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

Best CGI character?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lesath said:
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."
Click to expand...

Well, in that sense, I do agree. Davey Jones's texturing was superb and looked highly realistic, I agree.

The fact that Gollum's skull is not consistent with human/hobbit anatomy has little bearing on how good/bad his model looked, I think.

wtf?
Did you watch the movie? A guy in an octopus suit? 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 ;)
Click to expand...

You don't know how to read.
 
XiaNaphryz said:
pirates201_Pirates2-ds090t-.gif
Click to expand...

What's the purpose of the black around the lips and eyes?
 
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...

I could be wrong, but I think Gollum had the ring for a few hundred years as the transformation slowly took place. They montage it to look like it's just a few days in the movie.

I was impressed with how well the Balrog looked in LOTR. I always liked that design from the old John Howe painting, and was happy they stuck with it. The idea of his skin constantly drying and cracking open again when he moved was done well.

Balrog_3.jpg


It seems like the best characters are as much a result of clever usage as anything else. The T-Rex would probably look just as fake and shiny as other CG if they did those scenes on a sunny day, but the wet rainy look was probably done in part because of the limitations of the tech.
 
oracrest said:
It seems like the best characters are as much a result of clever usage as anything else. The T-Rex would probably look just as fake and shiny as other CG if they did those scenes on a sunny day, but the wet rainy look was probably done in part because of the limitations of the tech.
Click to expand...
Or it was done because that's how it happened in the book, and it creates a pretty scary atmosphere.

There were other scenes with the T-Rex in bright surroundings.
 
oracrest said:
It seems like the best characters are as much a result of clever usage as anything else. The T-Rex would probably look just as fake and shiny as other CG if they did those scenes on a sunny day, but the wet rainy look was probably done in part because of the limitations of the tech.
Click to expand...

There were actually some daylight shots, like this one:

T-Rex on the hunt
 
oracrest said:
I could be wrong, but I think Gollum had the ring for a few hundred years as the transformation slowly took place. They montage it to look like it's just a few days in the movie.
Click to expand...

I'm aware of that, but I think it just sets Gollum in the uncanny valley, especially apparent in a movie where you have (for the most part) non-CGI humanoids interacting with each other. I would have preferred something more subtle, more akin to people exhibiting exophtalmos.
 
oracrest said:
I could be wrong, but I think Gollum had the ring for a few hundred years as the transformation slowly took place. They montage it to look like it's just a few days in the movie.
Click to expand...

Gollum did indeed have the ring for a few hundred years before Bilbo found it (as for Gollum's eyes, I would guess they were so big due to the lack of light down in the underground caverns). The movie also makes it look like Frodo is in his early twenties when he goes off on his journey, while in the book he's well into his fifties IIRC.
 
agrajag said:
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.
Click to expand...
See, to me it is. Like many others, i watched through the whole Pirates movie thinking Davy Jones couldn't have been comprised of CG effects because he blended so seamlessly with all the other actors. Every bit about him, from the hat and the barnacles on it, to his body and clothing, etc each of them showed off the same texture characteristics as real-life materials would. Heck even the tentacle beard showed off the same rubbery texture that's easily identifiable as something organic (like how horror films have props like fake synthetic intestines but could easily pass off as the real thing in the movie) So naturally I assumed that the animatronics tech have improved considerably for them to make a suit that actually doesn't sacrifice the character's realism AT ALL.

And that to me is why saying it looks like a suit is very much a compliment. Because I thought that was the best goddamn suit ever in the history of practical effects in film.
 
Yeah, I'm in the boat that believes that CG shouldn't make me immediately think "hey look! CG!"
 
It's gonna be Davey Jones for a while. I could see the CG-ness in Button...to be honest in that movie I was way more impressed with the digital makeup used to make Pitt and Blanchett young.

I don't think the Avatar smurfs will top Jones, either. The design is just too out there for them to look as "believable"/real. The cartoon-like eyes are an issue. Jones easily passes off as a guy in a costume. :P

Bob Loblaw said:
100 % CGI

296fyoy.jpg
Click to expand...

Probably the worst entire shot of all 3 Matrix movies. WTF was the point of this? :lol BTW it looked terrible in 2003 and looks even worse now.

v0yce said:
What's the purpose of the black around the lips and eyes?
Click to expand...

When they were filming, ILM didn't know if they would be able to make completely realistic-looking CG eyes. The paint around his eyes would make it easier to "cut out" the actor's eyes and use them on the CG model, in case it was needed. In the end, it wasn't and Davey Jones is 100% CG from top to bottom.
 
Lesath said:
I'm aware of that, but I think it just sets Gollum in the uncanny valley, especially apparent in a movie where you have (for the most part) non-CGI humanoids interacting with each other. I would have preferred something more subtle, more akin to people exhibiting exophtalmos.
Click to expand...

How can there be an uncanny valley when you have no reference for what he's supposed to look like? Also though, he's basically supposed to be a real life "uncanny valley," that is that his features have been distorted and corrupted. While I don't agree, I can understand that you feel the eyes are too big and too much of an exaggeration, but I also think they're a key part of what made him such a successful CGI character: with such huge eyes it's much easier to convey the complex emotions that character was required to exhibit.
 
SquirrelNuckle said:
Weren't these mainly giant mechanical puppets with CGI overlay?
Click to expand...
The two were never mixed... not in the same frame, at least. The only time I can think of where a dino even jumps from animatronics to CG or vice versa within a shot is when the T-Rex spots the kids' flashlight and goes after them. They hide the cut from full-animatronic to full-CG with the truck body. I still think that the CG stuff looks better than the Winston stuff, mostly because it moves more convincingly.
 
Borgnine said:
How can there be an uncanny valley when you have no reference for what he's supposed to look like? Also though, he's basically supposed to be a real life "uncanny valley," that is that his features have been distorted and corrupted. While I don't agree, I can understand that you feel the eyes are too big and too much of an exaggeration, but I also think they're a key part of what made him such a successful CGI character: with such huge eyes it's much easier to convey the complex emotions that character was required to exhibit.
Click to expand...

I apologize; I've been misusing the term "uncanny valley." The issue with Gollum is that he looks out of place at times with the background, and especially the characters he interacts with. Perhaps he's not human, but he's humanoid enough, and when the elves, dwarves, hobbits, and man have a sort of rough standard of eye and bone structure, Gollum offers an extremely jarring cartoonish contrast, and breaks suspension of disbelief.

To put it into perspective, imagine that crappy CGI Rock posted earlier interacting with real people. I mean, sure he's supposed to be some sort of mutated scorpion king, but it still doesn't change the fact that it was crappy CGI.
 
faceless007 said:
Holy hell. I never even suspected. But then I'm inclined to wonder why Fincher did that instead of just normal location shooting.
Click to expand...

I think it was partly for realism and authenticity, partly just because he just could.
 
Combichristoffersen said:
Gollum did indeed have the ring for a few hundred years before Bilbo found it (as for Gollum's eyes, I would guess they were so big due to the lack of light down in the underground caverns). The movie also makes it look like Frodo is in his early twenties when he goes off on his journey, while in the book he's well into his fifties IIRC.
Click to expand...

This is true. in fact, he was celebrating his 50th birthday I think when he left. I was amazed how long it took for them to get the journey going!

I was always under the impression that the ring itself transformed it's bearer to a darker creature. Both Bilbo & Frodo went through un Hobbit like instances in the movies.
 
JGS said:
This is true. in fact, he was celebrating his 50th birthday I think when he left. I was amazed how long it took for them to get the journey going!

I was always under the impression that the ring itself transformed it's bearer to a darker creature. Both Bilbo & Frodo went through un Hobbit like instances in the movies.
Click to expand...

The ring itself did twist and transform its bearer, mutilating his/her mind and soul, giving them an unnaturally long lifespan. The ring essentially worked like a drug; the bearer would get "addicted" to it, causing the bearer to focus only on the ring and how to best ensure that no one else would be able to get it, and finally the bearer's soul would be so far gone it'd be a slave under Sauron's will (like what happened to the Numenorean kings that became the Ringwraiths). That said, I think there would have to be a seed of greed and/or evil lying dormant in the bearer for the ring to be able to enslave a ceature, which is why Aragorn and Gandalf could resist the temptation of the ring, while Saruman and Gollum* both fell for its power.


* Gollum wasn't originally an evil creature though, but his dormant greed and desire to own was awoken when he first saw the ring. Gollum is arguably one of the most tragic characters in fantasy literature, although he does redeem himself somewhat during the course of the book. If he ever found peace after death is debatable, but I certainly hope so. He was a sad creature, ruined and twisted by the malice Sauron poured into the ring.
 
v0yce said:
What's the purpose of the black around the lips and eyes?
Click to expand...

I'd guess that they let his real eyes come through the CG, and the black is to help blend the real with the not real.

Edit...never mind. I just saw this was answered above using real knowledge and not just speculation.
 
silverbullet1080 said:
Why are people debating Gollum vs Davy Jones, when it's clear that D9 currently has the most kickass CGI to date?
Click to expand...

In what way?

I mean it's so funny how so few of the people here realise how stupid this argument is without proper context.
 
Lesath said:
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.
Click to expand...

Being slowly corrupted and twisted by pure evil can do that to ya.
 
PataHikari said:
Being slowly corrupted and twisted by pure evil can do that to ya.
Click to expand...
Next time when coming up with an witty retort, do yourself a favor and make sure it wasn't already posted and addressed.
 
shuyin_ said:
Hey, i read what you wrote. Maybe you have trouble organizing your thoughts into writing ;)

Seriously, i'm curious. What movie did you watch? :P
Click to expand...

No, it's not my fault you are illiterate, friend. What posts did you read? Seriously, i'm curious.

adelante said:
See, to me it is. Like many others, i watched through the whole Pirates movie thinking Davy Jones couldn't have been comprised of CG effects because he blended so seamlessly with all the other actors. Every bit about him, from the hat and the barnacles on it, to his body and clothing, etc each of them showed off the same texture characteristics as real-life materials would. Heck even the tentacle beard showed off the same rubbery texture that's easily identifiable as something organic (like how horror films have props like fake synthetic intestines but could easily pass off as the real thing in the movie) So naturally I assumed that the animatronics tech have improved considerably for them to make a suit that actually doesn't sacrifice the character's realism AT ALL.

And that to me is why saying it looks like a suit is very much a compliment. Because I thought that was the best goddamn suit ever in the history of practical effects in film.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the explanation. Makes sense when you put it that way.
 
I didn't tell my wife that Benjamin Button had any CG in it until after the movie. She almost didn't believe me - I had to google up the making-of vid on youtube.

It's the most flawless CG character I've seen, and the first time a CG character wasn't intended to look fantastical in any way that I've seen work. I see pictures of it and still can't believe they pulled it off.
 
Gotta be Davy Jones.

I didn't even know that fucker was CGI until someone mentioned it after I had already seen POTC 2/3. I said God DAMN! O_o
 
silverbullet1080 said:
Why are people debating Gollum vs Davy Jones, when it's clear that D9 currently has the most kickass CGI to date?
Click to expand...

I guess because the prawns resemble animals more than sentient beings, let's be honest there's barely any emotional response in their faces. Even the leader and his kid, who have bigger, more expressive eyes, still aren't that far away from the cattle. I think the prawn design compliments the relatively low budget of the movie. They blend really well with reality in the movie, but that's it. What ILM accomplished with Davy Jones is considerably more impressive.
 
jett said:
I guess because the prawns resemble animals more than sentient beings, let's be honest there's barely any emotional response in their faces. Even the leader and his kid, who have bigger, more expressive eyes, still aren't that far away from the cattle. I think the prawn design compliments the relatively low budget of the movie. They blend really well with reality in the movie, but that's it. What ILM accomplished with Davy Jones is considerably more impressive.
Click to expand...

Honestly, that's why T-Rex in Jurassic Park still looks good. He was easy to do in the first place considering he's not bubbling with facial expression.

Still makes me say wow though which is why it's one of my favorites.
 
JGS said:
Honestly, that's why T-Rex in Jurassic Park still looks good. He was easy to do in the first place considering he's not bubbling with facial expression.

Still makes me say wow though which is why it's one of my favorites.
Click to expand...
I heard somewhere, maybe on the marking of, that the T-Rex was only 25,000 polys!:lol :lol :D :D
 
stuburns said:
Neytiri and her blue friends rain the pain on pretty much everything else. She in particular would get my vote.

Big pic so if you want to see it, click it.
http://www.crazythemes.com/images/Avatar-Neytiri-Movie.jpg
Click to expand...
From a technical standpoint that's probably true, but the goofy art and too-human-for-comfort design behind the characters puts it a notch below some of the best CGI characters out there IMO. The design really just doesn't sit well with me.



As far as actual characters go...

district-9-alien-face-1200.jpg


Simply amazing, and within the context of the film, very believable and convincing. Also looks less CG-ey to me than the Smurfatars.
 
I disagree the Na'vi are bad art or whatever, but yeah, the aliens in District 9 are very cool. Considering the limited budget too, they did an incredible job.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

No CGI realy means Invisible CGI.
29
3K
jason10mm replied
Best DVD ripping software?
2
170
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