Why CGI?

[Hmarrs]

Just courious:
Why CGI on the Hulk?
Why not use a person and use CGI for action seqences?(Flying cars destrution and giant leaps etc.)Like they did in Spiderman.
What I mean is remeber Lord of the Rings they used special effects to enlarge certain chracters.In League of Extra Ordinary Gentleman.
Remember that scene in the ships hull where they Mr.Hyde cahined up maan that was creepy.I'n not talking about the prostetics either I'm talking about his the size.
Another is I would have thought that the Thing would have been CGI.
It would have been more believeable since it would have been harder to find fault in the Thing being CGI since we have never seen a Rock man.
We have never seen a 9-10 foot tall green man either but he is closer to our anatomy so it is much easier to see the mistakes.
In a nutshell why not use it all.

Anyone else want to comment on this?

1.Why not use a very built person with protetics(heck you could even use Lou Forigno.This would even help the film make the transition from T.V. to the movie.It would have added so much more hype to the film.It also makes it easier to relate to the Hulk if you have a person to relate to.People want someone to admire for the role and say hey there's the Hulk.He is even bigger now and in everyone's mind he is the Hulk.Why not work it to you advantage.Naturally not the way he looked back then but modernized it's been 30 or so years can you imagine how good they can make him look now.Use him with make-up and prostetics.

2.Use Special Effects to make him look even bigger.

3.Top it all off with CGI to enhance it and make it look even better.(Glowing Eyes,Color,Veins whatever they can do to enhance the character.)

 

[GhostPoet]

Because CGI rocks.

 

[terry78]

Are you serious?

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

You can't just make a human look bigger and expect it to look like the Hulk.
The Hulk has very different proportions that would be impossible for a human to embody.

Lou Ferrigno has big hands.
Look at them.

Now look at the Hulk's hands.

People want to see a comic book come to life.
This is why The Thing, in the Fantastic Four movies, was one of the worst, most laughable comic-to-screen designs.
These characters are not just muscle men. They are giants, with inhuman proportions.

 

[Hmarrs]

Because CGI rocks.

Are you serious?

You can't just make a human look bigger and expect it to look like the Hulk.
The Hulk has very different proportions that would be impossible for a human to embody.

Lou Ferrigno has big hands.
Look at them.

Now look at the Hulk's hands.

People want to see a comic book come to life.
This is why The Thing, in the Fantastic Four movies, was one of the worst, most laughable comic-to-screen designs.
These characters are not just muscle men. They are giants, with inhuman proportions.

Okay cool but than why not a real person for closeups.
Also Mr.Hyde in League of Extra Ordinary Gentlemen had prostetic hands and we are talking about a number of years ago so imagine what they can do now.There was no CGI involved with Hyde.Also they can make any proportions they want now do you guys remember Lord of the Rings those people were all different sizes and all types of proportions.
Anyway after all is said and done okay make him CGI but why not use a real person for closeups to help sell the CGI?

 

[Sawyer]

Well, it depends on what you mean. Are you talking motion capture on a real person, or actually using a live person?

I think it would be kind of stupid to go back and forth between CG and liveaction, but I wouldnt be opposed to motion capture like in Beowulf.

 

[SuperFerret]

CGI often looks very fake, and even when done well it occasionally doesn't match the surrounding area onscreen. I think the best bet is a really good costume/make-up job (see Hellboy for reference) or a combo of CGI and costume, like Gollum was done.

 

[Hmarrs]

Well, it depends on what you mean. Are you talking motion capture on a real person, or actually using a live person?

I think it would be kind of stupid to go back and forth between CG and liveaction, but I wouldnt be opposed to motion capture like in Beowulf.

Use a real face up close with make-up.

CGI often looks very fake, and even when done well it occasionally doesn't match the surrounding area onscreen. I think the best bet is a really good costume/make-up job (see Hellboy for reference) or a combo of CGI and costume, like Gollum was done.

Or like Superferret said make it a combination of things.
Use it all.

 

[Hmarrs]

Well, it depends on what you mean. Are you talking motion capture on a real person, or actually using a live person?

I think it would be kind of stupid to go back and forth between CG and liveaction, but I wouldnt be opposed to motion capture like in Beowulf.

Use a real face up close with make-up.

CGI often looks very fake, and even when done well it occasionally doesn't match the surrounding area onscreen. I think the best bet is a really good costume/make-up job (see Hellboy for reference) or a combo of CGI and costume, like Gollum was done.

Or like Superferret said make it a combination of things.
Use it all.

 

[Hmarrs]

Well, it depends on what you mean. Are you talking motion capture on a real person, or actually using a live person?

I think it would be kind of stupid to go back and forth between CG and liveaction, but I wouldnt be opposed to motion capture like in Beowulf.

Use a real face up close with make-up and prostetics.Only for closeup scenes for eveything else Action full body etc.Use CGI.

CGI often looks very fake, and even when done well it occasionally doesn't match the surrounding area onscreen. I think the best bet is a really good costume/make-up job (see Hellboy for reference) or a combo of CGI and costume, like Gollum was done.

Or like Superferret said make it a combination of things.
Use it all.

 

[screams]

I'm ok with them using CGI for Hulk. They can definitely do more that way. If you watch a movie without trying to see it as a CG character and just ignore that it's animation then you'll just see an awesome movie.

 

[Hmarrs]

Sorry I posted 3 times on that last post.

 

[Hotwire]

CGI often looks very fake, and even when done well it occasionally doesn't match the surrounding area onscreen. I think the best bet is a really good costume/make-up job (see Hellboy for reference) or a combo of CGI and costume, like Gollum was done.

Gollum was total motion capture, just like King Kong. That being said, they use CGI because when dealling with characters like Hulk & Abomination, and trying to get them anywhere near their comic book proportions, a real human just can't do it. Here's a link to Greg Valentino, the man with the largest biceps ever recorded. http://thelongestlistofthelongeststuffatthelongestdomainnameatlonglast.com/largest16.html
Notice how freakish he looks?
Now, here's a link for Quincy Taylor, the 2007 largest bodybuilder...
http://www.criticalbench.com/Quincy-Taylor.htm
Now compare him to the Hulk, not even close.
The only way to get this Hulk on screen the way he looks on the pages, is CGI.

And I'm sure if the technology was around back when the TV show was being made, they would have used it.

 

[Chris Wallace]

*sigh*
Some things, contrary to what a lot of fanboys would like to believe, simply CANNOT be done with a human being. I'm quite happy w/the CGI effects that we've been getting, & look forward to advancements & improvements down the road.

 

[jaymes_e06]

Because Dr. Jackle in The League of Extrodinary Gentlemen looked fake as hell!

 

[ANTOINE X]

Just courious:
Why CGI on the Hulk?
Why not use a person and use CGI for action seqences?(Flying cars destrution and giant leaps etc.)Like they did in Spiderman.
What I mean is remeber Lord of the Rings they used special effects to enlarge certain chracters.In League of Extra Ordinary Gentleman.
Remember that scene in the ships hull where they Mr.Hyde cahined up maan that was creepy.I'n not talking about the prostetics either I'm talking about his the size.
Another is I would have thought that the Thing would have been CGI.
It would have been more believeable since it would have been harder to find fault in the Thing being CGI since we have never seen a Rock man.
We have never seen a 9-10 foot tall green man either but he is closer to our anatomy so it is much easier to see the mistakes.
In a nutshell why not use it all.

Anyone else want to comment on this?

1.Why not use a very built person with protetics(heck you could even use Lou Forigno.This would even help the film make the transition from T.V. to the movie.It would have added so much more hype to the film.It also makes it easier to relate to the Hulk if you have a person to relate to.People want someone to admire for the role and say hey there's the Hulk.He is even bigger now and in everyone's mind he is the Hulk.Why not work it to you advantage.Naturally not the way he looked back then but modernized it's been 30 or so years can you imagine how good they can make him look now.Use him with make-up and prostetics.

2.Use Special Effects to make him look even bigger.

3.Top it all off with CGI to enhance it and make it look even better.(Glowing Eyes,Color,Veins whatever they can do to enhance the character.)

That what I try to explain to those people! Everybody is screaming CGI BUT CGI is still not perfect! It should only be used for robots like transformers! or animals & monsters like Jurassic parc or LOTR. But when it comes to human it's different. The human eye as you all know is really precise on details.So anything wrong on a human animation is detected automatically.I don't really consider Hulk as a monster but rather more like a big 'green human'. The CGI animation is way to 'cartoonish' since the first spider-man movie. They need to perfect the animation otherwise the movie becomes A xbox 360 game!

I m also in favor for a human. You can always cheat the camera to look like he's 10ft tall! Like the Dawrf in LOTR is a big man in real life! The new Hulk may look cool but he doesn't look real enough!

 

[Katsuro]

CGI just looks better. This Hulk may not be perfect, but he looks a hell of a lot better than any human with prosthetics would look. The proportions of the human body just dont match the Hulk.

 

[ANTOINE X]

CGI just looks better. This Hulk may not be perfect, but he looks a hell of a lot better than any human with prosthetics would look. The proportions of the human body just dont match the Hulk.

But how do you explain the dwarf in LOTR? Some people(like my mother) still think he is small as a dwarf in real life. I think they can use the 'Perspective' camera for hulk. Also the monster in 300 was pretty good. So there is definitly other fx to explore other than CGI.

 

[Hmarrs]

That's my point Antoine X
Yeah use some CGI,some Prostetics and some Special effects (camera tricks)like LOTR,League of Extraordinary Gentleman and 300.
Like you have above from 300.Everyone keeps assuming that I'm trying to say.Just have some built guy painted green.That's not what I am saying.Mr.Hyde was played by the same guy who Played Dr.Jekell alot of people don't know that and he is tiny but he is layered up in prostetics.They then use some kind of special effect to make him huge.So if you start with a big guy already and work from there.Also his hands were out of proprtion but again they were prostetic actually robotic of some sort.Use someone big,add prostetics,use special effects like LOTR and then enhance everything via CGI.
Of course this won't work for every scene.That's where CGI comes in.Mix it up keep us guessing it adds to the illusion.The Only time a Magician asttounds you is when you don't know how the trick is being done even though you know it's not real.Once you know the secret the illussion becomes fake and losses the effect.Just like CGI.Someone said if you act like it's not CGI you will enjoy it.
NO!!!It's up to the studio to fool me to pull it off .That's what I am paying for.That's no excuse,Then why not have puppets and pretend their not puppets.Although I respect this persons opinion I don't agree.To me the Hulk looks fake and worse than the first one.People are going to like this one because their is more action.Altough the first one wasn't 100% it was far better than this one this one looks like rubber and his anotomy is terrible.Either way both failed to deliver.

 

[Steve Holt]

you also need to remember that the hulk is a 10 ft tall green man. when will that ever look real?

 

[Hmarrs]

Because Dr. Jackle in The League of Extrodinary Gentlemen looked fake as hell!

Yeah anything done solely one one premise of special effect will soon show it's flaws but if mixed up it will fool the eye.
Protetics fake yes but it had it's good points.
Big bodybuilder painted green fake yes but it had it's good points.
Person enlarged on screen via special effects fake yes but it had it's good points.
So why not take from all of the good points of these effects and mix it up.
Don't just use one type of effect and say well it's not perfect so just look past the mistakes.
No deal.Again it's their job to sell it.If they come up short then it's on them.If you can't do it then WAIT!!!Wait until you can.If someone were building you a house and the contracter said well the roof should hold up pretty good but it's not perfect so it may leak just overlook the leaks.You would be like"NO WAY"WHY?
You want what you pay for.We know the Hulk is not real but we walk into a movie theater so that Hollywood can sell us the illusion.I'm not going to go into a movie theater making excuses for the movie before I get in.To me that's ridiclous.
If the fans don't complain the next Hulk picture will be even less in quality
and become cheaper.They will try to sell more by spending less.We must continue to voice our opinion and never compromise.So that they have to keep rasing the bar to meet our standards.Don't make excuses for them.They don't care about us all they care about is $$$$$$$$$$$.
So we have to require and damand quality for the characters we love to watch.Remember it's your money.Demand what you pay for.We shouldn't have to make excuses for them. Like some people.(Oh well CGI is in it's infancy we have to accept that or pretend it's real)No offense but If we have to make excuses for them then that tells you their is already somthing wrong.
Again it's their job to sell it.

 

[Hmarrs]

you also need to remember that the hulk is a 10 ft tall green man. when will that ever look real?

That's fine but don't make it look worse.
Even more the reason to make it as realistic as possible using everything at your disposel.
Having some cartoon looking video game Hulk sure aint gonna do it.
Your best bet is to start of with a person at least that's real or wait until you can pull it off.
So you think Hollywood is saying"Oh well the Hulk is fake anyway so make him CGI no one is going to believe a 10ft tall man anyway"
Well knowing Hollywood that's exactly what they are thinking.
We know that their is no such thing as man bitten by a Spider climbing walls but I would much better have what we have than a man climbing a cable like in the Spiderman T.V. show from the 1970's.So saying that he is10ft tall no offense that's no excuse.
However they need to do it it's up to them.CGI or not.
It's up to Hollywood to sell the idea not mine.

 

[shapeshifter]

In certain cases CGI is the only logical choice. While I myself am no big fan of CG I will admit that some movies would be to expensive without it. I was very impressed with how Hellboy managed to find a really good balance between the two. Where it would have been easier to make a CG rendered hell hound, DelToro gave us an acrobat is a really amazing costume.
CG always ends up looking to different from the live footage, and for that I am slow to warm to it, also I am a fan of old horror movies, and costumes bring me back. Those are personal choices though, in reality CG works, and people will use it. I just hope there will always be Deltoros out there to keep us old school fanboys happy.

 

[DoubleM]

The CGI is fine in the Hulk. He was hit with Gamma Rays ala the comic book.

Leave this alone

 

[Hmarrs]

The CGI is fine in the Hulk. He was hit with Gamma Rays ala the comic book.

Leave this alone

I don't get it what's your point?
How does being hit by Gamma Rays qualify for CGI.
Or how does CGI explain Gamma Rays.Again I fail to see your point.