Check out the first Catwoman Sermon at my Squarespace website browntableent.squarespace.com/ And send me your most enticing, creative Squarespace websites to BrowntableEntertainment@gmail.com before December 15th so I can show them off in my next video essay!!!
Browntable you are so right in this video!!!! I saw the dark knight rises the other day and during that plane scene I thought: take note marvel! Practical over visual any day of the week
I found Thor Ragnarok to be pretty fucking terrible most of the time. Usually in movies, its jarring when you see something that isnt CGI'd that well because of how it really stands out among real things in the scene. Ragnarok was the opposite. Everything was so poorly animated that it was jarring when something real entered the scene.
Spider-Man 2 (2004) ended up winning an Oscar for VFX, is a great example of when to use CGI and when to not. They created real Animatronic arms for Doc Ock. The iconic Train Sequence took two years to complete. Not because they couldn’t use CGI. It’s because they want it to look as realistic as it can. They even went to Chicago to film elevated Train tracks then merged it with the clips of New York buildings and then applied little VFX as a final touch up to the characters.
As far as I know, it was also the first movie to do a 4k CGI intermediate. So, the Doc Ock CGI was native 4k, but the Dock Ock CGI in No Way Home was 2k upscaled to 4k. Making it look even faker.
The attention to detail in ASM2's effects is incredible. The wrinkling, adjusting to wind/various physical forces, lighting/reflections and textures. Awesome work.
I heard that the CGI fight between T'Challa and Killmonger was being worked on for months by Method Studios, and then literally 6 weeks before deadline, production was like "Let's change LITERALLY EVERYTHING." So... yeah. Method basically had to scrap everything they had done and create and render that entire scene from scratch over the course of like 6 weeks. From what I've heard, VFX get treated like absolute crap in the industry. They're artists, not miracle workers. They need time and also money. And no one in Hollywood wants to give them either. It really sucks :(
Yeah. It's really unfortunate that the film industry has adopted the "fix it in post" mentality and taken it to its extreme. It's just not an efficient way to go about it. Especially if you actually hire costume designers to make practical costumes and then just scrap all their hard work. You just end up wasting time and money. And making the visual effects teams work much harder than they could be. If you compare the budget of many of the recent Marvel films to films made by someone like Guillermo del Toro who uses as many practical special effects as possible you end up with a cheaper and more realistic looking film. If Marvel wants to make everything "photo realistic" why not actually capture it in-camera if you can? It's just counter intuitive.
@@NickDe3 I'm chiming in here 4 years later to say that there are two reasons why Christopher Nolan does so many practical effects in his films: 1. Because he wants whatever he makes to hold up in the future. He knows and understands people are going to dissect his work. To watch it in slow motion, to freeze frames for examination. So as an artist, it's important to him that it holds up in such scrutiny and of course, in the experience of the film to make it as seamless and not-distracting as possible. Which is not to say that he is anti-VFX. He merely wants to use it strategically, to enhance whatever is actually there. His favorite use of VFX seems to be covering wires for low gravity scenes such as in Inception and Interstellar. 2. *Because he always comes in under budget.* Nolan knows that if he goes over budget and has to go back to the studios to ask for more money, that's when he loses his creative authority. They'll say "Since you're asking for money, I want you to include XYZ your film or you won't get the money." But if you plan and execute well, you don't end up with these kinds of cost overruns. The Lear scene at the beginning of The Dark Knight Rises was planned to be executed and filmed over 4 days. The actual amount of time spent filming was only 2 days. You just cut hourly crew costs in half right there for what is considered to be an exceptional scene. In an article I read when Interstellar was coming out, it said that Nolan always returns "a substantial amount of money" to the studios when he's finished his movies. His minimalist approach to VFX is not just an artistic strategy, but also a financial one. VFX is often one of the most expensive parts of making a movie these days.
Costume designers: "Here's a real life, tangible, photo-realistic suit that we spent hours and hours on" Marvel: "Cool, we're gonna make the whole thing CGI" Costume designers: "But why?" Marvel: "Because"
I wonder how much of it is down to the actors and time pressure. You wouldn't think Anthony Hopkins would be bothered by sitting around for an hour or so in makeup gettiing an eyepatch, but who knows. Pretty sure the reason Iron Man became almost exclusively CGI is because RDJ was getting heat exhaustion in the suit, you might say "just build a better suit" but Hollywood ain't got time for that.
@@MrSnaztastic nah they have been using cgi since the first iron man bro cgi is pivotal in film making these days or else you wouldn't get cool things like iron man's suit individually piecing together or basically all his fight scenes
@@Mtab2260 I'm sorry, but that just sounds like an excuse to justify bad CGI. There's no excuse to slather Spiderman with CG while he's just standing in a boat with Nick Fury. Or him perched simply on a lampost. It's lame
Jack Harrison how about when he’s perched on a lamp post gravity doesn’t work that way. And he doesn’t actually have powers from a radioactive spider. Also it’s like Holograms in Star Wars. They’re blue and fuzzy so we can tell the difference. This is the same thing.
@@Mtab2260 well the lampost would be pretty easy. Just have a prop lampost, doesn't even have to be the full thing, and have Tom perch/balance on it with wires and a green screen in the background. That's a super easy thing to do practically.
@@Mtab2260 That's a bad excuse since they could've kept Peter in bone and flesh, while making the sorroundings CGI, both IRL and CGI would stand out? Yes Would that be bad? No, because we already as an audience know how the powers of Mysterio work.
It’s the same issue with Black Widow and Shang-Chi, the CGI looks unfinished. The scene where Yelena jumps onto the helicopter looks awful and so does the scaffold fight scene. It was actually ridiculous.
@@HowdyJ.Marston Yeah but if the film isn’t ready then they shouldn’t release it 🤷♀️ I can understand having to scrap ideas but even the majority of No Way Home’s scenes looked way better. If they haven’t finished the CG then why release it? Simple. They couldn’t hold off releasing those movies anymore and thought people wouldn’t care as much, so they dumped them in cinemas and then started streaming them almost immediately to take whatever money they could get. And they hoped people wouldn’t notice. They didn’t take that chance with No Way Home because they knew it would be big.
@@EmmaGrei i agree, they even played "fixed" version of the movie in the theaters. Where the cgi in some scenes were improved..like some videogame version patches.
Gotta say, i think The Amazing Spiderman suit has got to be the best spiderman suit put on film, like i get that movie wasn't the best but damn that suit man, its bloody beautiful in that opening scene
I loved both.I liked how the tasm 1 suit re invented the design and how tasm 2 gave the original design its own flair without straying too far from the source material.
Spidey 3 had great CGI too. I compared both the Venoms, and the Spiderman 3 Venom and the suit (especially the symbiote) movement looked really realistic. The new Venom looks way too glossy and plasticky and just weird from a texture point of view.
@@mushrifahmed8107 The CGI on Tom Hardy's Venom looks like glossy but keep in mind that the character dynamics between Venom and Brock are part of the charm. Also, the looks of the Symbiote looks slimy and creepy in a weird way. It looks like an enormous blob that attempts to eat you.
Spider-Man 2 didn't win its VFX Oscar for nothing, the film has such beautifully crafted effects shots and techniques. Hell, the VFX artist went through the trouble of setting up a zipline camera setup (ironically named "Spider-Cam") through the streets of New York and Chicago (the latter was for the train scene since there weren't any elevated train stations in New York with wide enough spaces to setup the Spider-Cam).
The costume department must have been furious. All that effort to make a really cool Spider-Man costume tailor fitted to Tom Holland and then have cgi go over the top of it? Why? It’s a waste of money on cgi too
I am surprised the costume designers haven't argued about this issue towards the people who are making these movies. They put so much work on these suits, yet all that hard work is thrown out the window, just to be replaced with full CG effects.
Yes the costume designers would be furious but replacing just the eye or part of someone change and keep everything practical would be hard ( not impossible but will take time) , because the real suit has wrinkles and cg one doesn't, so making it completely cg, atleast if they dont have time, then it is the correct choice.
@@Anonymous-tu4pl but if it’s easier, at that point they would have been better off using mocap suites. And isn’t it good that it wrinkles? It’s more realistic, like clothes doesn’t naturally look vacuum sealed like that. I personally liked the old Spider-Man costume from the raimi films purely for that reason, it looks realistic because they don’t overdo the cgi and make it look as smooth as possible
@@laytonpro8655 Yes that is 100% accurate but mocap is also a lot expensive. They used mocap for spiderman in infinity war, endgame and far from home( far from home has 90% cgi cars cities spiderman etc)
@@spider-man500 the reason they didn't keep going was because Garfield either was sick and didn't come in to a meeting or he wanted to work on another project as shown hacksaw ridge hes a damn good actor he might make a return
@Snehil Shrey He specifically said he loved the movie, but felt like it didn't capture the spirit of spiderman in that video. That means he's still excited to watch the thing, but isn't exactly convinced that it's really a good spiderman movie.
@@robl0xgamer258 tasm 2 was probably the best and the most realistic web swing cgi they ever made in a Spider-Man film, don't get me wrong they copy pasted the whole suit with cgi in Far from home but the best part about this is mysterio because why the fuq not he's a Cg artist like in real life and that illusion looks perfect to me I guess but marvel has completely overused cgi with a big budget, sometimes it's fake on the little details but they forgetting the practical stunts that they did before the mcu movies. Sony should hire those VFX team artist in tasm 2. You know what my biggest problem about the whole Spider-Man franchise is AVI FUCKING ARAD (SONY EXECUTIVE PRODUCER AND CO-FOUNDER OF MARVEL) SELLING TOYS FOR BULLSHIT!
@@robl0xgamer258 Sony Imageworks did the VFX for both the TASM movies which looks amazing. Most VFX companies do a pretty good job and from my understanding, Problems like these arise due to poor direction and time management and stuff like that.
One of the reasons why TDK trilogy and other Nolan's movies because he knows when to use cgi and not to overuse it. I love that in batman begins there actually is batmobile driving on roofs and minimal cgi.
@@thedestroyer2alltrolls411 so true. Tbh I hate almost all Marvel films. The only Marvel films I like was Spider Man 1, Spider Man 2 and the amazing Spider-Man
@@Hadex01 I can't get into MCU either. I liked The Incredible Hulk but my favourite superhero movies are the Raimi trilogy. Even TASM movies were decent. I just can't stand the MCU humour, it very rarely works for me.
@@crashfan9997 ikr. There's like an INTENSE situation and the audience is on the edge of their seats to see what aboutta happen and boom, a stupid, Corny ass joke
Genuinly curious what was the point of making Holland's DIY suit CGI. I could understand the main suit considering the flat, tight look they were going for (even if I disagree with that stylistic choice), but the DIY suit seems like it would be more effort than it's worth to CGI
@@nolan.. I mean the DIY does look flawed, but I don’t see the point of going to the effort of making CGI to look flawed, when you could just do the real thing
@@branpod I think its convenience. I mean what happens when someone damages the suit is what comes to my mind. Props like that probably cost a lot and just make doing normal movements a lot harder. Again I have no idea but that set spider man suit probably is made out of some sort of rubber or stiff material. And on top of that I cant remember if it was another movie or something else but I watched a video about someone wearing a thick suit for something. When its hot outside, I think they said like above 75f the actor could easily overheat causing heat stroke. So in the instance im referring to they had to implement water lines throughout the suit and hide a water pump on him as well to make sure that wouldnt happen.
There was also the general worry that Holland would puke in his skin tight suit while filming and then inhale that, so there were good reasons for switching to CGI
Infinity War was garbage looking. Not for the cgi, though a lot of the CG is really bad and fake looking. The problem is the color pallet. It is so monochromatic grey. The direction is nothing to write home about, so you are stuck with not only boring pictures, but grey ones. Come on Marvel! Shoot on film. You can afford it!
Cyro XVX and mostly unnecessary because a lot of the times they could have partially implemented a CGI solution to complement what was already there instead of just replacing it entirely thus making redundant whatever the actors were already wearing.
César Acosta that how effects work dude. Most of the time the actors are wearing something similar to what they will cgi in later so they can make the cgi look more natural on the body. They also use cgi completely in more action heavy scenes because it can look really jarring to go back and forth between practical and cgi for the full body type stuff
MCU fangirls are a cult. They think watching these movies (which I enjoy btw) are a religious ritual and cannot be profaned by even the slightest criticism.
go back and watch ironman 1 to see how photorealistic the scenes looked. The Mark II and Mark III looked SO good compared to the more recent suits. They actually looked like real car exteriors.
I like that the suits felt heavier and packed a punch. It's cool that Tony made improvements on his suits' speed and agility but sometimes the movements don't look right.
@@jarhead3571 the CGI makes it look less fluid and more robotic or cartoonish. But however I do respect their use of practical affects on tonys armor. I'd like to point out how his form seems ridiculus and animated, his arms are hyper extended at sometimes and doesnt seem very real to me. makes wonder if they had the same team that created the black panther final fight scene
Iron Man 1 was great because the director knew how to combine practical effects and CGI. He made that scene with Robert Downey Jr. running through a field of mines, all real explosions because he wanted it to look realistic, needless to say Downey thought he was an asshole. 😂 But they really kept it well. Marvel threw those values down to shit after that unfortunately.
Weird, I thought that the earlier movies look very out of place at times. However, I do think it's better than the phase 3 approach. The phase 2 suits looked the best in my opinion. Aside from Ultron, that was shit.
D I M A T R O N any clue why Black Panther is one of Marvel’s highest grossing movie? It’s garbage and everytime I expressed my hatred towards the movie, people call me racist like WTF?!
I still think that Tobey Maguire's suit is the best live-action suit we've ever seen. It still holds up 20 years later - doesn't feel dated, the head mask's eyes look great and menacing.... Don't get my started on the Black Suit - perfection.
@@demskittlesdoe1168 wow trashing a movie where it was at the breaking point of a CGI with no actual consideration of its quality... You're a deeply intelligent man sir
@@filipe8673 okay?? That doesn't change the fact he looked like a toy, have you seen iron man? I love the Raimi trilogy, but he still looked like a toy sometimes, disregarding the fact of the matter was very intelligent of you 🥶🥶
Obviously I could tell it was cgi, but I thought it was amazing until I saw the comparison between the all cgi and the practical suit. Still, I think the way it looks more like a comic book isn't 100% a bad thing.
I agree. The final fight for black panther was just horrendous and so much CGI was used. Killmonger vs Black Panther felt like a video game I wasn’t actually playing.
@Snehil Shrey by the logic he's using, no it isn't. The characters in Infinity War looked very real. Environments are also generally of higher quality than character models anyways. It's not surprising that the environments look realistic. But our focus is on the characters. That's what we're supposed to be looking at. That needs to have the biggest priority.
My biggest disappointment with No Way Home was the CGI, that movie deserved more refined effects, it was frustrating at times, we were seeing such epic scenes, but it felt like they were all digital dolls, the final fight was really ugly, NWH Andrew and TASM2 Andrew are RIDICULOUSLY different, tasm2 vfx are infinitely better than nhw
you gotta understand the CG suit is on purpose there not supposed to have winkles on it for comic accurate reasons and its stark created tech its ameant to fit smoothly across his body
@@glocktop916 but it didnt felt real, i didnt look like there was a body under the suit, and that "velvet" effect that made it blurry just made it even less real. At least for me
Well yeah, instead of dealing with the logistics and obstacles of a a movie shoot, just outsource it to another company you trust and give them pointers every now and then
@@alvareo92 I mean... Why even shoot at all. Modern day CGI is good enough to create 100% believable humans, but they are still actually filming stuff. They do a lot of stunts in real life so...
@@_yujin_ People have created almost 100% believable close up shots of humans. We have the technology and people that can do it. Not saying its easy SMH
thats actually the opposite reason why they use so much cgi. most fields that do practical effects in america have labor unions that means they cant be overworked or underpaid. outsourcing work to asian cgi studios that have no unions save marvel enough money to pay all the a-list overpaid celebrities their 10-50 mil to act out a scene with a stand in.
Just when I thought I had begun to hate The Amazing Spider-Man 2 as much as everyone else does, you show me that footage of the Andrew Garfield suit and remind me how gorgeous and perfect it really was.
The suit and the web swinging are the best we’ve seen to date. Definitely has the best cgi in my opinion. Wouldn’t really say that makes up for all the movie’s shortcomings
Having Tom Holland wear an entire spiderman suit that was custom made specifically for his body only to cover it all up with cgi is not only a huge waste of money but an insult to the costume designer. They’re basically saying that the practical suit wasn’t good enough so they had to completely redo it in post. Also it makes no sense that they would make Robert Downy run around set wearing that probably heavy iron man torso just to complete cgi it. There wouldn’t be a floating head problem either because Downy was wearing an actual suit torso all they needed to do was cgi him from the waist down.
@@alvareo92 And when it's the Hulkbuster suit, it's probably better to not open it up to show the head. The head part is just not proportional to a human head.
Noredoos No I’m not hating on marvel, I just don’t like what marvel does with the insanely overused cgi. They should atleast use it in some scenes that really need it.
I don’t like sand oh your right sorry for going overboard I see what you're saying. And they should stop overusing CGI it kinda gets boring. Like when I'm watching a movie I want it to feel real not everything full of CGI.
The only thing that got me in infinity war was when Mark Ruffalo was in the hulk buster, it literally just looked like his head was floating there i was staring at it every scene
LeagueofMeta the iron man suit also looked pretty fake. the children of Thanos also looked a bit video gamey, especially Proximum Midnight. but Thanos looked great.
I do agree that they use too much CGI. But in my opinion, when its done perfectly I love it. Thanos for example. Photo realistic, but like the thumbnail, Spidermans suit in homecoming and more Civil war, but still. I hope in Far Frome Home they dial down on the CGI and hope we get to see a great looking spiderman.
It was so sad to see doc ock in Spiderman NWH. He was only CGI.. comparing that to how beautiful and amazing he looks with the practical effects from Spider Man 2 when they literally had puppeteers controlling his arms for real. It was a sad moment in the new spider man. Otherwise I did enjoy it a lot!
Sam Raimis movies are always full on passion projects. You can feel how authentic those movies are. Real story and real practical effects mixed with tasteful cgi. Movies are a business now so no one stops to try and be real or do something properly
God is forever you can have an opinion without being able to do the thing. For instance having an opinion on a piece of art without being able to to do any better.
God is forever oh my god you dont have to be producing movies to judge a fucking movie. most film critics arent creating huge budget movies. as the consumer of that content i have every right to judge it
@@htsunmiku Indeed but that's not necessarily a good thing. that's why I chose to become a developer over a designer. Developers don't get to spend hours of their life discussing why green would be better than blue. But I agree with you, those CGI finales ruin many good movies. The end of the Harry Potter movies in some vague unreal cgi setting were a good example of that.
It was going so well until then. When the big battle started, I thought "okay, this is a little rough but I can work with it." When the rhinos came in, I thought "okay... This is a little worse. But not ruining the scene." Then _that_ fight happened, and I was completely pulled out of the action. I hope they do a digital remaster or something someday.
They're relying on cgi too much. You can tell when there's been hard work put in when they don't use cgi. They should only use cgi where they can't but they've gone backwards and done everything cgi and little realistic as possible.
To this day i still think the Amazing Spider-man 2 has the best cgi spider-man we’ve ever seen. Not even No Way Home could replicate this for their characters, and it made the Spider-men all look like the suit was their skin. The Amazing Spider-man 2 crew focused on making it really feel like their was a person *in a suit* by making the suit fit a little looser than real life on the cgi models in their simulations giving the effect of a spandex suit reacting to wind and gravity *on top* of a person, rather than how the mcu crew often focuses more on the person than the suit, making the suit define muscles more giving it an extremely skin tight effect untrue to reality, crossing that uncanny valley and making the mcu Spider-man incarnations look like the suit is their skin. Marvel’s effects team should really look back on Tasm2 and take some notes.
Well I mean... It was the best, I can confirm that 100%... But saying thay they could not replicate it is just mean towards the VFX houses. I bet that its not their resposibiliyy to choose what spidy looks like. Its the directors. So saying that they could not replicate is just... Wrong. I bet they could easily make it as amazing, but at the end, its a movie not a fashion show.
@@weasel4674 Marvel, as a studio, doesnt make most the VFX my guy nor they fully control the budget or the deadline. they out source it to different studios that have 0 control over the deadline and budget. I do feel bad for them because it's a team of passionate individuals, probably underpaid and overworked, that tried to make the best out of an impossible situation. They also gave us some of the best cgi in the Marvel universe during Guardians do the Galaxy. Movies (Yes, EVERY movie) is a business, like it or not. These movies cost hundreds of millions of dollars to make. They arent just farting these out, it takes many months of dedication and focus to deliver so many products in a timely manner and still make profit. The many studios and people that work on these really love what they do and can't help but follow orders from a select few higher ups with the money. Want to blame someone? look up the producers, not the studio.
Corridor Digital did a great job going more in depth on the final Black Panther fight. Marvel rushed the hell out of the company and they couldn't add in things like correct motion blur, better lighting, etc. Marvel gave the company 6 weeks to do an entire third act fight scene between two black-suit characters in a dark cave. It isn't the VFX fault here. It's entirely Marvel for this.
"So we're stuck with two cartoons fighting." Absolutely agree with everything in this video. When climactic scenes are 100% CGI and I know it, I have a hard time getting emotionally invested in the outcome. It's like watching a video game.
@@peanutgallery4 Once again, I said "It's like WATCHING a video game," not "It's like PLAYING a video game." Playing, you're involved. Watching someone else play, not so much.
I don't really care if it's CGI and neither do the majority of people. I have been emotionally invested watching a video game. I don't even care about the matrix CGI or the worst CGI you can think of. I wouldn't be that phased if I even saw a damn boom mic in the corner of a shot. Because it's like a book, you can still use your imagination to be immersed.
The Black Panther trailer got me more hyped than any trailer ever has, but that part almost ruined the entire rest of it for me. I was like, "Oh shit...this is going to be a cartoon."
the CGI is impressive, but at the same time there are so many situations where its kinda odd to use instead of actor or practical, it went from correcting and adding, to totally creating.
I thought I was the only one. The homecoming suit is probably my least favorite in the films, but I use it so much in the PS4 game. It looks especially real during rain.
I think that’s because the suit blends in more with the environments in the game since it’s fully animated. In the movie the visuals of cgi and reality tend to contrast more.
I thought this was a recent vid lol. Marvel's CGI problem has gotten much, much worse since this was uploaded. Many VFX artists are now speaking out against Marvel for being the worst client to work for. The only thing from 2018/Infinity War that looked questionable was Ruffalo's floating head when he was in the Hulkbuster armour. You can almost do a revisit of this topic for Phase 4. It's pretty terrible lol.
As someone who's trying to break into the VFX industry I can tell you why they "overuse" CGI, it simply gives them much more control over a scene. With CGI, if the director doesn't like the lighting in a shot, or the camera isn't moving at the right speed then these variables can be easily adjusted before being rendered out. With a practical shot, you're kind of screwed unless you reshoot the scene with proper lighting or try to get the VFX team to fix it in post which will most likely result in an ugly scene,. Instead of henry cavill's mustache getting cut off his face in post (which was ugly as all hell), they should've just replaced his whole head with CGI in justice league. Which brings me to the next point, the reasons why we get some CGI that goes unnoticed and some that looks like an eyesore is thanks to time and money. If there's a studio that has spectacular work in one film and less than stellar work in another, it's probably because they weren't paid enough for the job or weren't given enough time. VFX artists can sometimes go overworked and underpaid
This, i was one of the artists who worked on the house explosion scene in x men, they shot a massive explosion indoor with phantom cameras, beautiful footage. it was not used and everything had to be redone in cg because the timing off the flames was off and the camera movement didn't sync with the idea of the shot (it was a moving camera shooting at a very high fps). the entire thing was recreated using the original scene as reference and trying to keep things as close as possible. we also have deadlines to complete shots/shows and a studio is often understaffed and juggling multiple shows at one time, each having its own priority. it's not possible to put 100% of a companies resources into every show all the time
But why would a film studio need complete control of a well-made suit that they've created to fit the actor? I understand the need to fix lighting and explosions, but digitally replacing a suit that's already been made may seems like a waste of money to me.
It makes sense, but at the same time, it doesn't due to the context. We are talking about MARVEL here... not an underground / upcoming / etc movie maker, but a multi-billion dollar industry. It makes ZERO sense why they would skimp out of production, especially when they have basically unlimited funds. They are not pressured by anything, so there's no reason for them to rush production, as people will watch literally anything they produce. In the end, it just feels lazy and stupid.
yes but then after 10-20 years or so...there will be movies with almost 100% cgi/VFX just like disney pixa's animated films but ultra realistic. The actors will just record their voice in a studio and maybe do some motion capture.
In my experience, when good vfx studios produce bad effects, 90% of the time is because of a too-tight schedule (and yeah, that's the exact percentage :-P )
@Alexander Kerensky Tarantino don't really if you don't count shit like removing safety wires and stuff like that. He's very much so purist when it comes to that stuff. They just transformed Hollywood boulevard for him for Once Upon a Time. He has said that it's ok to use if the actor/stuntman is going to die otherwise. So he uses it so minimal that I wouldn't say he's a good example.
I way prefer the look of the practical suit. I wish they would only animate the eyes and shit like webs and that. Practical may look less “impressive” but it feels way more real and thats what I want.
Great video. It always stuck out to me how Favreau's Ironman looked damn near perfect compared to the rest. I have a special appreciation for directors who go an extra mile with practical effects. Favreau's Ironman, Nolan's Batman, and a good chunk of Snyder's Watchmen.
I hear what you're saying about covering up the suit if they made a practical one. The hard work of the costume designers doesn't do overlooked, in fact they create the 3d model based EXACTLY off of the costume made by the designers. And they cover up the suits with CGI most of the time to hide imperfections in the joints, and where armor overlaps. You can see in almost every shot whether it's ironman, Spiderman, or black panther that the practical suit looks terrible. That's because the helmet of ironman isn't connected, or the Spidey suit has giant wires underneath Tom's suit that bulge out, or straps that flare out from the black panther suit. They replace the suit completely in many shots because when they shoot it practically it usually looks WORSE. With exception, the black panther suits looked almost flawless, but when you're shooting and the actors are moving 70% of the time it looks clunky and weird. So I have to respectfully disagree because I understand how all of these shots are made in post production. Hats off to all VFX teams everywhere, you guys make movies what they're supposed to be.
@@tortisluvzu9678 those elements were definitely taken to consideration. When you design a suit/costume it's best to represent the characters who wear it. This is pretty standard stuff
FINALLY someone is making a video about this, Marvel's CGI has been a big problem for me in their past movies (especially homecoming) and whenever I give my opinion marvel fanboys keep saying ‘OH BUY HAVE YOU SEEN SUPERMAN'S MOUSTACHE IN JL’
Yes, I'm so thankful to see I'm not the only one who thinks this. The MCU is becoming increasingly fake looking and I hate it, I miss Iron Man's more tangible and practical armors, and Marvel constantly covering up real costumes with video game CGI is infuriating.
I noticed the Crap CGI for the Homecoming suit straight away and nobody seemed to talk about it much 'cept me. This is the video we need but don't deserve...
A lot of people like me just don't care to notice. It certainly looks more realistic than the actual hand drawn comic books, and people loved those. It's the same reason nobody complains about the low quality CGI when they watch Toy Story 1995, because it actually isn't that relevant to the immersion unless you make it (ie have no concept of imagination).
11 месяцев назад+3
6:59 This scene right here is pure art, the way that they applyed physics on this 3d model is just perfect
8:04 "What happened?" They had like 2 weeks to design, produce, and render the fight scene before the movie was set to release. So... yeah... was not going to be there best work
I been saying to myself for years that Marvel CGI sometimes look HORRIBLE and overused. Iron man 1 suits looked the best cause they were real. In civil war looks like his head is floating on a cartoon character. Spiderman’s suit isnt as bad. But i feel like I am playing the PS4 game. Edit i made this comment before watching video to see u made many of the same points haha
Lol, still cant beat Catwoman's realistic CGI. I couldn't even tell if it was fake or not. Catwoman is unbeatable in every aspect of cinema/filmmaking.
Iron Man 1 was a full CG suit. I worked with a VFX artist who used to be in Iron Man 1. They ended up replacing everything. This whole "glossing the bad practical" is horse shit. you can't just "mix" practical suit with CG without making it look disconnected. Especially if they're made from the same material.
That's because CGI is not about tricking your eye, it is about tricking your mind. He could show you a clip of an actual REAL suit and tell you how fake it looks, and once your mind accepts it being CGI as a fact, you'll "notice" how fake it looks.
@@adamnfiddle8065 mate. I literally working in the industry. When I wrote that comment I was rendering a shot. I worked as a compositor and prep artist. I wasn't talking about Mad Max style of "VFX and practical" blend. I'm talking about literally patching up missing Iron Man suit with CG. The suit that RDJ wore in Iron Man 1 was reference for both actors and VFX artist. They aren't what u see in the final screen. Having Iron Man be practical from the waist up and then merge it with CG Legs and make it seamless is extremely time consuming. It's much cheaper and easier to replace everything.
Pedro Fernandes black panther sucked Idk why so many people liked I’m not racist but they could have done better like following the comics instead of some gay civil war shit
My biggest problem is with Spiderman, it hits me with uncanny valley all over, mostly in Civil War. The sad part is that Spidey is my favorite character, I think not only the CGI mask, but the lack of texture kills me.
another problem not helping that is that most all of the marvel movies after the avengers have a little bit of a washed out grey look to them at times especially in digitally constructed scenes that doesnt help detail pop
I personally like the Sam Raimi spidey suit, even though it's not considered "comic book accurate" by other Marvel fans. But in the end, who gives a shit if it ain't accurate😂
I hate how they cover everything up. This sucks. Why? What's the point? There's no reason! You have it all! You have everything there recorded already! Why erase it and make it CGI?
kyotobynight yeah...I fought with someone on Instagram once who was trying to tell me that it had objectively great CGI. I was so confused how someone could possibly watch that and believe that.
The problem, and I’m not being sarcastic (and it goes beyond Marvel fans) is folks today, particularly the younger people who are also the most rabid consumers of these films, are very ignorant. Because they’ve grown up in a post-digital world with disposable films/music/culture/whatever, they really don’t have an understanding of film or the 100+ years it’s been around for. So to them, the latest and most hyped summer blockbuster (which likely has a toxic fandom that seems more akin to soccer hooliganism than actual love of the franchise) is legitimately one of the greatest, deepest, highest quality example of the art form. Because to them, nothing existed before about 2010. And that’s why you get some dopey kid on the internet talking up Black Panther as the best VFX not just of the year, but perhaps the history of the planet Earth.
[A2] Army true, I’d be surprised if it took longer than ps8. So every PS comes out like every 7 years. And ps5 is coming out 2020. So another 22 years and we’re photorealistic.
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
Check out the first Catwoman Sermon at my Squarespace website browntableent.squarespace.com/
And send me your most enticing, creative Squarespace websites to BrowntableEntertainment@gmail.com before December 15th so I can show them off in my next video essay!!!
Browntable you are so right in this video!!!!
I saw the dark knight rises the other day and during that plane scene I thought: take note marvel!
Practical over visual any day of the week
Brilliant Analysis.
I'm actually still stunned that they built "The Bat" for TDKR, it looked gorgeous
Thanks, I sincerely appreciate it :)
@@Browntable
Could u do more of the BIAM series
And Ur welcome; )
CGI has never really bothered me...
Until Black Panther. That fight scene between T'Challa and Killmonger is literally just animation.
Kweem _ sammmeee
Me toi. I rarely even notice when cgi is being used but Black Panther bothered me with how fake it looked.
I found Thor Ragnarok to be pretty fucking terrible most of the time. Usually in movies, its jarring when you see something that isnt CGI'd that well because of how it really stands out among real things in the scene. Ragnarok was the opposite. Everything was so poorly animated that it was jarring when something real entered the scene.
@@yeetusdeletus9 do u think only the animation/CGI is terrible? Or the whole movie?
That was scene shot and given to the post production studio with less than six weeks to complete.
This video is still accurate even 3 years later. The CGI in No Way Home was jarring sometimes. Especially the final swing
When Andrew fckn jumps out of the portal though... WHY CAN'T U JUST USE A HUMAN
to be fair the reason it looks so jarring ia because of the conditions they were working under
They spent all their cgi on dock ock lol
When Andrew caught MJ...bruh...looked like those rubber chickens you squished and then it inflates back into place
@@poopfilms8873 Literally took me out of the scene
The final fight in black panther looks like it hasn’t finished rendering
Well they made over a Billion dollars with a B. So they did something right
@@davidaxelsson695 that has nothing to do with how bad it looks
They were probably given a ridiculous deadline. It looks like a test render lol
It's a ps2 cutscene fight
@@ohio rather get paid to cgi hulks ass
Spider-Man 2 (2004) ended up winning an Oscar for VFX, is a great example of when to use CGI and when to not.
They created real Animatronic arms for Doc Ock. The iconic Train Sequence took two years to complete. Not because they couldn’t use CGI. It’s because they want it to look as realistic as it can. They even went to Chicago to film elevated Train tracks then merged it with the clips of New York buildings and then applied little VFX as a final touch up to the characters.
As far as I know, it was also the first movie to do a 4k CGI intermediate. So, the Doc Ock CGI was native 4k, but the Dock Ock CGI in No Way Home was 2k upscaled to 4k. Making it look even faker.
Ock's arms in Spider-Man 2 were just streets ahead of the CGI ones in his recent return. They had real character.
The CGI in TASM 2 is honestly the best, too bad the script couldn't live up to the VFX
Yeah it was really good
agree, TASM 2 best cji of all spidey movies imo. but fr the script ruined it
Gabriel what is a cji
The attention to detail in ASM2's effects is incredible. The wrinkling, adjusting to wind/various physical forces, lighting/reflections and textures. Awesome work.
They put all their budget on the suit
I heard that the CGI fight between T'Challa and Killmonger was being worked on for months by Method Studios, and then literally 6 weeks before deadline, production was like "Let's change LITERALLY EVERYTHING." So... yeah. Method basically had to scrap everything they had done and create and render that entire scene from scratch over the course of like 6 weeks.
From what I've heard, VFX get treated like absolute crap in the industry. They're artists, not miracle workers. They need time and also money. And no one in Hollywood wants to give them either. It really sucks :(
Yeah. It's really unfortunate that the film industry has adopted the "fix it in post" mentality and taken it to its extreme. It's just not an efficient way to go about it. Especially if you actually hire costume designers to make practical costumes and then just scrap all their hard work. You just end up wasting time and money. And making the visual effects teams work much harder than they could be.
If you compare the budget of many of the recent Marvel films to films made by someone like Guillermo del Toro who uses as many practical special effects as possible you end up with a cheaper and more realistic looking film. If Marvel wants to make everything "photo realistic" why not actually capture it in-camera if you can? It's just counter intuitive.
@@NickDe3 I'm chiming in here 4 years later to say that there are two reasons why Christopher Nolan does so many practical effects in his films:
1. Because he wants whatever he makes to hold up in the future. He knows and understands people are going to dissect his work. To watch it in slow motion, to freeze frames for examination. So as an artist, it's important to him that it holds up in such scrutiny and of course, in the experience of the film to make it as seamless and not-distracting as possible. Which is not to say that he is anti-VFX. He merely wants to use it strategically, to enhance whatever is actually there. His favorite use of VFX seems to be covering wires for low gravity scenes such as in Inception and Interstellar.
2. *Because he always comes in under budget.* Nolan knows that if he goes over budget and has to go back to the studios to ask for more money, that's when he loses his creative authority. They'll say "Since you're asking for money, I want you to include XYZ your film or you won't get the money." But if you plan and execute well, you don't end up with these kinds of cost overruns. The Lear scene at the beginning of The Dark Knight Rises was planned to be executed and filmed over 4 days. The actual amount of time spent filming was only 2 days. You just cut hourly crew costs in half right there for what is considered to be an exceptional scene. In an article I read when Interstellar was coming out, it said that Nolan always returns "a substantial amount of money" to the studios when he's finished his movies. His minimalist approach to VFX is not just an artistic strategy, but also a financial one. VFX is often one of the most expensive parts of making a movie these days.
CGI saturation takes me out of movies so much. Watching older movies with practical effects and a strong focus on story is a breath of fresh air.
Basically the best example of what you said: Jurassic park 1 vs the Jurassic world dumpster fires
Bro there is still story but ur astic marvel fan
@@Untilted_Tundra I can see proof-reading is a non-existent concept for you.
just like my grandpa said, "it's all better back then"
It's also incredibly overwhelming, it just feels like they're showing off what they can do at this point.
Costume designers: "Here's a real life, tangible, photo-realistic suit that we spent hours and hours on"
Marvel: "Cool, we're gonna make the whole thing CGI"
Costume designers: "But why?"
Marvel: "Because"
Costume designers : "Fair enough"
Designers: we're still getting paid right?
"Oh, putting CGI on everything is TIGHT!
@@royalroyal2210 wow wow wow. Wow.
Because we're greedy, money hungry assholes.
They made a cg eye patch for Odin in Thor Ragnarok ...... I totally agree with you about the overuse of cgi nowadays
I wonder how much of it is down to the actors and time pressure. You wouldn't think Anthony Hopkins would be bothered by sitting around for an hour or so in makeup gettiing an eyepatch, but who knows. Pretty sure the reason Iron Man became almost exclusively CGI is because RDJ was getting heat exhaustion in the suit, you might say "just build a better suit" but Hollywood ain't got time for that.
Well for that it was literally because the eyepatch was uncomfortable for Hemsworth to wear
@@bunnarchist8965 but he isn't talking Odin not thor
@@MrSnaztastic nah they have been using cgi since the first iron man bro cgi is pivotal in film making these days or else you wouldn't get cool things like iron man's suit individually piecing together or basically all his fight scenes
The real eye patch always fell off so they said fuck it
The problem I have with Homecoming and ESPECIALLY Far From Home is that I could tell what was CG and what wasn't. I wouldn't say that is a good thing
Jack Harrison with far from home in parts that’s on purpose. You have to remember that the whole plot is basically real life CGI.
@@Mtab2260 I'm sorry, but that just sounds like an excuse to justify bad CGI. There's no excuse to slather Spiderman with CG while he's just standing in a boat with Nick Fury. Or him perched simply on a lampost. It's lame
Jack Harrison how about when he’s perched on a lamp post gravity doesn’t work that way. And he doesn’t actually have powers from a radioactive spider. Also it’s like Holograms in Star Wars. They’re blue and fuzzy so we can tell the difference. This is the same thing.
@@Mtab2260 well the lampost would be pretty easy. Just have a prop lampost, doesn't even have to be the full thing, and have Tom perch/balance on it with wires and a green screen in the background. That's a super easy thing to do practically.
@@Mtab2260 That's a bad excuse since they could've kept Peter in bone and flesh, while making the sorroundings CGI, both IRL and CGI would stand out? Yes
Would that be bad? No, because we already as an audience know how the powers of Mysterio work.
Marvel : makes cool suits
Also Marvel : covers it up with CGI
Atleast DC have real costumes.
@@Songittheledgebog Yes but DC also has Batwoman. Case closed.
Jonathan Evans To be fair marvel has Brie Larson but I see your point
Suit: Am I a joke to you?
whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy. i loved this spidey suit too but we hardly got to see it. it looked better in civil war.
It’s the same issue with Black Widow and Shang-Chi, the CGI looks unfinished. The scene where Yelena jumps onto the helicopter looks awful and so does the scaffold fight scene. It was actually ridiculous.
Well.. we're in the pandemic..I guess? That's what they said why Nwh has so much deleted scenes and scrapped ideas.
@@HowdyJ.Marston Yeah but if the film isn’t ready then they shouldn’t release it 🤷♀️ I can understand having to scrap ideas but even the majority of No Way Home’s scenes looked way better. If they haven’t finished the CG then why release it? Simple. They couldn’t hold off releasing those movies anymore and thought people wouldn’t care as much, so they dumped them in cinemas and then started streaming them almost immediately to take whatever money they could get. And they hoped people wouldn’t notice. They didn’t take that chance with No Way Home because they knew it would be big.
@@EmmaGrei i agree, they even played "fixed" version of the movie in the theaters. Where the cgi in some scenes were improved..like some videogame version patches.
I didn't really notice anything in shang chi, it looked good.
@@MuhammadSalman7236 The bad cgi stuck out at times like when Shang-Chi is hanging off of the train and the dragon fight at the end.
Gotta say, i think The Amazing Spiderman suit has got to be the best spiderman suit put on film, like i get that movie wasn't the best but damn that suit man, its bloody beautiful in that opening scene
SeedeeStevie743 it is
Everything was perfect , cgi, spidey Sense , humour, achting , action only the Script was trash
Yes the Amazing Spider Man suit was fucking awesome
I loved both.I liked how the tasm 1 suit re invented the design and how tasm 2 gave the original design its own flair without straying too far from the source material.
Yup. Best Spidey suit on film ever.
This video takes me back to when they actually made Doc Ock’s ARMS in the Raimi Film.
IT WAS SO EPIC!!! It was just genius SFX at work.
Spidey 3 had great CGI too. I compared both the Venoms, and the Spiderman 3 Venom and the suit (especially the symbiote) movement looked really realistic. The new Venom looks way too glossy and plasticky and just weird from a texture point of view.
@@mushrifahmed8107 The CGI on Tom Hardy's Venom looks like glossy but keep in mind that the character dynamics between Venom and Brock are part of the charm. Also, the looks of the Symbiote looks slimy and creepy in a weird way. It looks like an enormous blob that attempts to eat you.
Spider-Man 2 didn't win its VFX Oscar for nothing, the film has such beautifully crafted effects shots and techniques. Hell, the VFX artist went through the trouble of setting up a zipline camera setup (ironically named "Spider-Cam") through the streets of New York and Chicago (the latter was for the train scene since there weren't any elevated train stations in New York with wide enough spaces to setup the Spider-Cam).
And so of course Tom Holland said today the arms are fully CG....lmao
It’s all because practical effects and makeup are unionized and vfx departments aren’t
The costume department must have been furious. All that effort to make a really cool Spider-Man costume tailor fitted to Tom Holland and then have cgi go over the top of it? Why? It’s a waste of money on cgi too
I am surprised the costume designers haven't argued about this issue towards the people who are making these movies. They put so much work on these suits, yet all that hard work is thrown out the window, just to be replaced with full CG effects.
Getting all that Disney money changes a man
Yes the costume designers would be furious but replacing just the eye or part of someone change and keep everything practical would be hard ( not impossible but will take time) , because the real suit has wrinkles and cg one doesn't, so making it completely cg, atleast if they dont have time, then it is the correct choice.
@@Anonymous-tu4pl but if it’s easier, at that point they would have been better off using mocap suites. And isn’t it good that it wrinkles? It’s more realistic, like clothes doesn’t naturally look vacuum sealed like that. I personally liked the old Spider-Man costume from the raimi films purely for that reason, it looks realistic because they don’t overdo the cgi and make it look as smooth as possible
@@laytonpro8655 Yes that is 100% accurate but mocap is also a lot expensive. They used mocap for spiderman in infinity war, endgame and far from home( far from home has 90% cgi cars cities spiderman etc)
TASM series literally has the most realistic web swinging and CGI work
That didn’t save the franchise 😂
@@spider-man500 the reason they didn't keep going was because Garfield either was sick and didn't come in to a meeting or he wanted to work on another project as shown hacksaw ridge hes a damn good actor he might make a return
And one of the best spider man suits of all time
@@spider-man500 that's stupid, of course it matters. TASM was a godawful series & nobody cares about the technical work when the plot is that bad
@@BeeHatGuy rewatch TASM. It's better than Homecoming and FFH lol
CGI is like spices: they improve everything if used carefully.
if you try to create a dish purely out of spices, its gonna fail
Happalula very well explained
What about salt? It enhances flavours but add too much and it's gonna kill the sauce.
Imagine eatinng a whole ginger only covered with bbq sauce
Exactly!
Pretty much this, they can create practical suits and touch them up with cgi here and there
RIP FFH Suit. You were beautiful and now you’ll probably look like a cartoon.
I hope they don’t replace it with rubberized Spiderman. Sony Imageworks is one of the more “okay” VFX companies so I’m genuinely scared.
@Snehil Shrey He specifically said he loved the movie, but felt like it didn't capture the spirit of spiderman in that video. That means he's still excited to watch the thing, but isn't exactly convinced that it's really a good spiderman movie.
@@Browntable I know I'm late, but Sony Imageworks did a good job with TASM2's CGI though.
@@robl0xgamer258 tasm 2 was probably the best and the most realistic web swing cgi they ever made in a Spider-Man film, don't get me wrong they copy pasted the whole suit with cgi in Far from home but the best part about this is mysterio because why the fuq not he's a Cg artist like in real life and that illusion looks perfect to me I guess but marvel has completely overused cgi with a big budget, sometimes it's fake on the little details but they forgetting the practical stunts that they did before the mcu movies. Sony should hire those VFX team artist in tasm 2. You know what my biggest problem about the whole Spider-Man franchise is AVI FUCKING ARAD (SONY EXECUTIVE PRODUCER AND CO-FOUNDER OF MARVEL) SELLING TOYS FOR BULLSHIT!
@@robl0xgamer258 Sony Imageworks did the VFX for both the TASM movies which looks amazing. Most VFX companies do a pretty good job and from my understanding, Problems like these arise due to poor direction and time management and stuff like that.
as much as I hate TASM2... I wholeheartedly agree its cgi was way ahead of its time... the suit looks real af even when its a 100% cgi shot!!!
That final fight was pretty much all CGI and that is incredible tbh
It's an "Amazing" suit. It was so good they even used the CGI for close ups and it still looked real.
I LOVED the opening scene, how the logo fades and is replaced by the logo on the suit
The electro and the rhino CGI were crap at times. Apart from that, it was pretty much fine.
not ahead of its time. These new films are just lazy
One of the reasons why TDK trilogy and other Nolan's movies because he knows when to use cgi and not to overuse it. I love that in batman begins there actually is batmobile driving on roofs and minimal cgi.
@Castor Tarantino Infinity War and Endgame are overrated.
@@thedestroyer2alltrolls411 💯
@@thedestroyer2alltrolls411 so true. Tbh I hate almost all Marvel films. The only Marvel films I like was Spider Man 1, Spider Man 2 and the amazing Spider-Man
@@Hadex01 I can't get into MCU either. I liked The Incredible Hulk but my favourite superhero movies are the Raimi trilogy. Even TASM movies were decent. I just can't stand the MCU humour, it very rarely works for me.
@@crashfan9997 ikr. There's like an INTENSE situation and the audience is on the edge of their seats to see what aboutta happen and boom, a stupid, Corny ass joke
Pixar uses too much CGI
Well they should 🤐
@@praveenneevarp4822 Your Picard profile photo is reacting to you missing the joke.
@@praveenneevarp4822 r/woooosh
Ikr damn just make actual toys come to live using voodoo magic it's so easy. And if you're really lazy just turn Satanist and boom ez money
Lmao
Marvel: I'll do it myself.
snap!
Half the universe become CGI...
Your pfp, I like it
gabriel dropout?
Another intellectual 👌👌👌
you could argue that actually happened in the film.
...and owned by Disney
Far from home was all CGI you predicted the future
I noticed it in the trailer, I wasn't paying to watch that cartoon
But it looks incredible
@@wetchicken8757 50/50
WaM Pandy nope
@@quickdraw6591 the movie does look absolutely incredible the cgi might be overused sometimes but the acting the stunts everything is amazing imo
Genuinly curious what was the point of making Holland's DIY suit CGI. I could understand the main suit considering the flat, tight look they were going for (even if I disagree with that stylistic choice), but the DIY suit seems like it would be more effort than it's worth to CGI
Exactly, diy is meant to look flawed and not “perfect”
@@nolan.. I mean the DIY does look flawed, but I don’t see the point of going to the effort of making CGI to look flawed, when you could just do the real thing
@@branpod I think its convenience. I mean what happens when someone damages the suit is what comes to my mind. Props like that probably cost a lot and just make doing normal movements a lot harder. Again I have no idea but that set spider man suit probably is made out of some sort of rubber or stiff material. And on top of that I cant remember if it was another movie or something else but I watched a video about someone wearing a thick suit for something. When its hot outside, I think they said like above 75f the actor could easily overheat causing heat stroke. So in the instance im referring to they had to implement water lines throughout the suit and hide a water pump on him as well to make sure that wouldnt happen.
There was also the general worry that Holland would puke in his skin tight suit while filming and then inhale that, so there were good reasons for switching to CGI
@@omegastudios-minecraft1865 but he still had to wear the suit... he wears the suit when recording, and then they put cgi all over it
Infinity War was beautiful. With the exception of Mark Ruffalo in the Hulk Buster Armor. It looked atrocious.
Agreed. Tonys cgi was kinda bad too
Whenever they have their helmet off... Ugh
Infinity War was garbage looking. Not for the cgi, though a lot of the CG is really bad and fake looking. The problem is the color pallet. It is so monochromatic grey. The direction is nothing to write home about, so you are stuck with not only boring pictures, but grey ones. Come on Marvel! Shoot on film. You can afford it!
@@troubleman8430 no
@@westos U mean idiot
YES, the floating head in the last few movies have been bother the hell out of me. Bruce in the Hulk Buster armor was the worst of it that's for sure.
Hell yeah! Infinity war was almost perfect...
Pulling off that kind of CGI is very expensive and difficult.
Cyro XVX and mostly unnecessary because a lot of the times they could have partially implemented a CGI solution to complement what was already there instead of just replacing it entirely thus making redundant whatever the actors were already wearing.
SHIT! And here I was thinking I'm the only one who noticed that GOD-AWFUL moment that almost managed to make me hate the movie.
César Acosta that how effects work dude. Most of the time the actors are wearing something similar to what they will cgi in later so they can make the cgi look more natural on the body. They also use cgi completely in more action heavy scenes because it can look really jarring to go back and forth between practical and cgi for the full body type stuff
I now can't unsee RDJ's floating head
Aquivery you didn’t see that the first time in infinity war... I did
@@caylya7869
mind RDJ
LOOK AT RUFFALO MAN ! its a nightmare
My favourite mark suit is
*-M A R K R U F F A L O-*
calm down, you will not see him again
Gabriel G2 ...screw off
Why does this video have so many dislikes?
He’s barely even giving his own opinion. A majority of this is just straight facts!
Lots of Disney informants out there
MCU fangirls are a cult. They think watching these movies (which I enjoy btw) are a religious ritual and cannot be profaned by even the slightest criticism.
mcu stans take any sort of criticism of the mcu as a personal offense
Probably because he dared to criticize Black Panther
@@michaelbasileos Yeah, that genuinely irritates me. The Tom Holland fangirls are easily the worst.
Well, he was right about Far From Home…
I actually didn't like the "practical" suit.
And it looked so cool!!!
Isn’t the cgi part of the story
Mysterio: aight imma head out
Yep
go back and watch ironman 1 to see how photorealistic the scenes looked. The Mark II and Mark III looked SO good compared to the more recent suits. They actually looked like real car exteriors.
I like that the suits felt heavier and packed a punch. It's cool that Tony made improvements on his suits' speed and agility but sometimes the movements don't look right.
@@jarhead3571 the CGI makes it look less fluid and more robotic or cartoonish. But however I do respect their use of practical affects on tonys armor. I'd like to point out how his form seems ridiculus and animated, his arms are hyper extended at sometimes and doesnt seem very real to me. makes wonder if they had the same team that created the black panther final fight scene
Iron Man 1 was great because the director knew how to combine practical effects and CGI. He made that scene with Robert Downey Jr. running through a field of mines, all real explosions because he wanted it to look realistic, needless to say Downey thought he was an asshole. 😂 But they really kept it well. Marvel threw those values down to shit after that unfortunately.
Weird, I thought that the earlier movies look very out of place at times. However, I do think it's better than the phase 3 approach. The phase 2 suits looked the best in my opinion. Aside from Ultron, that was shit.
If someone showed me the end fight of black panther without context i would have thought its fan made or from a marvel game lol this looks so bad
Yes
Looked like something from the mighty racoon.
D I M A T R O N any clue why Black Panther is one of Marvel’s highest grossing movie? It’s garbage and everytime I expressed my hatred towards the movie, people call me racist like WTF?!
@@leppp9002 maybe because the black community finally got a full black cast action movie 🤔 [no racism intended]
@@virgin5415 And that guy make CGI videos with much less budget.
I still think that Tobey Maguire's suit is the best live-action suit we've ever seen. It still holds up 20 years later - doesn't feel dated, the head mask's eyes look great and menacing.... Don't get my started on the Black Suit - perfection.
Nah
@@Kirmanator4172 You've got no taste, thanks for letting us know
@@him8012 he looks like a toy in cgi, TASM had the best suit imo, but I love the originality in the raimi suits
@@demskittlesdoe1168 wow trashing a movie where it was at the breaking point of a CGI with no actual consideration of its quality... You're a deeply intelligent man sir
@@filipe8673 okay?? That doesn't change the fact he looked like a toy, have you seen iron man? I love the Raimi trilogy, but he still looked like a toy sometimes, disregarding the fact of the matter was very intelligent of you 🥶🥶
I always noticed the fake suit in Homecoming and it bugged me.
VariousPond same
Obviously I could tell it was cgi, but I thought it was amazing until I saw the comparison between the all cgi and the practical suit. Still, I think the way it looks more like a comic book isn't 100% a bad thing.
I hate it !! Don’t know why they needed to do that
I get the joke.
@@thizzuchiha Then dont watch the movie?
The fight scene between T'challa and Killmonger really bothered me when I saw it in theater.
Eli Holt why?
Eli Holt kidding, wow, ee
Same. Loved the movie but it was incredibly obvious.
Eli Holt it did everyone
I was genuinely surprised by how shitty it looked when I saw the movie. It was as if I had accidentally put on Spawn 97.
I agree. The final fight for black panther was just horrendous and so much CGI was used. Killmonger vs Black Panther felt like a video game I wasn’t actually playing.
@Snehil Shrey Yeah, because that is 100% what we're arguing, not the overuse of CGI... CGI itself.
And it was a lack luster fight.
@Snehil Shrey
Did anyone here say the IW cgi wasn't horrible?
Infinity War has its off moments as well, especially with Iron Man.
Shrey
So Marvel can't be criticized for their mistakes? Get lost, Marvel shill!
@Snehil Shrey by the logic he's using, no it isn't. The characters in Infinity War looked very real. Environments are also generally of higher quality than character models anyways. It's not surprising that the environments look realistic. But our focus is on the characters. That's what we're supposed to be looking at. That needs to have the biggest priority.
My biggest disappointment with No Way Home was the CGI, that movie deserved more refined effects, it was frustrating at times, we were seeing such epic scenes, but it felt like they were all digital dolls, the final fight was really ugly, NWH Andrew and TASM2 Andrew are RIDICULOUSLY different, tasm2 vfx are infinitely better than nhw
You just explained how I feel exactly
I think both of the TASM films have the best effects they look incredible
you gotta understand the CG suit is on purpose there not supposed to have winkles on it for comic accurate reasons and its stark created tech its ameant to fit smoothly across his body
@@glocktop916 but it didnt felt real, i didnt look like there was a body under the suit, and that "velvet" effect that made it blurry just made it even less real.
At least for me
@@Arthur-do6xl its a nannotech suit not cloth my god
Marvel just feels like spending an enormous budget on paying for CGI. They're rich, and the profit they make on their movies allows them to do that
Well yeah, instead of dealing with the logistics and obstacles of a a movie shoot, just outsource it to another company you trust and give them pointers every now and then
What a waste either way
@@alvareo92 I mean... Why even shoot at all. Modern day CGI is good enough to create 100% believable humans, but they are still actually filming stuff. They do a lot of stunts in real life so...
@@_yujin_ People have created almost 100% believable close up shots of humans. We have the technology and people that can do it. Not saying its easy SMH
thats actually the opposite reason why they use so much cgi. most fields that do practical effects in america have labor unions that means they cant be overworked or underpaid. outsourcing work to asian cgi studios that have no unions save marvel enough money to pay all the a-list overpaid celebrities their 10-50 mil to act out a scene with a stand in.
Just when I thought I had begun to hate The Amazing Spider-Man 2 as much as everyone else does, you show me that footage of the Andrew Garfield suit and remind me how gorgeous and perfect it really was.
HoustonProductions1 still a shitty movie.
The suit and the web swinging are the best we’ve seen to date. Definitely has the best cgi in my opinion. Wouldn’t really say that makes up for all the movie’s shortcomings
@@hiimchrisj Agreed
Everyone keeps talking about how great TASM2 suit is and I never understood that. It's almost identical to the Raimi suit.
Honestly it looked like he was wearing a basketball
“Let me guess, your costume?”
Tom Holland: “It was, and it was beautiful.”
Ted Spaghetti no it wasn’t in homecoming and the floating tony head on iron man from infinity looked horrible
My suit was like most movies, too good looking, not enough cgi to go around. And when the movies vfx faced discrimination, I offered a solution.
Covering them in CGI...
Having Tom Holland wear an entire spiderman suit that was custom made specifically for his body only to cover it all up with cgi is not only a huge waste of money but an insult to the costume designer. They’re basically saying that the practical suit wasn’t good enough so they had to completely redo it in post. Also it makes no sense that they would make Robert Downy run around set wearing that probably heavy iron man torso just to complete cgi it. There wouldn’t be a floating head problem either because Downy was wearing an actual suit torso all they needed to do was cgi him from the waist down.
The Non-CGI Homecoming suit is way better
Because it looks more similar to raimi?
@@nineteeneightythree4138 No, it's because they smudge away the depth on the black lining. Raimi's did'nt do much better because the lines were grey.
@@nineteeneightythree4138 No, because it looks more similar to The amazing spider-man 2
You mean the non-CGI Civil War suit?
The Raimi suit was the best suit. It looked so awesome even though it was handcrafted.
I hate how marvel overuses cgi just to make it “epic” and “cool”. It gets really boring and repetitive that ends up not being amazing anymore.
yeah, like the costume opening up to show the face makes sense in Iron Man, not so in Black Panther for example, but it looks cool & high-tech so
@@alvareo92
And when it's the Hulkbuster suit, it's probably better to not open it up to show the head. The head part is just not proportional to a human head.
Fam stop hating and appreciate jeez I would like to see you make a movie oh wait YOU CANT
Noredoos No I’m not hating on marvel, I just don’t like what marvel does with the insanely overused cgi. They should atleast use it in some scenes that really need it.
I don’t like sand oh your right sorry for going overboard I see what you're saying. And they should stop overusing CGI it kinda gets boring. Like when I'm watching a movie I want it to feel real not everything full of CGI.
The only thing that got me in infinity war was when Mark Ruffalo was in the hulk buster, it literally just looked like his head was floating there i was staring at it every scene
Same, I forgot to talk about it, same problem as the Ironman one from Civil War
imo i think it looked fine except when thor appeared
I think that was done on purpose to be comedic since Mark was being a self aware Big "little kid" having fun in a big mech the whole battle Lol
Infinity War had some dodgy green screen too, espeically in the Wakanda battle.
LeagueofMeta the iron man suit also looked pretty fake. the children of Thanos also looked a bit video gamey, especially Proximum Midnight. but Thanos looked great.
4:48 *Tasm 2 suit* : Am I a joke to you?
that last fight in black panther is like the rock as the scorpion king in mummy
ouch, right in the nuts !
We don't talk about that...
African cgi
I do agree that they use too much CGI. But in my opinion, when its done perfectly I love it. Thanos for example. Photo realistic, but like the thumbnail, Spidermans suit in homecoming and more Civil war, but still. I hope in Far Frome Home they dial down on the CGI and hope we get to see a great looking spiderman.
Yeah the Iron Spider was some Steppenwolf shit
Spartan003 reality is way too complex to consider this perfect. Maybe one day they ll achieve it. But now I see only good cgi cut scene
@@dawe964 well they did it in 2002 I think they can do it in 2018
i think it’s important to critique what you love
i absolutely agree! essentially the same thing that i also commented on some different video the other day :)
Dick Swett
i’m a huge fan of the MCU, but i’m not so blind to ignore it’s flaws anymore than i would ignore its greatness
Buchanan Games which is why I have so many issues with rdr2
Which is why I hate DC movies as of right now ?
Yes troll on all the hard work... u internet troll should get a life 🖕🏻
It was so sad to see doc ock in Spiderman NWH. He was only CGI.. comparing that to how beautiful and amazing he looks with the practical effects from Spider Man 2 when they literally had puppeteers controlling his arms for real. It was a sad moment in the new spider man. Otherwise I did enjoy it a lot!
Sam Raimis movies are always full on passion projects. You can feel how authentic those movies are. Real story and real practical effects mixed with tasteful cgi. Movies are a business now so no one stops to try and be real or do something properly
Honestly the cg in nwh isn't even bad
Y'all are just reaching
There is reasons why they did this
@@lucadasillywolf Ikr.
Bruh didn't you know what Alfred said in the interview? You're complaining without knowing anything.
Mark Ruffalos head on the Hulkbuster in Infinity War made me want to barf. It’s the only time I’ve ever really noticed bad CGI.
rlly? i thought it looked fine
It looks alright in the first shot but the shot in the background at the end looks bad
Agreed.
with black panther even i noticed the fakeness of the fight
God is forever you can have an opinion without being able to do the thing. For instance having an opinion on a piece of art without being able to to do any better.
God is forever oh my god you dont have to be producing movies to judge a fucking movie. most film critics arent creating huge budget movies. as the consumer of that content i have every right to judge it
God is forever god abandoned you after this comment
Yea because superheroes are sooo realistic
@@htsunmiku Indeed but that's not necessarily a good thing. that's why I chose to become a developer over a designer. Developers don't get to spend hours of their life discussing why green would be better than blue. But I agree with you, those CGI finales ruin many good movies. The end of the Harry Potter movies in some vague unreal cgi setting were a good example of that.
It was such a shame they ended Black Panther with that cartoon fight.
It was going so well until then. When the big battle started, I thought "okay, this is a little rough but I can work with it."
When the rhinos came in, I thought "okay... This is a little worse. But not ruining the scene."
Then _that_ fight happened, and I was completely pulled out of the action. I hope they do a digital remaster or something someday.
It reminded me of the Man of Steel fight where both Zod and Superman are replaced with CGI puppets
Spider ham: you got a problem with cartoons?
sam wroblewski man of steel had 10000x better cgi than this shit
@@samwroblewski748 Have you seen the scene of Super-man's first flight in Mos? It's visually stunning.
They're relying on cgi too much. You can tell when there's been hard work put in when they don't use cgi. They should only use cgi where they can't but they've gone backwards and done everything cgi and little realistic as possible.
I never noticed how fake last battle looked in black panther
Same but to be fair I did watch it in a plane 😂
Tryingcovers it’s very noticeable
Unfortunately that was all I noticed during that scene.
Me neither. Because I fell asleep in the cinema!
Tryingcovers honestly, try watching it on a RUclips video that says it's a game for Back Panther. I would believe it.
The thing in Black Panther....the VFX studio got the footage on December and had only 6 weeks to work...(the movie was set to Release on February)
To this day i still think the Amazing Spider-man 2 has the best cgi spider-man we’ve ever seen. Not even No Way Home could replicate this for their characters, and it made the Spider-men all look like the suit was their skin. The Amazing Spider-man 2 crew focused on making it really feel like their was a person *in a suit* by making the suit fit a little looser than real life on the cgi models in their simulations giving the effect of a spandex suit reacting to wind and gravity *on top* of a person, rather than how the mcu crew often focuses more on the person than the suit, making the suit define muscles more giving it an extremely skin tight effect untrue to reality, crossing that uncanny valley and making the mcu Spider-man incarnations look like the suit is their skin. Marvel’s effects team should really look back on Tasm2 and take some notes.
Well I mean... It was the best, I can confirm that 100%... But saying thay they could not replicate it is just mean towards the VFX houses. I bet that its not their resposibiliyy to choose what spidy looks like. Its the directors. So saying that they could not replicate is just... Wrong. I bet they could easily make it as amazing, but at the end, its a movie not a fashion show.
@@rennoruutli5267 lmao why you kept defending subpar cgi lol
@@luminosity01 subpar?
They had about 6 weeks to make the final scene in Black Panther
That's why it looks so bad
Good to know
Plus having two black suits in a black set does not help.
Lucky5tr that’s why marvel shouldn’t rush their films. I don’t feel bad for them
@@weasel4674 Marvel, as a studio, doesnt make most the VFX my guy nor they fully control the budget or the deadline. they out source it to different studios that have 0 control over the deadline and budget.
I do feel bad for them because it's a team of passionate individuals, probably underpaid and overworked, that tried to make the best out of an impossible situation. They also gave us some of the best cgi in the Marvel universe during Guardians do the Galaxy.
Movies (Yes, EVERY movie) is a business, like it or not. These movies cost hundreds of millions of dollars to make. They arent just farting these out, it takes many months of dedication and focus to deliver so many products in a timely manner and still make profit. The many studios and people that work on these really love what they do and can't help but follow orders from a select few higher ups with the money. Want to blame someone? look up the producers, not the studio.
They rushed it so they could spend more time on infinity war
the suit in the amazing spiderman II is legit good
The ripples oof *slurps lips*
so is the one in the first one
It’s the most realistic Spider-Man suit
Say what you will about that movie, the visual effects are impeccably good.
Joshua Guo it’s a shame the movie is shit
IF I’m not mistaken black panthers ending scene only had a short time to be made so they had to rush and that’s why it looked so bad
@g420 I believe it was actually 6 weeks to make the whone final fight scene
yeah they had 6 weeks i think
@Vincent DiPaolo Xbox One X is the most powerful console, why couldn't be ps4?
@g420 I'm sorry but have you seen the graphics on the PS4? That shit looks photorealistic as all hell.
Makes sense. A good company doing something that bad screams low budget or short time
Corridor Digital did a great job going more in depth on the final Black Panther fight. Marvel rushed the hell out of the company and they couldn't add in things like correct motion blur, better lighting, etc. Marvel gave the company 6 weeks to do an entire third act fight scene between two black-suit characters in a dark cave. It isn't the VFX fault here. It's entirely Marvel for this.
You could have perfect CGI there. It wouldn't matter. The choreography was ass.
"So we're stuck with two cartoons fighting."
Absolutely agree with everything in this video. When climactic scenes are 100% CGI and I know it, I have a hard time getting emotionally invested in the outcome. It's like watching a video game.
You can't get emotionally invested in a video game? Go play some Final Fantasy
@@baha2092 I said it was like WATCHING a video game, not PLAYING a video game. :)
@@vicholtreman1405 :)
@@peanutgallery4 Once again, I said "It's like WATCHING a video game," not "It's like PLAYING a video game." Playing, you're involved. Watching someone else play, not so much.
I don't really care if it's CGI and neither do the majority of people. I have been emotionally invested watching a video game. I don't even care about the matrix CGI or the worst CGI you can think of. I wouldn't be that phased if I even saw a damn boom mic in the corner of a shot. Because it's like a book, you can still use your imagination to be immersed.
Hulks gotten more plastic looking with each film.
he actually got better
In endgame he literally looks like a green mark ruffalo
@Cyberdemon Mike yea thats what i mean like the cgi is getting better
I liked him in the first avengers, he looked awesome.
@@maleki7608
Exactly
In Black Panther, the scene where the car gets destroyed in slow-mo is literally the worst cgi I have seen in a Marvel movie
Even when I saw it in the trailer, I was like 🤔🤔🤔 And that was supposed to be a "WOW!" moment but it did absolutely nothing for me.
The Black Panther trailer got me more hyped than any trailer ever has, but that part almost ruined the entire rest of it for me. I was like, "Oh shit...this is going to be a cartoon."
The newest spider-man's CGI was very bad at times. And the floating head you talked about appeared absolutely everywhere
Dr Stranger MOM as well. The city monster was so atrocious.
the CGI is impressive, but at the same time there are so many situations where its kinda odd to use instead of actor or practical, it went from correcting and adding, to totally creating.
Good take, great take + 1
Finally some recognition for how epic the yellow jacket looks
I think it's funny that the homecoming suit looks better in Spider-Man PS4 than it does in the films.
Dustin Caldwell yes
I thought I was the only one. The homecoming suit is probably my least favorite in the films, but I use it so much in the PS4 game. It looks especially real during rain.
Didn't care about the Stark suit at all till I wore it in game and it's now one of my favorites.
Insomniac's engine is one of the best
I think that’s because the suit blends in more with the environments in the game since it’s fully animated. In the movie the visuals of cgi and reality tend to contrast more.
I thought this was a recent vid lol.
Marvel's CGI problem has gotten much, much worse since this was uploaded. Many VFX artists are now speaking out against Marvel for being the worst client to work for.
The only thing from 2018/Infinity War that looked questionable was Ruffalo's floating head when he was in the Hulkbuster armour.
You can almost do a revisit of this topic for Phase 4. It's pretty terrible lol.
As someone who's trying to break into the VFX industry I can tell you why they "overuse" CGI, it simply gives them much more control over a scene. With CGI, if the director doesn't like the lighting in a shot, or the camera isn't moving at the right speed then these variables can be easily adjusted before being rendered out. With a practical shot, you're kind of screwed unless you reshoot the scene with proper lighting or try to get the VFX team to fix it in post which will most likely result in an ugly scene,. Instead of henry cavill's mustache getting cut off his face in post (which was ugly as all hell), they should've just replaced his whole head with CGI in justice league. Which brings me to the next point, the reasons why we get some CGI that goes unnoticed and some that looks like an eyesore is thanks to time and money. If there's a studio that has spectacular work in one film and less than stellar work in another, it's probably because they weren't paid enough for the job or weren't given enough time. VFX artists can sometimes go overworked and underpaid
This, i was one of the artists who worked on the house explosion scene in x men, they shot a massive explosion indoor with phantom cameras, beautiful footage. it was not used and everything had to be redone in cg because the timing off the flames was off and the camera movement didn't sync with the idea of the shot (it was a moving camera shooting at a very high fps). the entire thing was recreated using the original scene as reference and trying to keep things as close as possible. we also have deadlines to complete shots/shows and a studio is often understaffed and juggling multiple shows at one time, each having its own priority. it's not possible to put 100% of a companies resources into every show all the time
Ive also heard that vfx studios will negotiate that entire shots are recreated because that way they can actually make money
But why would a film studio need complete control of a well-made suit that they've created to fit the actor? I understand the need to fix lighting and explosions, but digitally replacing a suit that's already been made may seems like a waste of money to me.
It makes sense, but at the same time, it doesn't due to the context.
We are talking about MARVEL here... not an underground / upcoming / etc movie maker, but a multi-billion dollar industry.
It makes ZERO sense why they would skimp out of production, especially when they have basically unlimited funds.
They are not pressured by anything, so there's no reason for them to rush production, as people will watch literally anything they produce.
In the end, it just feels lazy and stupid.
yes but then after 10-20 years or so...there will be movies with almost 100% cgi/VFX just like disney pixa's animated films but ultra realistic. The actors will just record their voice in a studio and maybe do some motion capture.
Homecoming suit without wrinkles is bothering me
Same
Sony was responsible for the cgi on the spiderman suit though
Even the hotel and Nick Fury gun in Far From Home was cgi
Thats emberasing
For real?
@@dontwatchanime8063 emberasing
Walls everything
@Goddamn 47 it's actually harder to do cgi...
With the amount of CGI marvel uses, I'm surprised they still call their films "live action films" as opposed to animations
Like the "live action" Lion King movie
In my experience, when good vfx studios produce bad effects, 90% of the time is because of a too-tight schedule (and yeah, that's the exact percentage :-P )
Oofie
the studio heads don't care and most movie-goers don't notice, so it's gonna stay that way for a long time, sadly
@Alexander Kerensky Tarantino don't really if you don't count shit like removing safety wires and stuff like that. He's very much so purist when it comes to that stuff. They just transformed Hollywood boulevard for him for Once Upon a Time. He has said that it's ok to use if the actor/stuntman is going to die otherwise. So he uses it so minimal that I wouldn't say he's a good example.
I way prefer the look of the practical suit. I wish they would only animate the eyes and shit like webs and that. Practical may look less “impressive” but it feels way more real and thats what I want.
It's pretty sad when Sam Raimi and Marc Webb CGI looks better than Jon Watts.
BOOMOO 201 that’s what I’m saying but it’s much easier for them because they weren’t building a universe
George Woolley faxxxs
@Egan Mansfield-Mitchell yeah wtf. That sounds like less work, lower cost, yet yields a better result.
that elevator scene looks amazing because they used the real suit and touched up on it with some CGI.
Great video. It always stuck out to me how Favreau's Ironman looked damn near perfect compared to the rest. I have a special appreciation for directors who go an extra mile with practical effects. Favreau's Ironman, Nolan's Batman, and a good chunk of Snyder's Watchmen.
You do realize most of the film is completely cgi iron man right? They used practical suit as ref for the vfx department.
@@UPLAYTHATGAME Your point is?...Favreau still did it best
I hear what you're saying about covering up the suit if they made a practical one. The hard work of the costume designers doesn't do overlooked, in fact they create the 3d model based EXACTLY off of the costume made by the designers. And they cover up the suits with CGI most of the time to hide imperfections in the joints, and where armor overlaps. You can see in almost every shot whether it's ironman, Spiderman, or black panther that the practical suit looks terrible. That's because the helmet of ironman isn't connected, or the Spidey suit has giant wires underneath Tom's suit that bulge out, or straps that flare out from the black panther suit. They replace the suit completely in many shots because when they shoot it practically it usually looks WORSE. With exception, the black panther suits looked almost flawless, but when you're shooting and the actors are moving 70% of the time it looks clunky and weird. So I have to respectfully disagree because I understand how all of these shots are made in post production. Hats off to all VFX teams everywhere, you guys make movies what they're supposed to be.
Marvel overuses cgi
Justice league: *am I a joke to you*
Even Justice League was rushed & wasn't given time to finish
Juan A. Can’t change the fact that it was shit, what matters is the result.
@@sumsumsumin Of course it's going to come out bad if it never got time to be done!
Juan A. Look we are just critiques man. It’s not our problem if the film didn’t get enough time or shit.
HahaHAHAHa you used that meme-thing.. that was funny
Why so many dislikes, this is a good argument
Marvel shills
MCUtards can't see past their own logic
People probably don't watch the video and think he means the CGI is bad.
“Why are you booing me? I’m right!”
J Miles Clone good one bro
Seriously,
sponge out of water was better than the final black panther fight
Fact:They only have like 3 months to finish that cgi fight,sooo...
@@applepie1272 6 weeks*
This aged incredibly well with No Way Home, although it'll be easy to blame the pandemic for the poor quality.
because that is literally the reason.
Ant-Man suit is good, i like it..
it looks ugly, dirty, worn, cheap...
which is made it good, because it represents broken and disposable scott...
And is 30 years old :)
They made it cgi in civil war
Idk why though
If the suit looks amazing in practical
I don't think marvel wen't that deep, I think its just a suit they designed.
@@tortisluvzu9678 those elements were definitely taken to consideration. When you design a suit/costume it's best to represent the characters who wear it. This is pretty standard stuff
@@LeadMetal82 I really doubt that. Especially because its Marvel we're talking about.
FINALLY someone is making a video about this, Marvel's CGI has been a big problem for me in their past movies (especially homecoming) and whenever I give my opinion marvel fanboys keep saying ‘OH BUY HAVE YOU SEEN SUPERMAN'S MOUSTACHE IN JL’
Exactly, two negatives don’t make a positive
but have you seen Superman's moustache
Yes, I'm so thankful to see I'm not the only one who thinks this. The MCU is becoming increasingly fake looking and I hate it, I miss Iron Man's more tangible and practical armors, and Marvel constantly covering up real costumes with video game CGI is infuriating.
Bernardo Rengel
Black panthers worse
Jovany Marquez Yeah, but black panther's cgi is ok until the final fight while spidey looks fake through most of the movie
I noticed the Crap CGI for the Homecoming suit straight away and nobody seemed to talk about it much 'cept me. This is the video we need but don't deserve...
That's because I still can't really tell the difference between the two. Most people must not see it either.
the roof top scene with Tony stark was shocking how bad it looked.
B0Vin a lot of people complained about the cgi In homecoming before it even came out
A lot of people like me just don't care to notice. It certainly looks more realistic than the actual hand drawn comic books, and people loved those. It's the same reason nobody complains about the low quality CGI when they watch Toy Story 1995, because it actually isn't that relevant to the immersion unless you make it (ie have no concept of imagination).
6:59 This scene right here is pure art, the way that they applyed physics on this 3d model is just perfect
8:04 "What happened?"
They had like 2 weeks to design, produce, and render the fight scene before the movie was set to release. So... yeah... was not going to be there best work
They had 6 weeks to do the fight scene
While still not a lot for than 2 weeks
@@peopleproblems2841 u will be surprised on how much work that is
You miss the point they didnt have to actually cgi as much as they did
That isn’t an excuse that’s dumb on their part even more so
I been saying to myself for years that Marvel CGI sometimes look HORRIBLE and overused. Iron man 1 suits looked the best cause they were real. In civil war looks like his head is floating on a cartoon character. Spiderman’s suit isnt as bad. But i feel like I am playing the PS4 game.
Edit i made this comment before watching video to see u made many of the same points haha
Never thought I'd see you here lol
He didn’t leave me on read this time 😩🙏
@@Browntable 💪😫👊
I'm laughing way more than I should at you being here 😂
Horrible is a strong word, I'd say inconsistent at times.
Lol, still cant beat Catwoman's realistic CGI. I couldn't even tell if it was fake or not. Catwoman is unbeatable in every aspect of cinema/filmmaking.
*The CGI for Catwoman is phenomenal!!!* Nothing could ever beat it... even Avatar movie(the good one btw) couldn't top the CGI in CatWoman
@Soft_Enigma Attack of the Planet of the Apes? *More like Attack of the Bad CGI no one's gonna give a shit about.*
@@REONEON12 Avenger Infinity War? More like *_AVENGER : INFINITY BAD CGI_*
@@XxwalaweixX Star Wars? More like *TERRIBLE CGI WARS*
Tasm 2??
I’ve come back to agree with you. Lmao I don’t understand why they made the Green Goblin costume CGI in No Way Home. It’s just so pointless.
Unfortunately, these days it comes down to it being cheaper to do it in CG
@@einootspork but why do juggernaut companies Disney, Marvel & Sony need to be cheap ? It’s just odd to me
@@Vellum777 why does anyone with a billion dollars want to be cheap?
Because wealth is greedy.
@@Vellum777 m a x i m i z e t h e p r o f i t s
I never noticed how the CGI suit thing until you pointed it out. Man it really does get progressively worse😷😷
Iron Man 1 was a full CG suit. I worked with a VFX artist who used to be in Iron Man 1. They ended up replacing everything. This whole "glossing the bad practical" is horse shit. you can't just "mix" practical suit with CG without making it look disconnected. Especially if they're made from the same material.
That's because CGI is not about tricking your eye, it is about tricking your mind. He could show you a clip of an actual REAL suit and tell you how fake it looks, and once your mind accepts it being CGI as a fact, you'll "notice" how fake it looks.
@@tlabd9582 Your comment's what's full of horse shit. The whole thing about CGI is mixing it with practical effects.
@@adamnfiddle8065 mate. I literally working in the industry. When I wrote that comment I was rendering a shot. I worked as a compositor and prep artist. I wasn't talking about Mad Max style of "VFX and practical" blend. I'm talking about literally patching up missing Iron Man suit with CG. The suit that RDJ wore in Iron Man 1 was reference for both actors and VFX artist. They aren't what u see in the final screen. Having Iron Man be practical from the waist up and then merge it with CG Legs and make it seamless is extremely time consuming. It's much cheaper and easier to replace everything.
@@adamnfiddle8065 and by "seamless" I mean realistic. It's way more realistic looking to have everything CG than trying to patch.
Luckly Catwoman has 0 percent cgi
Halle Berry one hundred percent jumped from buildings practically, no recent blockbuster can touch it 😤
true, and not cgi lady makes out with sexy cop because cwoman wrote sorry wrong
Ultron lips animation was stupid. Imagine how more menacing he would look with a blank face all the time. You know.... like a CREEPY ROBOT!
Yeah and his eyes too, they tried to make him seem human when he was a ruthless killing machine in comics.
Well Ultron is already creepy on his looks
I mean imagine finding him in ur closet with his red glowing eyes and his cheeks open O_o
Eh. I thought it was fine.
But in the movie he's supposed to look more human
His first appearance in the movie was genuinely creepy. Then it went to shit.
To this day, The Incredibles is actually the only superhero movie to have zero cgi
ITS FULLY CGI WDYM
I usually don't notice VFX in marvel movies. I don't have a good eye for that... But black panther... God damn that was so bad even I picked it up.
Pedro Fernandes black panther sucked Idk why so many people liked I’m not racist but they could have done better like following the comics instead of some gay civil war shit
@@MikeBandoTv you gonna cry over his opinion?
@@NotPliskin I liked his civil war intro but I hated the movie
@@NotPliskin that movie was awesome
KneeGuuh hell no
My biggest problem is with Spiderman, it hits me with uncanny valley all over, mostly in Civil War.
The sad part is that Spidey is my favorite character, I think not only the CGI mask, but the lack of texture kills me.
The thin ass webs don't help it, it just blends in so much
I agree, the background and the cgi suit just don't blend in too well. I can't say for everyone but for me it's painfully obvious.
another problem not helping that is that most all of the marvel movies after the avengers have a little bit of a washed out grey look to them at times especially in digitally constructed scenes that doesnt help detail pop
I personally like the Sam Raimi spidey suit, even though it's not considered "comic book accurate" by other Marvel fans. But in the end, who gives a shit if it ain't accurate😂
People who are actually fans of the characters? So yeah, I can see why it bothered a lot of people. But you wouldnt understand it.
@@tarnishedpose So gatekeeping basically
@@shempmalone9736 yep.
@CR7 The best Facts
@@tarnishedpose Is it the Marvel Cinematic Universe or the Marvel Comics Universe ?
I hate how they cover everything up. This sucks.
Why? What's the point? There's no reason! You have it all! You have everything there recorded already! Why erase it and make it CGI?
The Black Panther fight looked directly from 2003
From 2000,
The best part is when you see people saying that movies like Black Panther deserves a VFX Oscar
kyotobynight yeah...I fought with someone on Instagram once who was trying to tell me that it had objectively great CGI. I was so confused how someone could possibly watch that and believe that.
Better it than that infinty War nonsense
V B What kind of drugs you on, cause they must be some intense shit?
The problem, and I’m not being sarcastic (and it goes beyond Marvel fans) is folks today, particularly the younger people who are also the most rabid consumers of these films, are very ignorant. Because they’ve grown up in a post-digital world with disposable films/music/culture/whatever, they really don’t have an understanding of film or the 100+ years it’s been around for. So to them, the latest and most hyped summer blockbuster (which likely has a toxic fandom that seems more akin to soccer hooliganism than actual love of the franchise) is legitimately one of the greatest, deepest, highest quality example of the art form. Because to them, nothing existed before about 2010.
And that’s why you get some dopey kid on the internet talking up Black Panther as the best VFX not just of the year, but perhaps the history of the planet Earth.
@@travis_redfern6771 What? Am on sanity drugs! That space opera with lame attempts at being deep is laughably bad
You made me realize we're all just cgi characters on the ps115.
Psht more like PS8. We aren't that far away from making things better than life lmao
[A2] Army true, I’d be surprised if it took longer than ps8. So every PS comes out like every 7 years. And ps5 is coming out 2020. So another 22 years and we’re photorealistic.
@@xovotv5906 Exactly. They'll be stepping up VR with every console too I bet
3 years later and this video is now more important then ever