• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Best CGI character?

Status
Not open for further replies.
agrajag said:
Serious question time. Why do the dinosaurs in the first Jurassic Park hold up so much better than Jar Jar Binks and other CGI characters in Phantom Meanace? Did ILM just get really lazy, or is it because the dinosaurs' skin isn't supposed to be very elastic.
Click to expand...

Most of it doesn't really. Jurassic Park's CG is not as good as it used to be. The integration of practical effects and dark lighting help make it look much better than it is, but most stuff in the light looks fairly unconvincing now. Plus the use of closeups, which always look better than full body shots. The first brachiosaurus shot looks really poor now.

Nazgul_Hunter said:
(A side benefit of that is that performances are better. Read Star Wars actors comments on how difficult it was to perform while completely surrounded by green and then the final product for evidence.)
Click to expand...

Absolute bullshit excuse for bad acting. Lucas is a bad director of actors (plus awful dialogue), that's the reason so much acting in Star Wars sucks. And quite a few actors gave good performances in the films in spite of all that: Liam Neeson, Christopher Lee, Ewan McGregor.

And for added measure every actor working on those Zemeckis MoCap films absolutely praise the process and comment on how freeing it is.
 
If you're just discussing model details, I'd like to add this to the Avatar debate. It's an amazing amount of detail in that picture. If it looks natural and doesn't stick out is another thing, but I leave those arguments up to you :lol
 
fistfulofmetal said:
I don't buy that the Prawn a few posts back is CG. The ones in the movie? Yeah definitely. Just not the posted earlier.
Click to expand...
It probably is, but it still looks much better than any shot in the movie.
District 9's CG is excellent, but not THAT amazing. A lot of the shots have the obvious blurry CG look.
 
Snytbaggen2 said:
If you're just discussing model details, I'd like to add this to the Avatar debate. It's an amazing amount of detail in that picture. If it looks natural and doesn't stick out is another thing, but I leave those arguments up to you :lol
Click to expand...
There's a lot of detail, yeah, but the eyes are still done poorly and the faces look more cartoony than alien. Plus it really throws me off how the detail is ruined by depth in all of the Avatar screens + trailers.

They would've been better off calling up the Mass Effect concept design team for pointers.
 
DY_nasty said:
They would've been better off calling up the Mass Effect concept design team for pointers.
Click to expand...
258se3b.jpg
 
Krev said:
It probably is, but it still looks much better than any shot in the movie.
District 9's CG is excellent, but not THAT amazing. A lot of the shots have the obvious blurry CG look.
Click to expand...

It's not CG. It was created for the teaser with prosthetic makeup.
 
Karma Kramer said:
Sigh...

Davy Jones and the District 9 Aliens are definitely not the best because their appearance is already heavily based off real-life things (squid and bug scales).

Benjamin Button and Gollum are the winners so far, and Avatar will be the king soon.
Click to expand...

*facepalms*
I'm just going to ignore you from now on. The ones you posted are closer to life than DJ and the D9 Aliens will ever be. I can't believe you're trying to argue that Davy Jones is heavily based off real life and fucking old man Benjamin Button isn't
 
Good CGI characters don't have to be limited how "good" they look in terms of how realistic and non-CGI they look in comparison to their surroundings. Sometimes it can just be how well they played in the movie story and character-wise too.
 
Zaptruder said:
This is incorrect. Those are bill's eyes... they couldn't quite get the eyes right, so they put the makeup around it, then shopped them into the final composition to get the effect... pulled it off fantastically of course.
Click to expand...
Actually I'm 100% sure I've read in an interview with VFX director that they had CG eyes on Davey. They saved Nighey's eyes in case they couldn't get this right so that they could composite them in, but they ended up not doing that after all.
 
Medalion said:
Good CGI characters don't have to be limited how "good" they look in terms of how realistic and non-CGI they look in comparison to their surroundings. Sometimes it can just be how well they played in the movie story and character-wise too.
Click to expand...

In terms of design, the prawns are fantastic. And I know I'm hardly being original here but... Avatar's creatures' designs are completely uninspired.
 
T-Rex, Davey Jones, and the prawns of D-9 are the top 3 most realistic looking CGI.

Doug and Wall-E are some of my favorite CGI characters.
 
This wins IMO!

Avatar61.png


But Gollum, Benji Button, Davey Jones, WALL-E, and the prawns of D-9 ALL are SUPER GREAT! All of these choices are just way too hard to make.
 
shuyin_ said:
Debatable? WTF are you talking about?
Me,
- after seeing Gollum: that's CGI and it's not that good;
- after seeing Davy Jones: heh, cool animatronics they used on that actor's face. As it turns out, there were no animatronics, no actor... Davy Jones is 100% CG, from head to toe. The scenes on the beach, in broad daylight still make him look real.

And you really have to see them in motion: Gollum smells like CGI from a mile; for Davy Jones, as i said, most people (myself included) didn't even think he might be CGI - he was perfectly modelled and animated. If you think it's debatable that Davy Jones looks better than Gollum as a CGI character you need to change your glasses. Or maybe get some :P
Click to expand...

I said the same thing about Davey Jones and I just got new glasses.
 
How do you make stuff like DJ or the Avatar characters? Do you model stuff polygon by polygon like they used to in games, or do they just scan faces and mess them up in Maya? I have no clue how they get it so lifelike.
 
Truant said:
How do you make stuff like DJ or the Avatar characters? Do you model stuff polygon by polygon like they used to in games, or do they just scan faces and mess them up in Maya? I have no clue how they get it so lifelike.
Click to expand...
They're pretty much character models in Maya, yes. They have to be rigged and animated like any other model. Sometimes physics simulation is used to help parts of the animation. What make them look so much better than game models is the super high resolution and the rendering/shading/lighting - some sequences for DJ took over 24 hours to render out one frame.
 
Gollum is a fantastical creature, naturally you're going to say that he looks CGI. The aliens in Avatar look like cartoons too. Saying that you thought that Davey Jones is a guy in an octopus suit with animatronics is not a compliment for his CGI artists. :lol
 
agrajag said:
Gollum is a fantastical creature, naturally you're going to say that he looks CGI. The aliens in Avatar look like cartoons too. Saying that you thought that Davey Jones is a guy in an octopus suit with animatronics is not a compliment for his CGI artists. :lol
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure they'd say otherwise. :P

Not being able to tell something's CG is supposed to be the ultimate compliment I thought. But what do I know. ;)
 
DY_nasty said:
Well, even then the Prawns look much, much better than the Avatar dudes.

I think a lot of people are placing Avatar up so high because of hype and expectation alone.
Click to expand...

Whenever I see an Avatar character it's really apparent to me that they're CGI, prawns in D9 just blew me away though. Even when there are tons on the screen it looks fantastic...can't wait to get it on Blu-Ray.
 
XiaNaphryz said:
I'm pretty sure they'd say otherwise. :P

Not being able to tell something's CG is supposed to be the ultimate compliment I thought. But what do I know. ;)
Click to expand...


I'm pretty sure they weren't going for a "guy in a rubber suit look," otherwise they'd just hire a, you know, guy in a rubber suit. Saying that it's still fake-looking, just in a different way is no compliment.
 
Binabik15 said:
Best human(oid) is still Davy Jones, best non-human the prawns and best machine goes to all of the Transformers.

Perfomance wise it´s Gollum.

I really dislike the Avatar shots, something looks really off. Maybe depth of field or lighting, but compare it to Davy Jones, he really looks like he´s there as a part of the scene, while the Avatar stuff looks still like it was shopped in.
Click to expand...

I agree with this statement 100%. Also, I do give a vote to the T-Rex, because Jurassic Park is what I actually put down for my religion sometimes. That's how much I love it.
 
Hm, but isn´t the T-Rex in most of the really stunning moments an animatronic puppet?

I wish they´d use more "real" stuff in movies, often CGI looks so laughably bad and fake.
 
Binabik15 said:
Hm, but isn´t the T-Rex in most of the really stunning moments an animatronic puppet?

I wish they´d use more "real" stuff in movies, often CGI looks so laughably bad and fake.
Click to expand...
You know what I can't stand? When movies bring the CGI in for simple blood effects. Zombieland just pissed me off with that. They had this horribly pasted on blood spatter thing going throughout the movie that made it irritating to watch.
 
DY_nasty said:
You know what I can't stand? When movies bring the CGI in for simple blood effects. Zombieland just pissed me off with that. They had this horribly pasted on blood spatter thing going throughout the movie that made it irritating to watch.
Click to expand...

Explosions.

When action movie explosions look like fire from the Shrek dragon you know that Hollywood is out of it´s mind.

Just get a few gallons of gas and make it go boom, how hard is this?

Edit: Pretty much all Pixar characters are great, but this thread is more aboutlive action with CGI thrown in, isn´t it?

Just convering my ass for saying Transformers over Wall-E :lol
 
agrajag said:
Gollum is a fantastical creature, naturally you're going to say that he looks CGI. The aliens in Avatar look like cartoons too. Saying that you thought that Davey Jones is a guy in an octopus suit with animatronics is not a compliment for his CGI artists. :lol
Click to expand...

I disagree; we all know that Davy Jones didn't have real tentacles, so one would logically assume that some sort of special effects are at play. The fact that the CGI was so well-implemented and integrated into the original scenes that the average guy would think it's some guy in an octopus suit with animatronics is the highest compliment one could offer.
 
No, the highest compliment one could offer would be a suspension of disbelief, like many people here professed about District 9. Animatronic puppetry, prosthetic suits, etc. look fake as hell and not any better than CGI.
 
agrajag said:
No, the highest compliment one could offer would be a suspension of disbelief, like many people here professed about District 9. Animatronic puppetry, prosthetic suits, etc. look fake as hell and not any better than CGI.
Click to expand...
That can be argued...

Some stuff is just downright atrocious across the board - and the viewer is left wishing that the director had chosen to use a cardboard cutout of a train instead of paying someone to make some shit that isn't worthy of a DS screen (Public Enemies - near the end, the train they use is fucking laughable and a class of college sophomores could've made something more presentable out of plywood).

If you're gonna use CGI, use it well, and not whenever you're feeling lazy.
 
Same thing can be said for puppets, though. At no point have I ever seen a guy in a monster suit and said "man, that looks real."
 
agrajag said:
Same thing can be said for puppets, though. At no point have I ever seen a guy in a monster suit and said "man, that looks real."
Click to expand...
Predator.
 
agrajag said:
No, the highest compliment one could offer would be a suspension of disbelief, like many people here professed about District 9. Animatronic puppetry, prosthetic suits, etc. look fake as hell and not any better than CGI.
Click to expand...


YOU ARE WRONG!!! EVERYBODY knows that the aliens in District 9 weren't real aliens. And we ALL knew Davy didn't have real tentecals. Nothing could suspend that belief. We just know that it's not possible to have real aliens in a movie.
 
DY_nasty said:
Predator.
Click to expand...

Looks like a guy in a halloween suit.

I think Alien would be a better case for your argument. Fuck, I have to retract my statement. Alien is fucking awesome.

mckmas8808 said:
YOU ARE WRONG!!! EVERYBODY knows that the aliens in District 9 weren't real aliens. And we ALL knew Davy didn't have real tentecals. Nothing could suspend that belief. We just know that it's not possible to have real aliens in a movie.
Click to expand...

Duh, of course everyone knows that special effects aren't real, silly goose.
 
agrajag said:
Looks like a guy in a halloween suit.

I think Alien would be a better case for your argument. Fuck, I have to retract my statement. Alien is fucking awesome.
Click to expand...
At the time, Predator was fucking amazing... fucking amazing.

But yeah, Alien kinda takes the cake.
 
agrajag said:
No, the highest compliment one could offer would be a suspension of disbelief, like many people here professed about District 9. Animatronic puppetry, prosthetic suits, etc. look fake as hell and not any better than CGI.
Click to expand...

You're reaching. During a movie, suspension of disbelief is important, but after a movie, when you're looking back on it, it would be entirely illogical and unusual to retain that suspension of disbelief. I believe that without the distraction of the plot and pacing, CGI would naturally be held under even tighter scrutiny...which is what we're doing, right?

If you want to bring up suspension of disbelief, though, Gollum's eyes were impossibly huge for his head, and it always bothered me that they suddenly increased in size as he transformed from a regular hobbit to what he became.
 
Lesath said:
You're reaching. During a movie, suspension of disbelief is important, but after a movie, when you're looking back on it, it would be entirely illogical and unusual to retain that suspension of disbelief. I believe that without the distraction of the plot and pacing, CGI would naturally be held under even tighter scrutiny...which is what we're doing, right?

If you want to bring up suspension of disbelief, though, Gollum's eyes were impossibly huge for his head, and it always bothered me that they suddenly increased in size as he transformed from a regular hobbit to what he became.
Click to expand...

That was just being faithful to the book. The book explained that his eyes bulged out from spending his life in the darkness.

Look, all I'm saying is that "man, his tentacles looked so realistic that they looked like they were made from rubber!" is a laughable compliment.
 
Heh, I'd love to find out the polygon count numbers for Neytiri or Jake, or hell, the environments (this assuming they're using polys and not NURBS or some other mesh geometry).

It must be in the total astronomical levels. Obviously with movies, you don't have to limit yourself like you do with games.
 
There´s a shot of Scorpiwhatshisname´s head in Transformers 1 that looks 100% real. Because it´s animatronic. It IS real. Same goes for some of the shots with the little spy bot.

The Dark Knights blows up miniature cars and it looks much better than pure CGI crashes.

Animatronics/rubber suits/miniatures plus CGI is criminally underused and I bet it´d make a lot of stuff look that much better.
 
Binabik15 said:
There´s a shot of Scorpiwhatshisname´s head in Transformers 1 that looks 100% real. Because it´s animatronic. It IS real. Same goes for some of the shots with the little spy bot.

The Dark Knights blows up miniature cars and it looks much better than pure CGI crashes.

Animatronics/rubber suits/miniatures plus CGI is criminally underused and I bet it´d make a lot of stuff look that much better.
Click to expand...


Well, of course a real robot will look real. But you can't exactly have a real octopus-man, can you?
 
agrajag said:
Look, all I'm saying is that "man, his tentacles looked so realistic that they looked like they were made from rubber!" is a laughable compliment.
Click to expand...


That's not what we are saying at all. We are saying it looks like it's "real" and not digitally created.
 
agrajag said:
I'm pretty sure they weren't going for a "guy in a rubber suit look," otherwise they'd just hire a, you know, guy in a rubber suit. Saying that it's still fake-looking, just in a different way is no compliment.
Click to expand...

What the hell? What are they supposed to say? Holy shit, where did they find a guy with face tentacles to play Davie Jones?
 
mckmas8808 said:
That's not what we are saying at all. We are saying it looks like it's "real" and not digitally created.
Click to expand...

I was responding directly to the guy who said that DJ looked like "prosthetics and animatronic limbs," not to whatever "you" were saying.

What the hell? What are they supposed to say? Holy shit, where did they find a guy with face tentacles to play Davie Jones?
Click to expand...

I don't know. It always bothered me how shitty Hellboy and that amphibian guy in Hellboy and The Thing in Fantastic Four looked. To me saying that incredible CGI looks like a guy in a suit isn't a complimentary statement at all.
 
agrajag said:
That was just being faithful to the book. The book explained that his eyes bulged out from spending his life in the darkness.

Look, all I'm saying is that "man, his tentacles looked so realistic that they looked like they were made from rubber!" is a laughable compliment.
Click to expand...

Eyes bulging to such a degree that would require changes in bone structure and and increase in both the diameter AND the pupil of the eye? Sorry if I don't buy it.

And as to your second point, there was quite a difference between "the lighting and textures are so realistic such that they must have involved real-life objects" and "lol rubber."
 
agrajag said:
Gollum is a fantastical creature, naturally you're going to say that he looks CGI. The aliens in Avatar look like cartoons too. Saying that you thought that Davey Jones is a guy in an octopus suit with animatronics is not a compliment for his CGI artists. :lol
Click to expand...
wtf? :lol
Did you watch the movie? A guy in an octopus suit? :lol What kind of movie did you watch?

Davy Jones looks like a human being with a mask on his face (to give the octopus-face) - BUT IT IS NOT A HUMAN BEING AT ALL. If a completely CG character, that looks and moves like a human being, is not a compliment for his modelers than nothing is. That's the ultimate compliment: not being able to tell when a real person is used or CGI.

You must be a joker ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

No CGI realy means Invisible CGI.
29
3K
jason10mm replied
Best DVD ripping software?
2
169
ReBurn replied
  • Poll
Best Deep Purple lineup
0
153
666 replied
Is this the most beautiful anime character?
32
1K
Mister Apoc replied
Best JPEGMAFIA song?
9
424
Viruz replied
Top Bottom