barkingbaphomet
Junior Member
all backlit and creepysmoking
@barkingbaphomet
Posts: 2,252
Likes: 1,006
|
Post by barkingbaphomet on Jul 19, 2017 19:38:08 GMT
Avengers vs. Black People
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Jul 19, 2017 19:44:55 GMT
The "look" of the practical effects is good. However, it falls apart when they start moving around. Just look at Kurse. Does he look good? Sure... but then he moves very slow and cumbersome, and it makes it hard to believe that he can beat Thor to the punch when Thor was easily beating Hulk and IM to the punch. Which means that Kurse should at least be faster than Thor, Hulk and IM. But watch him move, does he actually look fast? Predator has good effects I'll give you that. But then that wasn't what you mentioned. You specifically mentioned Skeletor in Master of the Universe... which was a horrible costume by today's standards. Dude, watch the LotR. Compare the practical FX orcs with the CGI orcs of The Hobbit. It's no comparison. The practical FX orcs look a hundred times better, even when moving around. Watch the original Star Wars trilogy too. Check out Biba Fortuna, Admiral Ackbar and Emperor Palpatine. That's because the Twi'lek and Palpatine are light make-up. You think they'll have a scene where Ackbar is in a conversation where he has to emote? He'll have to go the way of Jar Jar. And they went lazy on the Hobbit. Well, not exactly lazy, but you can tell they didn't go hard like they did on LotR.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Jul 19, 2017 20:08:26 GMT
The "look" of the practical effects is good. However, it falls apart when they start moving around. Just look at Kurse. Does he look good? Sure... but then he moves very slow and cumbersome, and it makes it hard to believe that he can beat Thor to the punch when Thor was easily beating Hulk and IM to the punch. Which means that Kurse should at least be faster than Thor, Hulk and IM. But watch him move, does he actually look fast? Predator has good effects I'll give you that. But then that wasn't what you mentioned. You specifically mentioned Skeletor in Master of the Universe... which was a horrible costume by today's standards. Dude, watch the LotR. Compare the practical FX orcs with the CGI orcs of The Hobbit. It's no comparison. The practical FX orcs look a hundred times better, even when moving around. Watch the original Star Wars trilogy too. Check out Biba Fortuna, Admiral Ackbar and Emperor Palpatine. Yeah they look good... but none of them looked as good as Gollum. And even though they moved decently, they still looked cumbersome. Just look at how stiff those Urukhai look during fight scenes. There's this one scene where the main Urukhai (the one Aragorn fought) drew a bow. That was ridiculously painful to look at.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2017 23:08:21 GMT
Dude, watch the LotR. Compare the practical FX orcs with the CGI orcs of The Hobbit. It's no comparison. The practical FX orcs look a hundred times better, even when moving around. Watch the original Star Wars trilogy too. Check out Biba Fortuna, Admiral Ackbar and Emperor Palpatine. Yeah they look good... but none of them looked as good as Gollum. And even though they moved decently, they still looked cumbersome. Just look at how stiff those Urukhai look during fight scenes. There's this one scene where the main Urukhai (the one Aragorn fought) drew a bow. That was ridiculously painful to look at. Even so, I'll take those practical orcs over th cgi orcs any day. The white Orc in The Hobbit looked like a cartoon and thus had zero screen presence. I do love Gollum and I understand that CGI characters have a place in film too, but the authenticity of practical characters shouldn't be so easily dismissed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2017 23:11:08 GMT
Dude, watch the LotR. Compare the practical FX orcs with the CGI orcs of The Hobbit. It's no comparison. The practical FX orcs look a hundred times better, even when moving around. Watch the original Star Wars trilogy too. Check out Biba Fortuna, Admiral Ackbar and Emperor Palpatine. That's because the Twi'lek and Palpatine are light make-up. You think they'll have a scene where Ackbar is in a conversation where he has to emote? He'll have to go the way of Jar Jar. Not necessarily. Ackbar wasn't designed for heavy emoting. Yoda is a better example. That puppet in ESB is insanely emotive. The sheer amount of (believable) expressions Yoda could display was staggering. He's more believable and has better screen presence than any CGI character to this day! And that was made in 1980!
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Jul 19, 2017 23:30:01 GMT
Yeah they look good... but none of them looked as good as Gollum. And even though they moved decently, they still looked cumbersome. Just look at how stiff those Urukhai look during fight scenes. There's this one scene where the main Urukhai (the one Aragorn fought) drew a bow. That was ridiculously painful to look at. Even so, I'll take those practical orcs over th cgi orcs any day. The white Orc in The Hobbit looked like a cartoon and thus had zero screen presence. I do love Gollum and I understand that CGI characters have a place in film too, but the authenticity of practical characters shouldn't be so easily dismissed. Unless you want the orcs to display super strength and other superhuman traits. Hate on the look of the Warcraft orcs all you want, they at least showed the kind of super strength associated with orcs. The LOTR orcs and goblins may have looked good but they certainly didn't move good. It just won't make sense to make Thanos appear in practical sfx when Hulk is done in CGI and Thanos is supposed to be stronger than Hulk. They will never be able to properly display his full powerset by limiting him to practical effects.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Jul 20, 2017 0:18:07 GMT
That's because the Twi'lek and Palpatine are light make-up. You think they'll have a scene where Ackbar is in a conversation where he has to emote? He'll have to go the way of Jar Jar. Not necessarily. Ackbar wasn't designed for heavy emoting. Yoda is a better example. That puppet in ESB is insanely emotive. The sheer amount of (believable) expressions Yoda could display was staggering. He's more believable and has better screen presence than any CGI character to this day! And that was made in 1980! So you saying Thanos should be a giant puppet?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2017 0:23:02 GMT
Not necessarily. Ackbar wasn't designed for heavy emoting. Yoda is a better example. That puppet in ESB is insanely emotive. The sheer amount of (believable) expressions Yoda could display was staggering. He's more believable and has better screen presence than any CGI character to this day! And that was made in 1980! So you saying Thanos should be a giant puppet? No. I didn't say that. Why can't we have a conversation without twisting each other's words? I was explaining how practical FX can work through a series of examples. Thanos is a humanoid character so he's comparable to Emperor Palpatine or Biba Fortuna, not Yoda. But my last few responses had nothing to do with Thanos anyway. I was showing that practical FX can sometimes work far better than CGI and refuting your claim that they can't emote, not specifically making a case for a practical Thanos.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2017 0:24:59 GMT
Even so, I'll take those practical orcs over th cgi orcs any day. The white Orc in The Hobbit looked like a cartoon and thus had zero screen presence. I do love Gollum and I understand that CGI characters have a place in film too, but the authenticity of practical characters shouldn't be so easily dismissed. Unless you want the orcs to display super strength and other superhuman traits. Hate on the look of the Warcraft orcs all you want, they at least showed the kind of super strength associated with orcs. The LOTR orcs and goblins may have looked good but they certainly didn't move good. It just won't make sense to make Thanos appear in practical sfx when Hulk is done in CGI and Thanos is supposed to be stronger than Hulk. They will never be able to properly display his full powerset by limiting him to practical effects. Fair enough in regards to Thanos. I wasn't really even talking about him in the first place, I was simply disagreeing with your grim assessment that practical FX are always inferior to cgi.
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Jul 20, 2017 0:50:34 GMT
Not necessarily. Ackbar wasn't designed for heavy emoting. Yoda is a better example. That puppet in ESB is insanely emotive. The sheer amount of (believable) expressions Yoda could display was staggering. He's more believable and has better screen presence than any CGI character to this day! And that was made in 1980! So you saying Thanos should be a giant puppet? Why not? Episode 8 Snoke is.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Jul 20, 2017 0:50:46 GMT
So you saying Thanos should be a giant puppet? No. I didn't say that. Why can't we have a conversation without twisting each other's words? I was explaining how practical FX can work through a series of examples. Thanos is a humanoid character so he's comparable to Emperor Palpatine or Biba Fortuna, not Yoda. But my last few responses had nothing to do with Thanos anyway. I was showing that practical FX can sometimes work far better than CGI and refuting your claim that they can't emote, not specifically making a case for a practical Thanos. But this whole thing is about making Thanos CGI. You'd have to get a big guy to play the character because Thanos is a big guy. But they went with an actor doing motion capture. Bib Fortuna and Palpatine are normal proportioned guys with light make-up on their face. The more you put on a person's face, the harder it is to emote.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2017 1:09:45 GMT
No. I didn't say that. Why can't we have a conversation without twisting each other's words? I was explaining how practical FX can work through a series of examples. Thanos is a humanoid character so he's comparable to Emperor Palpatine or Biba Fortuna, not Yoda. But my last few responses had nothing to do with Thanos anyway. I was showing that practical FX can sometimes work far better than CGI and refuting your claim that they can't emote, not specifically making a case for a practical Thanos. But this whole thing is about making Thanos CGI. You'd have to get a big guy to play the character because Thanos is a big guy. But they went with an actor doing motion capture. Bib Fortuna and Palpatine are normal proportioned guys with light make-up on their face. The more you put on a person's face, the harder it is to emote. Ok. But I maintain that practical FX deserve a bigger role in these types of movies. Some characters do need to be cgi, like Hulk for example, but practical fx and/or make up work should always considered as option one.
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Jul 20, 2017 1:25:00 GMT
So you saying Thanos should be a giant puppet? Why not? Episode 8 Snoke is. He is?!
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Jul 20, 2017 5:34:18 GMT
Why not? Episode 8 Snoke is. He is?! Sequel Trilogy, The Last Jedi December 8, 2016
Star Wars: Episode VIII’s Supreme Leader Snoke: Master Of Puppets!by Jason Ward (editor-in-chief)For Star Wars: Episode VIII it appears, at least in part, that Snoke will not be a character generated in a computer. Instead he will be a huge puppet around seven to eight feet tall, taking several people to operate and a man inside a suit to make him walk. Stylistically, it seems as if Snoke may be CGI generated for the holographic communication sequences, but when he has scenes in Episode VIII next to real flesh-and-blood humans like Kylo Ren he will be a practical puppet with facial features operated by the crew. His appearance is identical to what we saw in the holograms, but there’s apparently a “real” Snoke in the next installment of the Skywalker saga. We don’t know exactly how much screen time Snoke has in Episode VIII and that makes it impossible to say he’s almost always a puppet in the film or CGI. But we do know the puppet is pretty impressive, and appears to be articulated in such a way it seems it is more than an elaborate stand-in. It would seem the puppet Snoke would be more powerful and interesting to look at than a CGI character, of which audiences are continually critiquing the visuals. I am really excited to see a puppet over seven feet in size that might kick Luke Skywalker’s butt. That’s pretty exciting, and I can’t wait to learn more about the innovations and new ground transversed by Rian Johnson and the crew of Star Wars: Episode VIII. Just to reiterate, we cannot say what the balance between classic puppetry and CGI are, but we do know they built a large impressive rig for Supreme Leader Snoke. ( edited slightly to avoid TL;DR )
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on Jul 20, 2017 5:36:58 GMT
Sequel Trilogy, The Last Jedi December 8, 2016
Star Wars: Episode VIII’s Supreme Leader Snoke: Master Of Puppets!by Jason Ward (editor-in-chief)For Star Wars: Episode VIII it appears, at least in part, that Snoke will not be a character generated in a computer. Instead he will be a huge puppet around seven to eight feet tall, taking several people to operate and a man inside a suit to make him walk. Stylistically, it seems as if Snoke may be CGI generated for the holographic communication sequences, but when he has scenes in Episode VIII next to real flesh-and-blood humans like Kylo Ren he will be a practical puppet with facial features operated by the crew. His appearance is identical to what we saw in the holograms, but there’s apparently a “real” Snoke in the next installment of the Skywalker saga. We don’t know exactly how much screen time Snoke has in Episode VIII and that makes it impossible to say he’s almost always a puppet in the film or CGI. But we do know the puppet is pretty impressive, and appears to be articulated in such a way it seems it is more than an elaborate stand-in. It would seem the puppet Snoke would be more powerful and interesting to look at than a CGI character, of which audiences are continually critiquing the visuals. I am really excited to see a puppet over seven feet in size that might kick Luke Skywalker’s butt. That’s pretty exciting, and I can’t wait to learn more about the innovations and new ground transversed by Rian Johnson and the crew of Star Wars: Episode VIII. Just to reiterate, we cannot say what the balance between classic puppetry and CGI are, but we do know they built a large impressive rig for Supreme Leader Snoke. ( edited slightly to avoid TL;DR )Interesting. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Jul 20, 2017 5:37:43 GMT
Sequel Trilogy, The Last Jedi December 8, 2016
Star Wars: Episode VIII’s Supreme Leader Snoke: Master Of Puppets!by Jason Ward (editor-in-chief)For Star Wars: Episode VIII it appears, at least in part, that Snoke will not be a character generated in a computer. Instead he will be a huge puppet around seven to eight feet tall, taking several people to operate and a man inside a suit to make him walk. Stylistically, it seems as if Snoke may be CGI generated for the holographic communication sequences, but when he has scenes in Episode VIII next to real flesh-and-blood humans like Kylo Ren he will be a practical puppet with facial features operated by the crew. His appearance is identical to what we saw in the holograms, but there’s apparently a “real” Snoke in the next installment of the Skywalker saga. We don’t know exactly how much screen time Snoke has in Episode VIII and that makes it impossible to say he’s almost always a puppet in the film or CGI. But we do know the puppet is pretty impressive, and appears to be articulated in such a way it seems it is more than an elaborate stand-in. It would seem the puppet Snoke would be more powerful and interesting to look at than a CGI character, of which audiences are continually critiquing the visuals. I am really excited to see a puppet over seven feet in size that might kick Luke Skywalker’s butt. That’s pretty exciting, and I can’t wait to learn more about the innovations and new ground transversed by Rian Johnson and the crew of Star Wars: Episode VIII. Just to reiterate, we cannot say what the balance between classic puppetry and CGI are, but we do know they built a large impressive rig for Supreme Leader Snoke. ( edited slightly to avoid TL;DR )Interesting. Thanks. No problem mang!
|
|
barkingbaphomet
Junior Member
all backlit and creepysmoking
@barkingbaphomet
Posts: 2,252
Likes: 1,006
|
Post by barkingbaphomet on Jul 20, 2017 10:45:16 GMT
Sequel Trilogy, The Last Jedi December 8, 2016
Star Wars: Episode VIII’s Supreme Leader Snoke: Master Of Puppets!by Jason Ward (editor-in-chief)For Star Wars: Episode VIII it appears, at least in part, that Snoke will not be a character generated in a computer. Instead he will be a huge puppet around seven to eight feet tall, taking several people to operate and a man inside a suit to make him walk. Stylistically, it seems as if Snoke may be CGI generated for the holographic communication sequences, but when he has scenes in Episode VIII next to real flesh-and-blood humans like Kylo Ren he will be a practical puppet with facial features operated by the crew. His appearance is identical to what we saw in the holograms, but there’s apparently a “real” Snoke in the next installment of the Skywalker saga. We don’t know exactly how much screen time Snoke has in Episode VIII and that makes it impossible to say he’s almost always a puppet in the film or CGI. But we do know the puppet is pretty impressive, and appears to be articulated in such a way it seems it is more than an elaborate stand-in. It would seem the puppet Snoke would be more powerful and interesting to look at than a CGI character, of which audiences are continually critiquing the visuals. I am really excited to see a puppet over seven feet in size that might kick Luke Skywalker’s butt. That’s pretty exciting, and I can’t wait to learn more about the innovations and new ground transversed by Rian Johnson and the crew of Star Wars: Episode VIII. Just to reiterate, we cannot say what the balance between classic puppetry and CGI are, but we do know they built a large impressive rig for Supreme Leader Snoke. ( edited slightly to avoid TL;DR )that sounds great but it likely dashes my hope that when he gets off of that throne he will be revealed to have a serpentine lower half.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Jul 20, 2017 16:27:28 GMT
Unless you want the orcs to display super strength and other superhuman traits. Hate on the look of the Warcraft orcs all you want, they at least showed the kind of super strength associated with orcs. The LOTR orcs and goblins may have looked good but they certainly didn't move good. It just won't make sense to make Thanos appear in practical sfx when Hulk is done in CGI and Thanos is supposed to be stronger than Hulk. They will never be able to properly display his full powerset by limiting him to practical effects. Fair enough in regards to Thanos. I wasn't really even talking about him in the first place, I was simply disagreeing with your grim assessment that practical FX are always inferior to cgi. I had to go back to my previous posts, because I don't recall ever saying that practical FX are always inferior to CGI. There is good CGI and bad CGI, same way there is good practical FX and bad practical FX. And obviously good practical effects will be better than bad CGI. This is what I originally said:
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Jul 20, 2017 16:33:33 GMT
Sequel Trilogy, The Last Jedi December 8, 2016
Star Wars: Episode VIII’s Supreme Leader Snoke: Master Of Puppets!by Jason Ward (editor-in-chief)that sounds great but it likely dashes my hope that when he gets off of that throne he will be revealed to have a serpentine lower half.
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on Jul 21, 2017 2:43:04 GMT
But this whole thing is about making Thanos CGI. You'd have to get a big guy to play the character because Thanos is a big guy. But they went with an actor doing motion capture. Bib Fortuna and Palpatine are normal proportioned guys with light make-up on their face. The more you put on a person's face, the harder it is to emote. Ok. But I maintain that practical FX deserve a bigger role in these types of movies. Some characters do need to be cgi, like Hulk for example, but practical fx and/or make up work should always considered as option one. Not always. If you know out of the gate that the character or object or monster will be doing something that a practical effect can't do then you don't go that route. Maybe for close ups that don't show it actually doing anything. These days, if the object is effects heavy, they'll only make a part of it practical so the other actors have something to work against (Thor vs Hulk fight on helicarrier).
|
|