Movie Reviews 2.0

It's only nerdish speculation, not actual script summaries.

 

Ah, okay. Well, good. Then I'm not really spoiled then.

 

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.

 

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.

 

Mcu ?

ps: i heard in the u.s there was a flash tv series any good ?

 

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.

 

A bit more Avengers 2 footage in the beginning. I'd pull it no problem.

 

That's actually been doing the rounds as the "extended trailer". The look on Thor's face when Capt America manages to unknowingly nudge the hammer is priceless.

 

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...

 

they did the opposite in the first captain america movie that was a great effect

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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)?

 

I think he was shorter too...

 

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.