The Avengers What impressive humanoid CGI has ILM done since Hulk 2003?

[Godman]

Im sceptical a lil as that was the last time i remember truly being impressed by live action interaction with CGI from ILM

 

[Invader34]

POTC, Davy Jones, I was impressed.

 

[Invader34]

In Van Helisng Mr. Hyde was pretty impressive

 

[nogap87]

Davy Jones is my favorite ILM creation. I would love to see them top that with Avengers' Hulk.

 

[Godzilla2000]

Despite my lack of fondness for the Transformers movies, ILM did a very good job with those ghastly robot designs.

 

[Gamma Goliath]

Transformers don't count they're metal lol.
ILM really hadn't done much in terms of organic humanoids, but thats what makes me excited to see what they'll do. Because the advancements in CGI have grown leaps and bounds since 03's hulk.

 

[Godzilla2000]

I'm sure the animators will rely heavily upon new texture software and using Motion Capture to get the right facial expressions. That's not the problem though. What is the problem are the eyes. If the eyes look particularly lifeless and dead the illusion is broken. What ILM did with the POTC movies is use the actors' own eyes for, say the cursed crew in Black Pearl. That might be hard to do with something like the Hulk, but not impossible though.

 

[Shadowlord X]

This is my greatest worry about this film.

A major factor that hindered the success of THE HULK movies was that the CGI for THE HULK didn't look real and took a lot of people out of the movies. (Also the first one on the whole was kind of crappy)

I REALLY hope they have some truly spectacular VFX for THE HULK in this movie. If they do then it will contribute greatly to it's success but if they don't it could be the same story all over again.

Keeping my fingers crossed.

 

[Godzilla2000]

I think when trying to make completely organic CGI creatures it's hard to make them move in a way that looks natural because the human eye knows how an organic creature should move. Any momentary jerkiness or any slight deviation from the norm just does not fool you at all.

 

[Dark Raven]

I'm sure the animators will rely heavily upon new texture software and using Motion Capture to get the right facial expressions. That's not the problem though. What is the problem are the eyes. If the eyes look particularly lifeless and dead the illusion is broken. What ILM did with the POTC movies is use the actors' own eyes for, say the cursed crew in Black Pearl. That might be hard to do with something like the Hulk, but not impossible though.

Isn't Ruffalo doing the mo cap for the Hulk? Why can't they use his actual eyes?

It would seem better to use that computer program "Movie Reshape" on Ruffalo that allows the SFX experts to add more height/more muscle, change the actor's features by playing around with parameter dials than completely replacing Ruffalo with an entirely CGI creation. That way it could still use Ruffalo but it would be an enhanced version of him.


Better still would've been to use an actual bodybuilder and augment everything (height/ muscles/ features etc) with that program.


Here is the movie reshape program in action:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXSj4pcl9Ao

 

[Godzilla2000]

Isn't Ruffalo doing the mo cap for the Hulk? Why can't they use his actual eyes?

I believe this is what I was hinting at when I referred to ILM using the eyes of the actors playing the cursed crew in POTC: Curse of the Black Pearl. It would require a lot more work to fix the eyes properly than with putting them on skeletons though.

 

[Spider-Vader]

Besides the design, Hulk's CGI was pretty good in the 2003 movie. I'm sure it'll look amazing in 2012 with a good design.

 

[JAK®]

They didn't keep Bill Nighy's real eyes for Davey Jones in POTC, and he was 100% convincing.

 

[Godzilla2000]

Well, I guess all we can hope for is the best, putting our trust in the people at ILM, when it comes to a completely CGI Hulk in the movie. Let's just be in a wait and see pattern for the finished product instead of stressing out about it.

 

[Invader34]

I don't think there's any question that we're gonna be getting the best ILM has to offer with the new Hulk, and with all the amazing achievements in effects lately like POTC, Transformers, and Avatar, I think Hulk will dazzle us as well. I wonder if ILM will be doing any work on Thor for this one, assuming that Thor will be doing more flying and using more lightning in Avengers I would like to see ILM handle that as well.

 

[TheVileOne]

Does Iron Man count?

 

[Godzilla2000]

I don't think there's any question that we're gonna be getting the best ILM has to offer with the new Hulk, and with all the amazing achievements in effects lately like POTC, Transformers, and Avatar, I think Hulk will dazzle us as well. I wonder if ILM will be doing any work on Thor for this one, assuming that Thor will be doing more flying and using more lightning in Avengers I would like to see ILM handle that as well.

Well, we can always give them as many encouragements as we can to do a good job, providing that interns check up on these threads to see what we the fans are saying, which I hope is the case because I'd like to cheer the hard workers at ILM to do a real bang up job on this film.

 

[SuperSAINT]

I have zero concerns with ILM doing the FX on the Hulk. They're one of the best in the business IMO.

 

[moviedoors]

They didn't keep Bill Nighy's real eyes for Davey Jones in POTC, and he was 100% convincing.

Yeah, it's five years old now and it still just looks real. ILM really hasn't gotten a chance to strut their stuff in digital creature work since that character. WETA is king now, but ILM just needs that opportunity to get up at bat again. WETA does astonishing work, but if anyone is their equal, it's ILM.

Wouldn't it be cool if ILM ushered in the next era in their skills with digital characters with the Hulk?

 

[marcvader]

This is my most inticipated question needed to be answered and I really hope they hit out of the park. Even though I like both Hulk movies for different reasons the Hulk has never sold me like Gollum did at the time or Davy Jones. Those creations were just so much more tangeable if you catch my drift.

 

[Doc Samson]

I think they should do a much better job simply because there's less Hulk scenes to worry about.

Aside from the fact that we're almost 10 years removed from their previous attempt, I think focusing on getting the CGI right for far less scenes is infinitely less daunting of a task. This is why personally, I wouldn't mind just two big Hulk scenes in the whole movie, one near the beginning if they follow the comic book roots and have Loki controlling the Hulk to face off against the rest of the team. Then he comes back at the end to help save the day, and redeem his position as a true hero.

If they can just work on two big scenes for the Hulk, I think the results should be astonishing.

 

[Shadowlord X]

I agree with Doc Samson on only 2 big HULK scenes are really necessary for the film.

The VFX for THE HULK is one of the potential key points of the movie in terms of reception from the GA.

The HULK is an well known and iconic character for people in their 30's to 50's. His VFX on film have never looked real enough to facilitate major portions of the GA to get into the films; quite frankly his VFX take too many people out of the movie.

If his VFX in this film look real and spectacular it could promote a major boost in interest as people will finally see THE HULK looking real!

In contrast if it's more fake looking stuff it could turn people off from giving the movie a chance.

 

[Doc Samson]

I agree with Doc Samson on only 2 big HULK scenes are really necessary for the film.

The VFX for THE HULK is one of the potential key points of the movie in terms of reception from the GA.

The HULK is an well known and iconic character for people in their 30's to 50's. His VFX on film have never looked real enough to facilitate major portions of the GA to get into the films; quite frankly his VFX take too many people out of the movie.

If his VFX in this film look real and spectacular it could promote a major boost in interest as people will finally see THE HULK looking real!

In contrast if it's more fake looking stuff it could turn people off from giving the movie a chance.

Agreed. I've always maintained in any F/X heavy film, that generational leaps in technology are really the most important aspect, even beyond plot & acting.

The Terminator franchise is a good example. IMO, the first movie trumps all of them, but only the 2nd one was a big cultural event, and it was strictly because of the new F/X at the time.

Star Wars, at the beginning, utilized visuals to an extent people weren't accustomed to. Jurassic Park was only riveting because the Dinosaurs for the time were breathtaking. Avatar is basically a mashup (a very crude one at that) of two or three movies that handled that type of story better. But people had to see it, just for the visuals.

Lord of the Rings, besides the heavy book following, was incredible on a technical scale. The Matrix, just one shot of bullet-time changed the whole landscape of action movies for half the decade. Even something like Superman The Movie owes a lot of its success to the wizardry that made you believe a man can fly in 1978!

The Hulk is that type of character, and needs that type of technical leap to really be the huge success we think it should be, in turn, making the Avengers, and any possible sequel, must-see entertainment.

 

[DieSmiling]

Star Wars, the Matrix, T2, Jurassic Park, and Lord of the Rings are all great movies that go far beyond revolutionary effects, IMO.

 

[Doc Samson]

Star Wars, the Matrix, T2, Jurassic Park, and Lord of the Rings are all great movies that go far beyond revolutionary effects, IMO.

Once you watch them, of course, but people weren't going for that initially, as you have no idea if the films were any good or not. They just saw cool stuff on a commercial or trailer and needed to see it