World Which film had the best swinging scenes??

[The Joker]

ASM won "Best 3D Movie" by IGN.

Are you sure that's an award and not just a best list they made for the year? Because that doesn't appear on any awards list I can see.

 

[Andrew Lucas]

Are you sure that's an award and not just a best list they made for the year? Because that doesn't appear on any awards list I can see.

I saw that in IMDB. Probably a list.

 

[LizardMan07]

No way. Next you'll be telling me Spider-Man isn't real and that it's an actor playing him.

You were saying before it was pure SFX. That's why I said that. Calm down. You're forgetting what you're arguing. Sit down and drink some tea.

I said there was exceptions.

Yes, which defeats your premise.

I know mate. You're good at telling the obvious that didn't need saying. Now apply that to saying something that backs your argument.

*Sighes*. Ok, whatever, you were arguing that new CGI is poor but whatever, you're upset.

What's 'it'? Who is Mark Kermode and why should I care what he thinks?

It=I. Some call it a spelling error. Some have the ability to grasp context from that, some don't Some remain upset, drink some tea, sit down. Mark's one of the more respected reviewers out there, probably the most notable with that opinion. Also, he can stay calm, you can't, and he drinks tea. You clearly aren't.

What impact is shooting out a web supposed to have on a super powered guy exactly?

Whiplaaaaash. Or, the power of speedy things to get slown down and the tragic effects of that.

I have presenteed it to you in pictorial form;

I am not seeing what the hell you're saying there. He swings around the crane in a loop and propels himself off that momentum into the air and lands on the flag pole.

There's no breaking gravity or physics there.

Note the GIANT SUDDEN DROP

I don't see any body reaction there. I see the same physics as the other vids you showed, only less impressive and more fake CGI-ish. In fact I never see any body reaction from Spider-Man when he shoots a web in a web swing. I'm talking about in any medium

No pictures this time, it's really hard to take in motion screenshots

1:12. 1:16 1:14 0:50 1:04

I noticed you ignored the other stuff I listed so I'm assuming you agree with that?

Also, I'd love to mention that the poll above doesn't confirm your personal beliefs as the other people that voted on the poll can vote for reasons that aren't completely in line with your beliefs. 2099, for example, admits that TASM/2 looks better but prefers the Raimi ones due to the context of the swings.

Also, to quote AL

Best swinging scene is the same as best CGI? Ah mate. Try again.

Peace and love, find your joy, drink tea. Praise Tobey

 

[The Joker]

I saw that in IMDB. Probably a list.

I thought so. I never heard of IGN giving movies actual awards before.

 

[Andrew Lucas]

Agree CGI has never been a problem in a sm movie before. Heck action has never been a problem in a CGI movie before. No story pacing ect that is a different story.

Thank you

 

[Andrew Lucas]

You were saying before it was pure SFX. That's why I said that. Calm down. You're forgetting what you're arguing. Sit down and drink some tea.



Yes, which defeats your premise.



*Sighes*. Ok, whatever, you were arguing that new CGI is poor but whatever, you're upset.




It=I. Some call it a spelling error. Some have the ability to grasp context from that, some don't Some remain upset, drink some tea, sit down. Mark's one of the more respected reviewers out there, probably the most notable with that opinion. Also, he can stay calm, you can't, and he drinks tea. You clearly aren't.




Whiplaaaaash. Or, the power of speedy things to get slown down and the tragic effects of that.

I have presenteed it to you in pictorial form;

Note the GIANT SUDDEN DROP



No pictures this time, it's really hard to take in motion screenshots

1:12. 1:16 1:14 0:50 1:04

I noticed you ignored the other stuff I listed so I'm assuming you agree with that?

Also, I'd love to mention that the poll above doesn't confirm your personal beliefs as the other people that voted on the poll can vote for reasons that aren't completely in line with your beliefs. 2099, for example, admits that TASM/2 looks better but prefers the Raimi ones due to the context of the swings.

Also, to quote AL

Peace and love, find your joy, drink tea. Praise Tobey

BRAB nails it again.

 

[Andrew Lucas]

I thought so. I never heard of IGN giving movies actual awards before.

Still, it won something t:

 

[LizardMan07]

BRAB nails it again.

I really quite enjoy MS paint.

By the time I finish one I'm super calm and stuff. It's my tea.

 

[Johnny-Oh]

Point is simple, if you're willing to understand it. It won an award but it didn't made me say, "Oh, is that a real?", Spider-Man earned as well, and even at the time, it was possible to recognize what was real or not, these days? Well, it's super fake.

Except that it isn't, every single person besides the haters have praised the CGI, saying that it was superb, even more from those who've watched the movie at IMAX3D, like me. Even the reviews called it top nodge, which is the truth.

Now, saying that SM2 or any movie from the past trilogy has better CGI is pretty much BS. Or else every single recent CBM is inferior as well.

If that's your logic then I can tell the CGI in TASM 2 is fake, because in fact it does look extremely cartoony and unrealistic several times. It is good CGI but it doesn't make it look less cartoony and a lot of people have complained about that especially the fight in the Power Plant. Raimi was limited for the technology of that time but worked around it with creative camera moves and a unique style that make his swinging stand out.

 

[The Joker]

Still, it won something t:

Not an actual award though, which was my point. That's why it's not listed as part of the movie's accolades.

 

[LizardMan07]

Hey guys can we not use the word movies anymore? I've got some angry adware on my computer that freaks out everytime somebody says that.

Start of the powerplant scene looks ripped out of a vidya game.

Spider-Man never looked cartoony imo

 

[spiderman2]

You sound like a parrot of the other guy. It's new CGI so by default it must look better than the older.

Wrong.

The dinosaurs in Jurassic Park used CGI as well as practical FX and it was so flawless that they never looked fake. That's the point none of you can get. Even 22 year old CGI looks better than your new advanced stuff.

http://whatculture.com/film/10-classic-special-effects-that-put-modern-hollywood-to-shame.php

You people must be living under a rock not to see this.


So you can acknowledge the new CGI isn't always the best. That's progress. Yes I'm saying the older trilogy FX look better. I'm not the only one going by the poll. You say it obviously isn't, I say it obviously is.

Kid, leave the temper tantrums at home. I'm not being paid to take that.

Again Jurassic park was ahead of its time and revaultion for its time. Look at a movie like jemonge it came out like 2-3 years after Jurassic park and it looks way faker then Jurassic park and there are some part of Jurassic park that do look kind of fake now. The park in the kitchen doesn't look that good any more and they kind of look fake right there and they used practical FX you cant really use much practical FX with something like web swinging for sm so of course the new ones are going to look better. Saying that the CGI was better in the old trilogy is just blind hate by the people that don't like the movies. I don't think that people that don't like these movies can say a single nice thing about them. I love the older trilogy expecial sm2 still one of the best CBM ever and a lot of the CGI in sm2 holds up greatly expecialy in the fight sences but there is no way on earth that it looks better then asm1 or 2.

 

[Keehar]

Again Jurassic park was ahead of its time and revaultion for its time. Look at a movie like jemonge it came out like 2-3 years after Jurassic park and it looks way faker then Jurassic park and there are some part of Jurassic park that do look kind of fake now. The park in the kitchen doesn't look that good any more and they kind of look fake right there and they used practical FX you cant really use much practical FX with something like web swinging for sm so of course the new ones are going to look better. Saying that the CGI was better in the old trilogy is just blind hate by the people that don't like the movies. I don't think that people that don't like these movies can say a single nice thing about them. I love the older trilogy expecial sm2 still one of the best CBM ever and a lot of the CGI in sm2 holds up greatly expecialy in the fight sences but there is no way on earth that it looks better then asm1 or 2.

Jurassic Park and a heap of other movies have been ahead of their times with SFX and CGI. That's the point. The older stuff often beats the new stuff. Raimi's Spider-Man movies over the Amazing Spider-Man movies being one of them.

I'm not answering all your belly aching about the hate the new movies get. They deserve what ever they get. Do you ever ask yourself why they are hated and why Marvel's cloud is hanging over Sony now.

You'd probably be the type to defend the Fantastic Four if it's horrible when it comes out.

 

[The Joker]

Yes, not a physical trophy.

It's just an IGN list. They make best lists all the time. These are the awards TASM was involved in, but did not win any of them: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Amazing_Spider-Man_(2012_film)#Accolades

 

[spiderman2]

Jurassic Park and a heap of other movies have been ahead of their times with SFX and CGI. That's the point. The older stuff often beats the new stuff. Raimi's Spider-Man movies over the Amazing Spider-Man movies being one of them.

I'm not even answering your belly aching about the hate the new movies get. They deserve what ever they get. Do you ever ask yourself why they are hated and why Marvel's cloud is hanging over Sony now.

You'd probably be the type to defend the Fantastic Four if it's horrible when it comes out.

Being ahead of your time doesn't mean that you are beating the new stuff per say. A movie like Jurassic park doesn't look like it is a 22 year old movie sure but I wouldn't say it looks better then asm2 its just if I didn't know I would say Jurassic park was more like 8 years old then 22 years old. I could under stand maybe if some one thought sm 1-3 where better for there time then say asm1 and 2 for its time but asm1 and 2 look better. I have asked my self over and over again about the hate that asm1 and 2 expcial 2 gets and I don't under stand like 75% of the hate just looks like hate for the sake of hating to me and my point is that even the good parts of the movie people cant give creatied for. The don't desver the hate at all.

 

[Keehar]

By your logic Cleopatra has better visual effects because it won an Oscar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_Award_for_Best_Visual_Effects

Time changes, things get better.

Sing along to my friendly song

The MS painter compared a 40 year old movie to now.

Is that desperation I smell?

 

[Andrew Lucas]

BRAB, those were literally the best paintings ever. Shame that your target couldn't understand them, as usual.

Good job mate

 

[Keehar]

'The best paintings ever'.

Now I see why you're impressed by Amazing Spider-Man CGI.

 

[Johnny-Oh]

By your logic Cleopatra has better visual effects because it won an Oscar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_Award_for_Best_Visual_Effects

Time changes, things get better.

Sing along to my friendly song

I never said that movies with Oscars for best visual effects look better than current CGI, what I said was that Spider-Man 2 was more impressive on its time than TASM 2 is now.

You don't need to take things out of context in order to seem right.

 

[LizardMan07]

I believe Andrew Wasn't being literal there.

Also, I made that comparison to show that an Oscar means null when comparing two films' visual effects unless they were released in the same year.

 

[Andrew Lucas]

To true most big budget movies now days have the same quietly CGI. Sure you may have a few movies like dawn of the apes that look better but most look around the same that is not what separates movies. What separates movies is story, pacing, music ect.

Exactly

 

[ThatSpiderGuy]

Everyone on here is acting like CGI is bad. Why is CGI bad in a Spider-Man film??? It lets you be able to see awesome new and crazy stunts that Spider-Man does, it gives us the ability to stretch our imaginations for swinging scenes. If anything, new CGI is GOOD for Spider-Man.

 

[Keehar]

I never said that movies with Oscars for best visual effects look better than current CGI, what I said was that Spider-Man 2 was more impressive on its time than TASM 2 is now.

You don't need to take things out of context in order to seem right.

That's the only tactic this one has. Say things out of context or that have nothing to do with what you're talking about.

It's all smoke and mirrors tactics to push off the real argument. Which we are winning.

 

[LizardMan07]

Well we have jumped the shark, we're arguing about the webswinging in spider-man films. That's pretty jumpy.

If it didn't give you anything to answer why did you answer it? #Checkmate

I've given up reasoning with you, I'm not sure if you noticed but I tried two pages ago, you just ranted, so I moved on to pictorial form. You couldn't read that.

Now I'm down to your level, statements with no substance, I'd hope, being down in here in the lowest common denominators of arguements, you'd understand me better.

In case you want to read actual arguements, we can flash back to a few pages ago.

There's one scene of electro particularly just as Spidey enters the powerplant that looks REALLY bad.

That actually legitimately only looks a bit better than the electro from "The Amazing Spider-Man 2" on Ultra settings on PC (If I could replay missions on the game I could prove it but ya'll will just have to believe me)

I loved the Raimi films but the swinging was not as good as TASM/2. The reboot captured Gravity and momentum, captured the elasticity of the web, mad Spiderman himself react to the environement he was creating, as in, he'd fall away to the left or right depending on where he'd put his weight, he'd flip and move through the air naturally, the web allowed natural rigid changes in direction, increases and even decreases in speed. The TASM series had fluid, fast paced, realistic defections of momentum, Gravity and speed.

The Raimi series I did genuinely love and what they achieved a decade ago was nothing short of astonishing, but spider-man does not react to the environment around him; he looks like a second dimension of the scene, as if he's not actually there. He has slight moments of gravity defiance as the stitch the next swing in and I think the biggest thing is he just sorta stays the same. He has no real variation in his day to day swinging. The biggest thing is gravity and momentum however, the Raimi Spiderman just didn't follow it as well, given that the technology was old. An example would be the train sequence, as Spidey flings himself up towards the train, he goes over a building. The direction he went in should have seen him just clip the building but as he reaches it he sorta starts floating up and up before sharply falling down. Another example is the final swing in Spiderman 1 where he is swinging towards the flag. It's as if some magnetic force begins to pull him towards the flagpole. He's up in the air, floating very slowly, and all of a sudden he dips sharply towards the flag. Another thing you can see in pretty much any swing is the delayed transition between the end of one swing and the start of the other, this one is harder to explain in words but he basically sorta jilts a bit, and then jags up before before falling down sharply, and then shoots out a web again and does the exact same action with little variation.

It just didn't have the fidelity and variation of the reboot series. And that just comes down to the current tech. You can say "oh it'll look crap in ten years" but SM1-3 will look even worse as they never captured physics to today's standards, and to be honest I'm not sure how much more accurate the physics engines can get these days, as they're getting more and more accurate. Obviously future films are going to look a hell of a lot better, but I think TASM1-2 will always look more natural then SM1-3

That's not saying that the Raimi series is bad because it really isn't, but both series use CGI in the swings, they're both "cgi fests" if you want to call it that.

At the end of the day, it's folly to claim 10 year old CGI is better then the current stuff.

I understand Spider2099's arguement of the context behind the scenes, but in terms of the raw swings themselves Raimi's are outclassed and that's nothing to be ashamed of

#1

If there's no stunt double then it's in part done by computer graphics.

I love the way you argue though. "Oh practical effects are always better, except when they're not like Dawn of the Planet of the Apes".

That's new age CGI mate.

Yeah, it did say Spider-Man floats, so did Mark Kermode, so do a lot of other people.

Even though you've already admitted nothing will change your mind.

[YT]/watch?v=MGeOjK0I7JY[/YT]

Look at how slowly he is falling here, and even rising, it's completely unrealisitc, hence, defying gravity. When he shoots out a web it has no impact on him whatsoever.

[YT]/watch?v=erJFUS9ZYmQ[/YT]

Again, look how slow he's going. The most daming thing is how he gets to the flagpole.

He drifts up, and then zooms down, its as if for the first time in the movie, the power of America has allowed gravity to take hold on him.

Compare this to the amazing spider-man 1

[YT]/watch?v=AZ4qAqzc2Qg[/YT]

Body reacts to the pull of the web, momentum is real, gravity is real. Speed increases and decreases based on release of webb. Ie; realistic depiction of swinging.

Anyway, I think it's the soundtrack

[YT]/watch?v=hIhgcaTqpaI[/YT]

Start from 30 seconds in, Spider-Man is now Elf'd

#2

 

[Johnny-Oh]

Lets see a real example of terrible physics:

Look where the crane is and how he doesn't even seem to shot his webs to it and most importantly look how he goes up in a straight vertical line which makes no sense, it looks like he's flying. His body movement makes no sense as he doesn't seem to gain momentum, its embarrasing for something made in 2012