my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » Anyone else sick of the Hulk yet? (Page 2)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Author Topic: Anyone else sick of the Hulk yet? Peter Berrett Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 602 From: Victoria, Australia Registered: Nov 2000 posted 06-16-2003 02:27 AM                        Claude wrote quote: I am very curious. How can you dislike a movie before it is released? All things are possible with Divx and a fast connection cheers Peter  |  IP: Logged Paul Howard Film Handler Posts: 26 From: Huyton, Liverpool, UK Registered: May 2003 posted 06-16-2003 09:54 AM                     The trailer for the Hulk, looks bad. It is edited great, sound is good, but when Hulk swings a tank around his head I think, "its only on for a split second and it looks shit, doesnt make me wanna see the whole thing." I am in a phase of loathing CGI, it always looks bad. I also dislike it when people say, "well its only a blockbuster, dont expect a great story or charachters." Why the hell not. You think for over 90million dollars someone should be able to write something even half decent, alas They dont. "Good Films cost less than $50million bad films cost more." Chew over that philosophy.  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 06-16-2003 05:42 PM                     One of the horribly bad things about CGI is few effects companies seem to be using any logical discipline with the tool in making things look real. Of course, some of this is definitely coming from the "crank it out fast and just good enough to get by" horse-shit which often comes from delivering the lowest bid. Outside of the incredible work done by Pixar, very few films using CGI these days approach the pioneering efforts made by previous films that had far fewer tools and much more primitive computing hardware. Let's face it, the average bottom of the barrel desktop PC on a store shelf has more computing muscle in it than the SGI Iris Indigo Elan models used to create effects in "T2" or "Jurassic Park". This is why I simply have to slam the human element involved for just plain half-assing the work. Even a simple thing such as a size/scale/movement formula, commonly used for miniature work, seems strangely absent in much of today's CGI. Sure, the Hulk swings a tank around by its cannon barrel but the whole sight gag looks like it lacks substance and weight. Part of the problem is the visual is sped up way too fast to be believable. The result winds up cartoony looking. One of the things that made the CGI work in "Jurassic Park" so great is many of the folks doing the animation were coming from ANALOG stop-motion fields of work. Those guys knew a lot more about weight, balance, motion, feel and all those other very important items that make animation believable. It seems these days that a bunch of the 3D animation schools and such teach none of this and only give overviews of computer software instead. This is also the same complaint I have about graphics art courses in general. They only seem to teach bullshit about software and nothing involving principals in design. IMHO, this is one reason why America's overall graphic design output SUCKS compared to other industrialized nations like Germany, France or Sweden. To make the long point short, it is high time for effects studios to make their animators learn ANIMATION and not just the newest shit about shaders and other software. The "analog" animators seem to know what it is about.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 06-17-2003 06:17 PM                        Well, here's a surprise -- Ebert & Roeper give "The Hulk" two thumbs up! They both praised Ang Lee's direction, and they liked the film's look and the storyline. Ebert said the film has "dark elegance." He also praised Jennifer Conolly's acting. They said the movie really isn't a special-effects movie and has more talk than the usual superhero extravaganza. They called this a plus. The only thing they criticized was the CG effects, saying when the hulk is bouncing around, etc. he looks like a video game, which I'd have to agree with, going by the trailer. They talk about the film here: http://tvplex.go.com/buenavista/ebertandroeper/today.html  |  IP: Logged Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 06-17-2003 07:32 PM                    It's all in the projection, kids.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 06-17-2003 08:02 PM                     Then I dare you to project Dumb and Dumberer. I dare you!  |  IP: Logged Kristin Wahlund Film Handler Posts: 92 From: Eagan, MN Registered: Jul 2001 posted 06-17-2003 10:48 PM                     Does all this hype remind anyone of "Tomb Raider"? and dont you think the hulk is just trying to play off the successs of spiderman? Didnt they learn anything from daredevil?  |  IP: Logged Paul Linfesty Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1383 From: Bakersfield, CA, USA Registered: Nov 1999 posted 06-17-2003 11:01 PM                     Well, actually, I DON'T remember TOMB RAIDER ( and I THINK that's a GOOD thing! I have to admit,though, I may go see Hulk now that some reviewers have liked it (Village Voice, Variety, Hollywood Reporter, Ebert & Roeper). But, I have to agree with Bobby Henderson here that CG has gotten out of hand, and I believe schools aren't teaching a basis in design first, but just jumping to the controls (programs are just TOOLS, they dont MAKE anything, the creativity of the individual does, they shouldnt be a MAYA artist, they should be an artist who just happens to be using MAYA at the moment).  |  IP: Logged Paul Howard Film Handler Posts: 26 From: Huyton, Liverpool, UK Registered: May 2003 posted 06-18-2003 07:11 AM                     Bobby Hit the nail on the head. quote: One of the horribly bad things about CGI is few effects companies seem to be using any logical discipline with the tool in making things look real. CG is very bad nowadays, -Lord of the rings has some good some bad, -Star Wars Ep2 some good some bad, -Matrix reloaded some good most bad -Spiderman all bad, no creative thought whatsoever went into those effects. Spiderman looked like a peice of rubber. It really ruins the film, any film. I know we all have to suspend disbelief, but how far. T2 and Jurassic park, even Independence day have very credible, believable effects. Their computers were mice compared to the monsters now. At least Pixar are still capeable of visual splendor. So computer graphics work has become more of a process than an artform, where have i heard that before?  |  IP: Logged Sam Hunter Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 779 From: West Monroe, LA, USA Registered: Jan 2002 posted 06-18-2003 08:56 AM                     I really didn't ever have a problem with CGI until I watched The mummy returns when the rock came out as part man part scorpian. That ended the movie for me as it looked completely fake. I would settle for stop motion anyday as compared to this.  |  IP: Logged John T. Hendrickson, Jr Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 889 From: Freehold, NJ, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 06-18-2003 08:55 PM                     Doesn't it all really come down to a decision on where to place your advertising dollars? You can spend a ton on picture "A", but at the expense of "B" and "C" and so on. Bad marketing decisions lead to big losses, and impact budgets for future pictures, since there is only so much money to go around. If you think you have a turkey, why overspend to promote it? You can't make chicken salad out of chicken Since we are opening with three prints, I hope to hell we don't have a green turkey on our hands!  |  IP: Logged Darren Crimmins Expert Film Handler Posts: 130 From: Dallas, TX, USA Registered: Jan 2002 posted 06-18-2003 11:12 PM                     My dad told me that he would not see this movie because for the simple reason that he kept getting bombarded with ads on the TV all the time. He doesn't care how good it is, just because every station he watched, there was that damn Hulk again. We both got frustrated with it during the NBA playoffs and just about every commercial break there was, the trailer came on. After a while, we changed the station to something else for about 2 minutes because we couldn't stand it anymore. Unfortunatly for me, I have to screen it so I can't aviod it . Here's to overhyping and having the trailer shoved down my throat.  |  IP: Logged Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 06-19-2003 08:13 AM                    Hulk commercials? Bah...that's nothing. Where were you when "Billy Jack" was four-walling it, city to city. Man, talk about commercial overload!  |  IP: Logged Jack Ondracek Film God Posts: 2348 From: Port Orchard, WA, USA Registered: Oct 2002 posted 06-20-2003 05:42 AM                        It'll be interesting to see how the comments go after this evening. We screened our print this morning (Thursday), and for once, the trailer didn't blow the whole movie. As has been mentioned, the CGI isn't all that great when Hulk is in the distance. In the desert, he looks more like a green flea, sproinging here and there. Close-up though, it's better. I'm not much of a comics fan, but I managed to sit through the 2 1/2 hours without any problem. The soundtrack had some decent effects in it, too... at least the DTS mix sounded pretty good. So.... ok... it was better than I was expecting. Friday night at the boxoffice should be interesting.  |  IP: Logged Daryl C. W. O'Shea Film God Posts: 3977 From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from) Registered: Jun 2002 posted 06-20-2003 05:58 AM                        I'm glad I don't watch televsion. I've only seen the trailer (at most) twice and only hear the odd Dodge Caravan / Hulk radio ad. But since it was brought up, I'm sick of the Hulk since it has DTS issues and I'm really sick of DTS issues.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.