Movie Reviews 2.0

Question is whether this is "the end" of the MCU, at least in terms of overarching story. They refused to make any references to "Phase 4" and Infinity War is billed as the culmination of all the treads that have been sewn so far. We'll have to see if new threads are sewn in Phase 3.
 
Wow a Wonder Woman movie.. that would be ace. I pick Jennifer Lawrence to play her.

Lucy: Absolutely dire movie - the biggest pile of dog doo since Noah.

It was like some kid in high school wrote it for his homework a few minutes before it was meant to be handed in. Did I mention it was dog doo? ScarJo or no... she was utter crap in it anyway.
 
Dave Baumann said:
Question is whether this is "the end" of the MCU, at least in terms of overarching story.
Click to expand...
Surely they would not be so dumb as to kill something which has brought them such immense success and wealth. I assume that if they're not speaking about the future it's because they're still busy cooking it up. :)
 
Marvel Cinematic Universe. Damn, Davros, keep up with pop culture.

They'll kill it themselves with all these movies. But I hope it lasts long enough to get to the Infinity War.
 
John Reynolds said:
Hemsworth said during interviews that he told Marvel he'd never bulk again like he did for the first Thor. Said he gained so much muscle in such a short term that he felt sick during most of the production.
Click to expand...

Why don't they start doing CGI muscle? You know move away from real life and start just creating CGI actors with the people there as placeholders? I think they did like 30 seconds of Arnold in his prime + even more muscle in Terminator as a cameo, so surely they can do a whole movie like that.
 
T4 was a CG head replacement on top of a live actor.

Doing proper, fully muscled human bodies is incredibly complicated, time consuming, and thus expensive. Muscle suits will usually look fake.

Also, actors doing their own stunts should better have some real strength as well...
 
It was a very work intensive effect, basically redrawing Evans frame by frame and sometimes mixing it with body doubles. Again, it's a lot more easier and cheaper to just hire a personal trainer for the talent.
 
Laa-Yosh said:
It was a very work intensive effect, basically redrawing Evans frame by frame and sometimes mixing it with body doubles. Again, it's a lot more easier and cheaper to just hire a personal trainer for the talent.
Click to expand...

If superhero movies stay popular the algorithms can improve (there's a difference between doing the best with existing tools and developing new tools). Some more information to work with would help too (ie. depth and maybe video from an offset camera to get some more hints about lighting ... the less manual work necessary the better).

Instead of just green screens we can have sets filled with green people :)

PS. hmm, maybe instead of trying to determine lighting from the camera(s) it might be better to just have a whole bunch of hemisphere light sampling devices on the actor's suit (an exercise in extreme miniature electronics design of course, but not impossible).
 
I'm sorry but nothing you say makes any sense. I suppose you're not familiar with the approaches used here at all.
 
Squilliam said:
Why don't they start doing CGI muscle? You know move away from real life and start just creating CGI actors with the people there as placeholders? I think they did like 30 seconds of Arnold in his prime + even more muscle in Terminator as a cameo, so surely they can do a whole movie like that.
Click to expand...

Maybe it wouldn't look as authentic. Hemsworth is hardly small as it is, as Thor he has a big armour on most of the time. His arms look amazing, so what's the point? For those scenes where he might be half naked, he can just do a few press ups and last minute pumping exercises and no one would know the difference.
 
Laa-Yosh said:
I'm sorry but nothing you say makes any sense. I suppose you're not familiar with the approaches used here at all.
Click to expand...

What does how artists approach the problem have to do with the way you automate it? The computer can't work the way you do, it can't infer physical information as well (or determine when just faking it looks good). It needs more physical inputs, it needs on set mocap (already being done) and it needs a decent idea of lights directions and shadows (which AFAIK can't be accurately captured on set yet, but is an obvious follow up to on set mocap and theoretically possible). Otherwise you're never going to cut down on the amount of manual tweaking per frame and you already said, it's rather expensive.

If it was up to you I think on set motion capture wouldn't even exist ... that wasn't how you guys approached the problem before after all. Better mocap, better lighting capture, better physical animation ... it's all going to add up to reduce the costs, if these kind of movies requiring full body CGI stay popular, even for main characters with more human physique.
 
Wouldn't it be trivial to add lighting information for at least indoors set locations by just keeping track of where you put light sources (and what properties said light sources have)?
 
There are two options, one is a complete 3D CG body replacement and the other is to try to work in 2D only (which is the way they did it with Evans). Both are super complicated but for different reasons. I've got no time to explain it right now, maybe later.

Also, thanks to MfA on educating me about my job.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Shortbread
Phil Spencer Interview: Redfall Reviews, Activision Deal - Kinda Funny Xcast Ep. 137
7 8 9
Replies
175
Views
12K
trinibwoy
T
B
The melodrama of making the Miami Vice movie
Replies
4
Views
2K
101998
1
R
  • Locked
Reverend at The Pulpit #12
2 3 4
Replies
73
Views
13K
Dave Baumann
Dave Baumann
P
Matrix Revolution. WARNING spoiler
Replies
5
Views
2K
Sazar
S
R
Reverend at The Pulpit #3
Replies
14
Views
3K
pcchen
P
Back
Top