instinctively know what looks right. the laws of physics still apply, weight, acceleration, inertia. comparing D9 or T2 is a falacy because the principle effect wasn't a human doing superhuman stuff, even in avatar where the humaniod characters looked near enough perfect they were still doing 'human' stuff not superhuman stuff.

 

[TheSlag]

Watched a little bit of Spider-Man (1) tonite, since it was on cable, and saw the scene with the fight with Flash at the school locker, and thought how lame the wire work looked with Peter somersaulting to avoid the attack from behind, and thought how cool this guy (or his like) could of made that scene.

 

[The Slang]

David Belle is a person with similar skills worth checking out. There's this french movie where in the opening scene, this guy escapes a building while being pursued by seemingly endless people. At one point he's cornered in a hallway and he uses the walls to step over their shoulders while kicking some. At other point he jumps over the edge of a balcony and uses some kind of rope to swing to a lower balcony on the next side of the building.

 

[Infinity9999x]

David Belle is a person with similar skills worth checking out. There's this french movie where in the opening scene, this guy escapes a building while being pursued by seemingly endless people. At one point he's cornered in a hallway and he uses the walls to step over their shoulders while kicking some. At other point he jumps over the edge of a balcony and uses some kind of rope to swing to a lower balcony on the next side of the building.

David Belle is insane. I believe he's the man who invented Parkour to begin with.

 

[DACMAN]

that was twenty plus years ago

Yeah, they did that just six years ago in SM2 and it still looked like crap.
At 47 seconds. I don't think anyone thought that looked good.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpgrOgypc9g


The only way live action wall crawling works is on inverted camera stuff like in SM1 when Peter first wall crawls. Look at The Fly with Jeff Goldbloom. It still looks good to this day.

Maybe it was just Raimi that made the CGI scenes so hit and miss. I thought the CGI when Spidey was doing the slo-mo jump in SM1 looked amazing. And the CGI Peter in Spider-Man 3 looked amazing as well. The close up of Peter sticking to the chunk of wall as it fell was one of the best CGI people I have ever seen. Then at the end of the movie when he's falling and fighting Venom, the scene looked terrible. It looked like a cartoon.

 

[Rumpy Bulge Dubz]

^I thought Spidey jumping into the window (0:45) was fake looking whereas Spidey crawling along the wall (0:47) looked real as hell

 

[DACMAN]

I agree. Him jumping into the window looked fake. But so did him wall crawling, like he was on a wire. He doesn't even look like he's touching the wall.

If they're going to do live action wall crawling with no cgi, they need to do it like The Fly.

 

[Naite22]

Looks exstremely cool. And combining stuff like this, with superior CG in the high swinging scenes would make for one hell of a spidey act!... But they wont do that -they're too dumb.

 

[Ajendo]

Exactly. Goldblum wall crawling looks real as hell and that film was made donkeys years ago.

 

[Dragon]

Yeah, they did that just six years ago in SM2 and it still looked like crap.
At 47 seconds. I don't think anyone thought that looked good.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpgrOgypc9g


The only way live action wall crawling works is on inverted camera stuff like in SM1 when Peter first wall crawls. Look at The Fly with Jeff Goldbloom. It still looks good to this day.

Maybe it was just Raimi that made the CGI scenes so hit and miss. I thought the CGI when Spidey was doing the slo-mo jump in SM1 looked amazing. And the CGI Peter in Spider-Man 3 looked amazing as well. The close up of Peter sticking to the chunk of wall as it fell was one of the best CGI people I have ever seen. Then at the end of the movie when he's falling and fighting Venom, the scene looked terrible. It looked like a cartoon.

This argument. like pretty much every other one is getting silly.

The whole debate about the CGI is eye-of-the-beholder. I see people loving shots that others hate and hating shots that others love.

And I see how people would "imptrove" the scenes and yet their improvements are completely impratcial and would create all new problems.
And they don't take into account that all of this stuff costs money. Talking about shooting a real actor catapulting without considering how much it would cost to build rigging and safety apparatus for a shot that would be for a tenth of a second. Ain't gonna happen.

And more over okay- the CG in Spidey sucks according to some of you. So who's doing it better? Who else has created a character that moves as elaborately as Spidey and made him look more convincing? Iron Man is just a guy in a metal suit that doesn't do much of anything but fire lasers and he looks totally like CG. Not even even real metal. The Hulk looks like a giant rubbery action figure. And IM2 had the same budget as Spidey 2, yet hasn't got a single actrion scene that remotely compares to those in Spidey 2.

And The Fly? Please. It did look good. But Goldblum wall-crawled for 1 second. He didn't do it as extensively as Spidey would have to, not to mention be fighting another character.

Again, I've always said they need to use more stunt work and less CG,
but it isn't as simple as some of you think.

 

[Ajendo]

Actually it is. If it wasn't a budget of £80million wouldn't even be considered.

 

[Dragon]

Actually it isn't. They've said the lower budget is because the films wiil focus less on action and more on teen-angst crap. They're hoping to sell this drival to the same doofi that flock to Twilight.

Sony doesn't care about making good movies, they just want to make money. In two years you guys are going to be wishing Raimi was back.

 

[Rumpy Bulge Dubz]

Actually it isn't. They've said the lower budget is because the films wiil focus less on action and more on teen-angst crap. They're hoping to sell this drival to the same doofi that flock to Twilight.

Sony doesn't care about making good movies, they just want to make money. In two years you guys are going to be wishing Raimi was back.

sadly, you speak the truth. Sony (like Fox) is rushing out another Spidey film soley for the purpose of maintaining rights and not to tell a story or give back to the fans.

you can just tell by that 1 single line about the film focusing less on action and more on Teen-angst, and they said JUST THAT .....freaking Teen-Angst

Teen-Angst?

Seriously?

In a Superhero film that's suppose to be aimed soley at males (be it kids or adults, superhero's are a male dominated interest) and boys, men, whatever, don't care at all for that crap.

so it flat out screams at you what they're trying to do. Why they're trying that though is beyond me. That's a mystery that may never get solved

 

[Ajendo]

Actually it isn't. They've said the lower budget is because the films wiil focus less on action and more on teen-angst crap. They're hoping to sell this drival to the same doofi that flock to Twilight.

Sony doesn't care about making good movies, they just want to make money. In two years you guys are going to be wishing Raimi was back.

Where's you proof of this? What because the summary given was a blurb of what the actual USM comics are about? There hasn't been any concrete statement by anyone that matters that has said these movies will focus less on action. Furthermore, the action in Raimi's movies weren't exactly in abundance. They were few and far between, maybe with the exception of SM3, which had a load of crappy action sequences. I for one won't be wishing for Raimi to return even if Webb sucks. And to be fair, all studios care about making money, that's first and foremost to any movie studio.

Teen angst?? It's spidey in high school he's a teenager who has the problems we all know he has, why is this a shocker to some of you? It's only grimmacing if we get more of the crappily executed angsty rubbish we got in the Raimi movies.

 

[Rumpy Bulge Dubz]

^no, it WAS stated in an interview or article about the reboot right when it was announced. You don't make a statement like "we're going to focus less on action and more on teen angst" without pretty much insinuating that it's going to be more soap than superhero, which I'm sorry if you like that or not, is just flat..out..Wrong!

Spidey in highschool doesn't mean it needs to be more drama than action, but they're pretty much saying it will be. This isn't Dawson's Creek

And to be fair, all studios care about making money, that's first and foremost to any movie studio.

true, but I said this in the past and I'll say it again. Money shouldn't be the ONLY thing they care about

with Fox though and now Sony, it's clear that's the case

when money is all you care about, you're setting yourself up for failure plain and simple

 

[Ajendo]

Provide a quote where a member of the powers that be said they were going to focus less on action. Please and thank you.

 

[TheSlag]

Teen angst?? It's spidey in high school he's a teenager who has the problems we all know he has, why is this a shocker to some of you? It's only grimmacing if we get more of the crappily executed angsty rubbish we got in the Raimi movies.

Instead of today's teens in High School that felt more like Grammar School. She loves me.. She Loves me NOT.. *WAHHHHH*

*sheesh*

 

[Rumpy Bulge Dubz]

Provide a quote where a member of the powers that be said they were going to focus less on action. Please and thank you.

I'm not gonna sit on my computer and try to look up a quote I read several months back, not happening. If you want proof so bad, do the searching yourself. It's out there

besides, I wouldn't know the first place to look. My best bet would be one of the threads in the Spidey forum. Possibly the Marc Webb thread, not sure on that though

or maybe somebody here has it saved. So if someone does, it would be appreciated if you posted it. Thanks in advance

 

[Ajendo]

If that's the case and it's so hard to find, then it's hardly concrete proof that the mission statement for the new film emphasises less action. As I said, most likely to be a blurb describing what the USM comics are about in which the film is going to be based on and not that the film itself will have less action.

 

[Rumpy Bulge Dubz]

^wrong

they were talking about the fiilm itself. The reboot will focus less on action and more on teen angst.


that's fact.

now you can believe or deny it till the freaking cows come home, I couldn't care less, I'm not here to convert nay-sayers into believers as there's some very ignorant people on this board that just refuse to listen to reason, you being one of them

And that would be a complete waste of my time. Plenty of people have told you the article exists, plenty of people can back up what it says

what YOU choose to believe, well, frankly, doesn't f'ng matter to me.

 

[Ajendo]

Plenty of people?? It's just been you and dragon and I don't understand why you're getting so worked up, clearly you're getting aggy over a situation that your claiming and yet failing to substantiate. If you can't back up what your saying then I suggest saying nothing at all.

Oh and from what I remember, the comment your refering to about less action wasn't even made by someone in the inncer circle but some journalist's opinion, so your "facts" are well, bs at best really.