Would the CGI in your case break the movie if it was terrible?

[Octoberist]

Yeah, I didn't understand why they decided to go that route. It was pretty awful. I don't see why they all looked the same anyway, but considering the look of the single remaining actress in make-up, why spend extra money on such a terrible alternative?

I haven't seen it, but I read that Angels and Demons was ruined by the CG recreations of the vatican...? Did anyone else find that to be a big issue?

It didn't look bad per say, but you can tell it's green screen work. Because everything else took place on location or on sets, it was jarring. But it didn't ruin the movie for me. That said, I wish they did build a set.

 

[S.A.A.D.]

I'm having a hard time believing that Superman Returns has as much visual effects shots as it doe's.

 

[dark_b]

hahahah if someone thinks that GL will have less CGI shots that the theatrical version of superman then he is ''funny''.

 

[S.A.A.D.]

Superman Returns I believe had CGI parts as a whole that was under the 20 minutes mark. Unlike GL,half of it wasn't suppose to take place in space,etc.

 

[Scarlet Spider]

hahahah if someone thinks that GL will have less CGI shots that the theatrical version of superman then he is ''funny''.

Is it funny because it's true or am I missing something?

From Martin Cambell:

"It's daunting," he said. "Just the process, something like 1,300 visual effects shots, it's mind-blowing, quite honestly."

http://www.superherohype.com/features/articles/99659-martin-campbell-talks-green-lantern-effects

From SR producer Gil Adler:

The picture has over 1,500 visual effects shots.

http://www.abc.net.au/atthemovies/txt/s1664539.htm

 

[JAK®]

I bet the number is much higher than that now.

 

[S.A.A.D.]

Is it funny because it's true or am I missing something?

From Martin Cambell:



From SR producer Gil Adler:

Oh well then that would mean that the visual effects shots in GL would last longer than the visual effects shots in Superman Returns. In terms of the running time.

 

[Octoberist]

again, remember they took out Superman Return's original opening.

 

[S.A.A.D.]

again, remember they took out Superman Return's original opening.

You're talking about the deleted sequences that costed a total of like AROUND 20$ million,am I right?

 

[Eze]

Just what if everything in the movie was good,but the CGI? Keep in mind that this movie depends on a hell of alot CGI. Would you be able to bring yourself to forgive it if it was bad? Alot of it? I'm certain that it would really hurt my enjoyment. Unlike most of the time,I am expecting it to be mind blowingly unbelievable and awesome.

I could forgive bad CG, if the story was entertaining enough.

 

[Octoberist]

Pilar express us still being panned for it's uncanny valley problems but I liked their work on Monater House.

 

[dnno1]

And even with that, the two films were nominated for oscars ("The Polar Express" for 3 and "Monster House" for one). I don't know if the criticism is more about being nit-picky than critical.

 

[Suzanne78]

I have a very hard time with movies with a lot of CGI, regardless if the story is good. Bad CGI would absolutely break the movie for me and take me out of the story altogether, so I really, really do hope that GL can at least succeed on finding a balance with the story/dialogue/effects...

I think it's definitely premature to judge the movie at this point (just like I tell others on the Thor and Captain America boards) but I will say that I'm cautious about the GL movie just because I know that it's a very CGI-heavy movie... and the preview of the trailer was a little rough for me in spots. I can't tell if it's mostly the dialogue or the stylistic choices made for the suits or the Oa set though.

I'm going to be at GL on opening weekend, that much is certain

 

[Tacit Ronin]

This isn't There will be blood, this is a summer popcorn flick. Bad CGI will absolutely greatly diminish the movie for me.

 

[dark_b]

It didn't look bad per say, but you can tell it's green screen work. Because everything else took place on location or on sets, it was jarring. But it didn't ruin the movie for me. That said, I wish they did build a set.

how would they do that?

 

[terry78]

Go to Oa and ask to film on location, duh.

 

[JAK®]

We're not talking about Oa.

 

[terry78]

We're not talking about Oa.

Don't ruin my bits, dammit!!!!

 

[dark_b]

we are talking about this .
http://features.cgsociety.org/story_custom.php?story_id=5064

i think it looked realistic enough and it was cheaper then building sets. since its not my money its not a problem to me if it would be expensive. but it didnt took me out of the movie.

 

[The Watchman]

Bad CGI pulls me out of a story like nothing else, so sadly it will be make or break.

 

[JAK®]

So it turns out the bad CGI in the "We go looking for trouble" shot looked that way because ET cropped the shot to be closer to Reynold's face.

So who wants to admit they overreacted?

 

[dnno1]

Those guys have left the building. Nowhere to be seen.

 

[WormyT]

So far I despise the CG suit especially the 'no seam' neckline and the mask and I really hate that they jacked up the brightness levels on the green so much.

To quote the guy at Slashfilm
"The effects shots look far from finished, which is more than likely since the film isn’t due in theaters until next Summer. I’m definitely not sold on the all-CG suit and the tone seems a bit more comic-laced and geared towards children than I was expecting. The dialogue and deliver seems hokey, cheesy and stilted."

 

[SuperDaniel]

Imo, the CGI costume is ten thousand times better than an actual costume. It looks really beautiful and makes completely sense.

 

[Karelia]

Well I didn't think the suit looked bad when I saw the ET, just looked like they were still working on it. In the HQ trailer, it looks 1000x better.

I think the CGI looks amazing already. If they're still working on it (which I assume they are) I'm totally gonna be happy with it. Having high hope for GL!

I think it looks better than an actual costume would look too. I've liked the approach they are taking with it, it just makes total sense to me.