PDA

View Full Version : NEW!!! Spiderman Trailer in Quicktime


SheepFactory
04-09-2004, 05:58 AM
http://www.apple.com/trailers/sony_pictures/spider-man_2/trailer/


enjoy

FloydBishop
04-09-2004, 06:09 AM
Very nice.

surripere
04-09-2004, 06:29 AM
Guys and gals, do you think Spiderman is meant to look cartoony? No disrespect intended, just curious if that was the look they were going for. Has anyone heard or read anything about that being a conscious effort?

JDex
04-09-2004, 06:32 AM
Oh hell yeah... after a quick, late viewing... HELL YEAH!!! :buttrock: :buttrock: :buttrock:

Three buttrocks...

We'll see how that looks in da mornin. Night all!

FUG1T1VE
04-09-2004, 06:35 AM
sweet. The Doc looks wicked!

Tom N.
04-09-2004, 06:55 AM
Finally a song other than Carmina Burana's "O Fortuna" was used for exciting opera music for an action sequence haha.

I'm excited to see this movie, woooo:bounce:

-Tom N.

Cararan
04-09-2004, 07:14 AM
Now this is what I'm talking about.

1001 JediNights
04-09-2004, 07:17 AM
What song was that?

Anyway, excellant footage. I look forward to this one. And yes, I think he WAS supposed to look a bit cartoony.

Slurry
04-09-2004, 07:36 AM
:drool:

Lordrust
04-09-2004, 07:38 AM
looks awsome, i hope this is good and not another summer disappointment

Supervlieg
04-09-2004, 07:39 AM
Nice, way better then the previous trailor. I like it. though CG Spidey looks more fake compared to the first movie. Doc Oc is still great though. He should wear his goggles though.

Bonedaddy
04-09-2004, 08:02 AM
Animation looked pretty good, definitely looks like a good time. But the rendering of Spiderman bugs me, the shadows always seem too light. He doesn't seem to fit in the frame well. At first I thought it may have been just because of his suit fabric, but in some shots near the end (where Harry unmasks him), the real suit is contrasty and has darker shadows than the CG one.

Well, whatever, I'll be there to see it. If a cartoony aesthetic is what they're going for, so be it.

Stimpy
04-09-2004, 08:11 AM
rendering might be due to it being temp shots only. i mean, there are two shots in that trailer where he looks like an OGL capture.

so. wait for the final piece.

Lifthz
04-09-2004, 08:22 AM
I'm really liking the whole feel of it. :buttrock:

And yes, the animations do seem cartoony, but ya know what? Spiderman IS cartoony. :p I say the animations fit in pretty well. I liked the slide between the truck.

As for the issues with the model looking like an OGL capture... yeah, there really needs to be better shadowing all around him to avoid that.

Anubis
04-09-2004, 08:31 AM
Wow.. what can I say, Spiderman looks like shit. People don't use this many temp shots in a trailer, something has happened, the lighting of the model is horrible. In many shots it looks like an opengl render. Is this what happens when we rely too much on cg char stand-ins? They must be swamped with work, I don't understand how every cg shot in the trailer could be a temp shot, so i think a lot of those were finals. Maybe they just had too many shots.

CE

Brettzies
04-09-2004, 09:06 AM
Looks cool to me. Are you guys watching this frame by frame or something?

I love that trailers are available for download, but they really aren't intended to be viewed this way. You need to see them BIG and BOOMING in a theatre without time to think about the shadows being too light or the costume too bright.

Not only that, but I'm sure everyone's monitor is calibrated slighty different. Even dvds, if you don't calibrate your tv can look like crap. Usually way tooo bright. I'm guessing most people have their monitor or video card gamma too high so they can see things better. Which is fine, but movies aren't intended to be that bright.

Stimpy
04-09-2004, 09:10 AM
nope. wasnt watching frame by frame the first time, but still that scene at 0:44 when he jumps into the window frame just looks WRONG.

anyway, im not too concerned, im sure the final results will be good.

mxhaunted
04-09-2004, 09:18 AM
This film looks like one to look out for! Mucho-fun to be had. And as for the comments about rendering… these trailers are in constant WIP until the film comes out. You heard all about it with Hellboy so I don’t see why Spidy will be any different. Also, this kind of thing works much better on a big screen……… SO STOP WHINGING! :p

Watch and enjoy. Don’t suck the joy out of it!

MX

Ziah
04-09-2004, 09:22 AM
K im a guy but im offically WET!!!

can't wait

Riddick
04-09-2004, 09:34 AM
Kaboooom!

Yum yum:drool:

samartin
04-09-2004, 09:43 AM
Now I never saw Spiderman cos' of the fight sequence in the alley, I just thought what a load of total sh!te !!!

This film does look awesome tho', I feel that the animation feels more weighted, alhtough like some people he doesn't look like he's really fitting in the environments but this does look like it will be worth watching on the big screen...

PS. I may even watch the 1st one now and put my escapism head on...

yangmiemie
04-09-2004, 10:28 AM
very nice.......
:bounce:

Clanger
04-09-2004, 10:34 AM
Probably largely due to the music but this is the first trailer to make the hairs on my arms stand up.
Anyone know if it will air in the UK at the same time or do we have to wait 6 years longer?

Marine
04-09-2004, 10:47 AM
opens july 16th in the uk, don't know why though... if they can release it in the phillipines on the 30th of june, why can't they release it on the same day internationally?

aragorn
04-09-2004, 11:08 AM
wow, r u people blind?? that movie will suck so much...it's not even debatable. yea..and i'm sure they "spider-man episode 3" in the works to accomplish mission in ruining good comic series. can't wait for the new batmant or should i say crapman..
thanx hollywood! :middlefinger: :wise:

dmonk
04-09-2004, 11:25 AM
Originally posted by aragorn
wow, r u people blind?? that movie will suck so much...it's not even debatable. yea..and i'm sure they "spider-man episode 3" in the works to accomplish mission in ruining good comic series. can't wait for the new batmant or should i say crapman..
thanx hollywood! :middlefinger: :wise:


Why?

Why will the movie suck? Oh great and powerful Oz with the ability to forcast the future! :rolleyes:

I think it looks awesome!

angel
04-09-2004, 12:41 PM
Originally posted by dmonk
Why?

Why will the movie suck? Oh great and powerful Oz with the ability to forcast the future! :rolleyes:

I think it looks awesome!

LOL!, yeah

I am excited about this film. You know if movements weren't exagerated a bit ppl. would say that it looks wrong because that's not how they envision Spiderman to move.

I can not wait to see this movie, looks like lots of fun.

Ed Bittner
04-09-2004, 12:51 PM
Considering the fact that the release date was bumped FORWARD, it's hard to believe that those shots where Spiderman looks "cartoony" are all temp-shots. I remember people saying the cg Spiderman didn't match the live-action Spiderman in the first film. Looked close-to-perfect to me,(in the first film), so I doubt Sam Rami would trade the near-perfect look of the first one for a cartoony look for the second.
Ed

flipnap
04-09-2004, 01:04 PM
wow, r u people blind?? What? who said that, where are you :cool: (does the stevie wonder head bob)

man relax, it looks like a lotta fun.. And for once im happy to see a "download" option available for a trailer.

gabe28
04-09-2004, 01:10 PM
yea..and i'm sure they "spider-man episode 3" in the works to accomplish mission in ruining good comic series.
LOL! Too late, Marvel took care of ruining comic a long time ago... but hell, watch the movie or don't, what's that got to due with your enjoyment of the comic?

Clanger
04-09-2004, 01:32 PM
Originally posted by Marine
opens july 16th in the uk, don't know why though... if they can release it in the phillipines on the 30th of june, why can't they release it on the same day internationally?

That's not so bad, one month I can wait not like the Hellboy 6 month's!

eric3dee
04-09-2004, 01:58 PM
Ok- maybe I'm wrong here, but for all of you complaining about spidey being too bright-- It could be due to the simple fact that film shots are done in a much larger color bit depth than what our puny RGB monitors can handle-- that said, its possible that these shots were haphazardly thrown into an edit and compressed for web without any attention (or time available for attention) to the bit-depth compression as compared from the digital to the original film print. This would explain some serious gamma offsets. I dunno- just a guess but one that certainly makes sense to me.

Chaosphere
04-09-2004, 02:18 PM
What is the MUSIC in it though, ANYONE know ??

PhilOsirus
04-09-2004, 02:24 PM
maybe I'm wrong here, but for all of you complaining about spidey being too bright-- It could be due to the simple fact that film shots are done in a much larger color bit depth than what our puny RGB monitors can handle

No, CG effects often have shadows thata re too light. It happened in LoTR (especially when we see Gollumn in the first movie). It could be fixed, but it seems they all end up forgeting that there are such things as hard shadows.

karabo
04-09-2004, 02:25 PM
I must say that I'm supremely disappointed by the Spiderman animation, it's terribly done and waaay too cartoony for a live action movie. It looks like this move is going to go the way of Blade 2 with animation like that. If this was an all CG film it would be ok but seeing as it isn't, it's going to mess everything up.

swampthing
04-09-2004, 02:27 PM
When you sit there and nitpick this bad i think you've kinda lost the whole point of the movie.

As long as when i'm watching the real thing nothing jumps out and smacks me and looks stupid, I really don't care i guess. I go to movies to enjoy them not nitpick every frame of animation and be an armchair quarterback.

Fasty
04-09-2004, 03:20 PM
Wow that looks incredible, totally a comic book come to life!

As far as the music goes, it sounds like it could be an original score, but I could be wrong.

keeganb
04-09-2004, 03:33 PM
I think alot of people are trying to make excuses for the crap looking renders of the CG Spidey, The film looks Amazing but every scene with the CG spiderman looks wrong. I am a huge comicbook fan but when people say "hey it's meant to be cartoony" that just doesnt cut it for me. it's mad cause besides the dodgey Spidey everything else looks superb, Doc Oc looks Ace!
Animations looks a bit odd in places aswell, he looks too light?
Keegan

SheepFactory
04-09-2004, 03:36 PM
Originally posted by karabo
I must say that I'm supremely disappointed by the Spiderman animation, it's terribly done and waaay too cartoony for a live action movie. It looks like this move is going to go the way of Blade 2 with animation like that. If this was an all CG film it would be ok but seeing as it isn't, it's going to mess everything up.

I beg to differ ,

I think the animation is the best I have seen , Thats how spiderman is SUPPOSED to move. he has superhuman speed , something you didnt see in the fist movie , hell he dodges bullets in the comic.


I am sure they'll fix whatever temp shots they have in the trailer , but for all I care they can put the grey lambert shaded model and i'll still go see the movie it looks like one hell of a ride.

William b. Hand
04-09-2004, 03:48 PM
Originally posted by aragorn
can't wait for the new batmant or should i say crapman..

I understand that the new Batman is gonna be done by Christopher Nolan, the director of "Following" and "Memento"... That has me encouraged.

SPIDERMAN 2's trailer may have action scenes that've been sped up slightly (as in the HULK trailers) which would account for the cartoony animation. The shadowing screw-ups... well... who knows. I hope they're just because it's unfinished footage. But although the noticeably cg SPIDERMAN may not improve in the final cut, I figure it has to be better than the first one.

I'm glad so many people have noticed these same sub-par cg shots... happy it's not just me.
:beer:

Chaosphere
04-09-2004, 03:49 PM
Jesus, you people need to calm down..at least we HAVE a Spider-Man 2 movie to be happy about...at least we can see him in action on the big screen, ten years ago we couldn't see anything CLOSE to this....MOVIES = FUN, thats the bottom line...STOP NITPICKING !!!! :D

TumikSmacker
04-09-2004, 04:19 PM
NO ONE Has said anything about how bad Dr. Octopus looks. THATS BECAUSE he looks fine! He looks great! The shadows of his tentacles blend in just perfect! So going on that I'm sure we can all relax cause the people who are working on this know what looks good and what doesn't.

If they were done RIGHT now then they still wouldn't be working on it. The truth of the matter is that they ARE still working on it and its not done yet!

KINGOFPAIN
04-09-2004, 04:23 PM
:bowdown:

keeganb
04-09-2004, 04:39 PM
Good point TumikSmacker, I never thought of that, Doc Oc looks ace and Spidey sucks so hopefully your right and it will look alot better when finished! :~D

I don't think it's nitpicking Chaosphere it's just that work like Gollum in LOTR has raised the bar and now we expect everything to be the higest quality all the time. Well I do anyway
Keegan

eliseu gouveia
04-09-2004, 04:54 PM
Sweet Mother of Nurbs, it´s the ´trucks with no axis´ anal nitpicking.
All.
Over.
Again.

Can you please, in the name of all that is wholly pre-rendered, just give it a rest and simply enjoy the trailer already?:rolleyes:

Game-boi
04-09-2004, 04:55 PM
eh..the trailer isn't that good, but it isn't that bad. As someone else brought up, the lighting looks off. It's not there and it makes SM stick out. This is an eyesore.

But that's not the worst thing here...oh no! That opera music at the end is! This is something that would be on a lame Smallville ad. The opera music is just too over the top and kinda kills the mood. Am I the only one that thinks that spiderman was never intended to have an opera chorus as background music?

At the very least, I think the trailer was edited well and it looks as though they used more interesting camera angles than the first movie. The trailer didn't really excite me into seeing it (I wasn't a big fan of the first movie). I would say that I won't be there opening day/weekend, but I bet my boyfriend will drag me to it.

-Chris

BoydLake
04-09-2004, 04:58 PM
One thing about rendering dark shadows and post processing....

it's a lot easier to color adjust an image that actually has color and isn't filled with black spots because you actually will have colors to adjust. Then once it's done, when you clamp the colors and raise contrast you get much better results.... relax guys... these shots are not finished.

One thing I noticed and hope is reflected in the film.... there seem to be many more spidey shots.... gotta love that! :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

Sil3
04-09-2004, 05:02 PM
Originally posted by Sheep Factory
I beg to differ ,

I think the animation is the best I have seen , Thats how spiderman is SUPPOSED to move. he has superhuman speed , something you didnt see in the fist movie , hell he dodges bullets in the comic.


I am sure they'll fix whatever temp shots they have in the trailer , but for all I care they can put the grey lambert shaded model and i'll still go see the movie it looks like one hell of a ride.

I agree.

This is how Spider Man is, in fact im glad the Spider Movies took so long getting into the big screen.

I was for more than 20 years a heavy hardcore Spider Man fan, still am but in a lesser way (growing up sucks...:blush: ) and this is exactly how i "saw" him move on those panels from the comic books. They manage to capture all those amazing acrobacies that only Spider Man can do and translate them extremely well from comics and mixed it into live action.

It´s simply astonishing what they did on the first movie, the story wasn´t exactly like in the comics and in this area a lot could had been more faithfull, i agree, but animation wise it was what i always imagined and im really anxious to see this one too, im pretty sure i´ll be blown away by seing Spider Man swing again all over NY city buildings, looking at the trailer im already :eek: :drool: :buttrock:

CGmonkey
04-09-2004, 05:09 PM
Too revealing.. I now know basicly 2/3 of the film!

asphaltcowboy
04-09-2004, 05:11 PM
ooooh baby! It's all about this! Can't wait!
Well put together trailer as well (loving the music ) I'm tingling all over!
(maybe it's just my Spider Sense™? )

fr3drik
04-09-2004, 05:13 PM
I just heard that Sony Pictures has announced that Spiderman 3 will have its USA opening on May 3rd, 2007. I went to their web site but I couldn't find any press info... Sam Raimi, who also directed the first and second movie, will apparently be directing the third one. Kirsten Dunst och Tobey Maguire are both starring in the third movie.

This whole talk about sequels, prequels ...some of them are actually good I think. It's rare but some sequels are even better than the first movie. You can't really just generalize like that. But of course, it's kind of pathetic to hear something like that they are making a Final Destination 3 and are thinking about following in Spy Kids 3D's footsteps ...making it in 3D. I have an idea! Let's make it a reality show while we are at it.

iconboy
04-09-2004, 05:15 PM
Originally posted by samartin
Now I never saw Spiderman cos' of the fight sequence in the alley, I just thought what a load of total sh!te !!!

This film does look awesome tho', I feel that the animation feels more weighted, alhtough like some people he doesn't look like he's really fitting in the environments but this does look like it will be worth watching on the big screen...

PS. I may even watch the 1st one now and put my escapism head on...

u didnt see spiderman because the alley fight looked weird?

keeganb
04-09-2004, 05:20 PM
"Too revealing.. I now know basicly 2/3 of the film!"

yeah I know what you mean CgMonkey, every film out there these days reveals everything and spoils the actual event of watching it when it's released!
Keegan

aazimkhan
04-09-2004, 05:37 PM
Now this is ONE superhero movie that was done excellently!...and continued amazingly!

5 stars! - cant miss this one.

DoctorStopMo
04-09-2004, 05:43 PM
Spider-Man is going to be the best superhero film franchise ever. The first one was a good movie - but it left me craving more action. I think this will sate my hunger for the action, and I think the writing will be as good as it was for the first one (with David Koepp's screenplay, I believe).

I agree that the Spidey in the trailer looked very fake, and I was beginning to think that Tobey Maguire only donned the costume for the scenes where he is shown with his mask off. But I will suspend my final judgment until after I see the film. Before the first film came out, I remarked to a friend that the suit with Tobey in it looked very much like the CG version.

Between the first trailer and this one, though, I am very impressed and definitely looking forward to this movie, which I think will lead the pack in box office gross.

addicted2_3D
04-09-2004, 05:43 PM
I agree with Bonedaddy on the cg stuff. I definitely hope that the shots are temps, cause it will really bug me when I watch the movie. Other than than I am glad to see a more animated spidey, but some of those moves were a bit weird. Like some of the traffic stuff for example. This is of course extremely nit picky, and I am sure that it will be an entertaining movie. :beer:

opus13
04-09-2004, 05:55 PM
isnt the music from he first film, just re-organized?

ambas
04-09-2004, 06:03 PM
well the movie isnt finishd and itl hopefully look better when everything is done.. its just a trailer

Kalasfixaren
04-09-2004, 06:22 PM
stop telling people to stop nitpicking!

Nitpicking is a curse that comes with being in the realm of 3d too much :rolleyes:

It's our duty to nitpick!

SheepFactory
04-09-2004, 06:31 PM
Nitpick all you want , I bet this film will break the first movies opening weekend record. :)

Even the dumbheads at Aint it cool news talkbacks are awed by the trailer , and thats a first.

fr3drik
04-09-2004, 06:37 PM
Originally posted by Sheep Factory
Even the dumbheads at Aint it cool news talkbacks are awed by the trailer , and thats a first.

Can someone PLEASE tell them (http://www.aint-it-cool-news.com/) to fix their text size and spacing?

Shu
04-09-2004, 06:43 PM
*sigh*

I really gotta stop reading these movie threads...
It seems that everyone and their dog has a "professional" opinion on the effects on these Cg movies nowadays. YEs, Yes, I know, this IS a CG forum, but comeon! Last time I checked, it was humans who were making these movies! It's not going to be perfect!! Every movie has its flaws, but do you guys focus on the flaws so much that you can't enjoy the movie?

<sidenote> Its also quite funny how the lesser talented/experienced artists are usually the ones to offer up their technical gripes.</sidenote>

Yes, I agree, the CG spiderman does not look 100% consistent with it's environment, but I also understand and respect how difficult it is to achieve this. Does it really look that bad where it's worth arguing over??!!

Also, the comparison between Doc OC and the Spidey character isn't fair. Forgive me if I'm wrong, But I think that the arms on doc OC is the only CG on that character (except for a few shots where its IS noticable). If that's the case, you're comparing a full CG Spidey to some CG arms. Not fair!

Anyway, that my 2 Cents (more like a buck 50). I'll just close on one more note - This movie looks good - Why? because it looks like a good MOVIE - not a good CG animation.

rsjrv99
04-09-2004, 07:06 PM
Thisi s foinf to be a great movie!

otacon
04-09-2004, 07:08 PM
That was SOOOWEEEEET!!:bounce:

TheWraith
04-09-2004, 07:28 PM
Originally posted by Shu
Its also quite funny how the lesser talented/experienced artists are usually the ones to offer up their technical gripes.</sidenote>


i would agree with that. of course, i was the same way when i was a student studying 3d. i think it might be a maturity thing... or maybe a trying to be better than everybody thing. but now i can easily sit back and relax to a movie withough rolling my eyes at every flaky fx shot. it's sort of like app wars, it really seperates the newbs from the experienced ppl.

TumikSmacker
04-09-2004, 07:37 PM
:beer: I'll drink to that TheWraith! Well said.

Bonedaddy
04-09-2004, 07:37 PM
Originally posted by Shu

<sidenote> Its also quite funny how the lesser talented/experienced artists are usually the ones to offer up their technical gripes.</sidenote>



I just brought up the shadows thing because it looked odd to me, and I wanted to know whether it was intentional, whether it is finished, etc. I didn't mean to bash, didn't mean to gripe, I just wanted to learn the process.
I always try to be as critical as possible of my own work, I figure it's a good thing to try and make everything as perfect as possible.
Whatever, still love the animation, think Doc Ock looks great (why don't more people remark upon him?), and I'll be there opening day.

karabo
04-09-2004, 07:43 PM
Originally posted by Sheep Factory
I beg to differ ,

I think the animation is the best I have seen , Thats how spiderman is SUPPOSED to move. he has superhuman speed , something you didnt see in the fist movie , hell he dodges bullets in the comic.


I am sure they'll fix whatever temp shots they have in the trailer , but for all I care they can put the grey lambert shaded model and i'll still go see the movie it looks like one hell of a ride.

you have to understand that although this is a movie based on a comic, they can't simply translate everything over because there are just certain things that don't work in live action. When you are using real people, you are somewhat limited by what people can actually do and you can't over-exaggerate like they do in comics and cartoons, it simply doesn't work. That's what messed up Blade 2. You have to tone things down for live action. Even though spidey could move like that in the comics, it has to be toned down for live action if it's going to be believable. Right now it's not believable at all, it looks like bad CG in a cool looking movie. Everything else looks great but as soon as you see the spidey model, it hurts the realism of the movie. The first movie had places where spidey looked fake as well but in general they did a good job, I don't know why they are not keeping things beleivable with this movie. The movie makers want us to believe that it's actually Tobey McGuire swinging among the building tops but in the trailer, it just wasn't happening because I wasn't convinced that he could actually do that by the CG model.

surripere
04-09-2004, 07:46 PM
It's not about how many years you've been doing 3D work or if you have any talent at all. Saying that something looks fake or cartoony is a subjective observation that anyone who has eyes in their head can make. The act in question is "seeing" not "making". It doesn't require that you have any image-making skills whatsoever, only image-seeing skills.

Judge the remark, not the person making the remark.

SheepFactory
04-09-2004, 08:04 PM
Originally posted by karabo
you have to understand that although this is a movie based on a comic, they can't simply translate everything over because there are just certain things that don't work in live action. ..........


you have to understand that this is spiderman and he can move at those speeds. if they put tobey on wires and swing him across the stage you wont get the same effect. yes i bet it'll look more realistic but I dont go to spiderman to see realism. I dont go to movies to nitpick whats logical and whats not , i go to enjoy the ride.

GRMac13
04-09-2004, 08:38 PM
Originally posted by karabo
you have to understand that although this is a movie based on a comic, they can't simply translate everything over because there are just certain things that don't work in live action.

Which is why they are done in CG.

Originally posted by karabo
When you are using real people, you are somewhat limited by what people can actually do and you can't over-exaggerate like they do in comics and cartoons, it simply doesn't work.

With that logic, Spider-man could NEVER be made into a live-action movie. I don't know of any stuntman who could swing around NY and climb up walls while doing backflips and handsprings off ledges 40 stories up. It does work, if you don't sit there and try to rationalize it by thinking "gee, that would never happen in real-life!" No shit, that's the whole point.

Originally posted by karabo
That's what messed up Blade 2. You have to tone things down for live action. Even though spidey could move like that in the comics, it has to be toned down for live action if it's going to be believable.

What's this "toned down" nonsense? I don't understand what you're trying to say here? Could you be more specific? Are you suggesting that Spidey should only do moves in the film that an average human could do in real life? Sort of negates the fact that he supposed to have superhuman powers doesn't it?

Originally posted by karabo
Right now it's not believable at all, it looks like bad CG in a cool looking movie. Everything else looks great but as soon as you see the spidey model, it hurts the realism of the movie.

OK, now you are really confusing me. Is it the model that is offending you, or the animation. Personally I think both were done very well, with the exception of the allegedly "unfinished" rendering and compositing.

Originally posted by karabo
The first movie had places where spidey looked fake as well but in general they did a good job, I don't know why they are not keeping things beleivable with this movie. The movie makers want us to believe that it's actually Tobey McGuire swinging among the building tops but in the trailer, it just wasn't happening because I wasn't convinced that he could actually do that by the CG model.

Guess what? Tobey Maguire can't do any of that stuff, and the movie-makers don't expect you to believe that he can (that's craziness). What they do want you to believe (at least for 2 hours) is that Peter Parker can do all those things. That's what a fantasy movie is; a couple of hours to escape from reality.

This is not directed specifically at you, karabo, but I really wish that more people would articulate their critiques much better than simply "it looks fake" or "it's too cartoony." What the hell does that mean anyway? I understand that this is a CG Forum, and we are here to learn and so forth, but honestly nobody is learning anything by simply saying "eh, it doesn't look good." Granted there were a few well thought out responses regarding compositing and rendering, but most have been very fan-boyish. I'd expect the average movie-goer to say something like "eh, it looked too cartoony" but I expect much more from CG professionals (or aspiring CG pros). What was cartoony? Was it the color of Spidey's suit? The lack of contrast in the CG elements when compared to the live-action plate? The shapes of the geometry in the models? The shaders? The animation? What?

Personally I noticed a few areas where the animation looked a bit odd. I'm not one to nitpick, but if I were, I'd be sure to back up my opinion with an explanation. For example, when Doc Ock throws a clock hand down at Spidey at 2:14, I think Spidey's reaction is wonky-looking. At first I thought it was just some stiff animation, but on closer inspection, it seems like the motion just doesn't flow well with the action. Spidey seems to kick the clock hand away with his left foot. With the pose that puts him in, it is hard to register the kick. In addition to that, when he recovers from the kick, he spins around in the opposite direction (to his right), totally reversing his momentum. I think it would have worked better had they made Spidey simply dodge the hand altogether, or kick it with his other foot, and continue into the spin to the right with the same momentum, or continue spinning to his left after kicking with his left foot. The timing of this shot was actually pretty nice, but the poses could have definitely been better thought out.

Anyway, overall I think the animation is great (as well as the rest of the trailer). The above example shows a place where certain people might find the shot a bit jarring, but most won't understand why. Most of us on this forum should understand why this shot may not work, or may seem odd to certain people. I just wish that in the future people would be more specific with thier own critiques if they feel the need to complain about a movie's FX.

TheWraith
04-09-2004, 09:02 PM
Originally posted by GRMac13

Personally I noticed a few areas where the animation looked a bit odd. I'm not one to nitpick, but if I were, I'd be sure to back up my opinion with an explanation. For example, when Doc Ock throws a clock hand down at Spidey at 2:14, I think Spidey's reaction is wonky-looking. At first I thought it was just some stiff animation, but on closer inspection, it seems like the motion just doesn't flow well with the action. Spidey seems to kick the clock hand away with his left foot. With the pose that puts him in, it is hard to register the kick. In addition to that, when he recovers from the kick, he spins around in the opposite direction (to his right), totally reversing his momentum. I think it would have worked better had they made Spidey simply dodge the hand altogether, or kick it with his other foot, and continue into the spin to the right with the same momentum, or continue spinning to his left after kicking with his left foot. The timing of this shot was actually pretty nice, but the poses could have definitely been better thought out.


way to show how its done. i had an art class where we critiqued each others paintings each week, and while doing so we weren't allowed to say "like". we couldn't say "i like this" or "i don't like that", we actually had to be descriptive. and you have just shown how how to critique something in a professional manner.

surripere
04-09-2004, 09:04 PM
GRMac13,

You're right, one should always back up their critiques with specifics, because it really is too easy to just say something looks a certain way without elaborating. You put it well. I for my part admit that I took a shortcut and assumed that everyone who watched the trailer carefully would know what I was talking about when I used the word "cartoony". My bad, I guess.

To elaborate, my point was about the lighting and contrast on Spiderman not being consistent with the rest of the shot, nor the movements of the character being consistent with the physical laws we are used to. My question was just whether people thought this was all intentional.

Lil_Mick
04-09-2004, 09:13 PM
I agree with surripere about the cartoony look. I feel that there is just a lot of contrast in some areas, like when he's swinging in a dark enviroment and he is still bright. And there are some shots that need some shadows as well.
As for the physics behind it I can see where you're going with it not being consistant with the laws we're used to, but also keep in mind that some of the physical laws need to be bent in order to make SM do what he is supposed to do. so when he is flying around it will look wierd 'cause we arn't used to seeing that in every day life.

My only other comment is that it IS still just a preview. There are still gonna be tweaks made to it, so some of the things we see will be better in the film.

~J

majofo
04-09-2004, 09:35 PM
That movie looks fricken sweet!!!
and I have to say I am finding the whole Harry Osborn thing interesting..wonder if they will do a movie with him as the Green Goblin!
That movie looks WAY better then the first one!!

Wowweee

~Majofo

fattyLees
04-09-2004, 09:37 PM
Looks like the story is really tight and shows a lot of promise. Can't wait till it comes out.

-Fatty

luv2xlr8
04-09-2004, 10:04 PM
Looks good, could be better than the first. But that Kristan D does not look or act the part for Mary Jane. MJ suppose to be some tall hot lookin playboy women like the comics i read.
http://www.spiderfan.org/characters/images/mary_jane/mcfarlane_mj3.jpg

FloydBishop
04-09-2004, 10:07 PM
Top Ten Villians or other Marvel characters that should be in future Spider Man films:

10: Sandman

9: Damage Control

8: Mysterio

7: Electro

6: Kraven the Hunter

5: Rhino

4: Venom

3: Captain America

2: Kingpin

1: The Fantastic Four


For the third film, it would be great if they had Spider Man try and joint the Fantastic Four, just like the old school comic. Seeing Spider Man duke it out with Ben Grim and Johnny Storm would be great!

http://www.bigreds.com/spiderman1.gif

luv2xlr8
04-09-2004, 10:10 PM
I choose.....:buttrock:
http://www.godflesh.com/sf/art/mvc/supers/venom.jpg

kicit
04-09-2004, 10:13 PM
nice nice till i cant say anything, but hope the stodyline is interesting also...

I prefer on story more on the CG ;)

for example Final Fantasy the spirit within is bad movie.... :hmm:

Pete Latrofa
04-09-2004, 10:26 PM
:buttrock: :buttrock: :buttrock: :buttrock:

jbw
04-09-2004, 11:15 PM
Yay! A decent spidey villian finally! :)
This is a vast improvement over the teaser trailer that was posted a while back.
Good job and I can't wait to see it!

ta,
jbw

Bonedaddy
04-09-2004, 11:39 PM
Originally posted by Floyd Bishop
2: Kingpin
[/B]

Didn't Ben Affleck already kill him though?

<---didn't see that movie

gabe28
04-10-2004, 12:21 AM
Didn't Ben Affleck already kill him though?
No... one of the only things I liked about DD the movie was that they for once did not kill off the villian in a comic based movie. When will Hollywood realise that super heros need recurring arch villians?

GRMac13
04-10-2004, 12:22 AM
Originally posted by Bonedaddy
Didn't Ben Affleck already kill him tho ugh?

No. He's "not the bad guy." :D

ZEROSKULL
04-10-2004, 02:48 AM
Wow and love it till the end

iconboy
04-10-2004, 05:48 AM
hey all

just wanted to add something..

I just got back from watching helboy and guess what trailer they showed before it? Yeppers! Spidey 2! , and although i really didnt complain about the lighting and animation of the CG spidey, i did notice what everyone else was pointing out, and let me just put some of your concerns to rest. On the big screen and in a dark theatre the odd animation and "out of place" CG looks real and awsome. It flows naturally and all the flaws u might have picked out actually blend with the darker film and screen. I dunno maybe all the CG was done to be viewed on a theatre screen and not in glaring detail on our monitors in quicktime ?? ;)

SpiralFace
04-10-2004, 09:07 AM
I whould have to agree with Iconboy. I have yet to see this latest trailer in the theaters, but there where things in the hellboy trailer that I thought looked horrible, but ended up translating to the big screen insanely well. (If only the script for the movie was as well done as the special effects)

I do see where people can see the bad renders. But I've looked closely at them as well and I have to say that they don't look to bright, I think there color is just to intense, and it makes the models pop out from the live action shot.

But at the same time the ones that don't look all so hot, Like the one where he's on the subway car and jumping on the window sill, also look like they don't have shadows. So although I agree that they whould never put that many temp renders into the trailer, They might be still iorning out the composoting.

As for the outdoor sceens with him, he looks exactly the same from the first one at the finally of the movie when he jumps on the flag post ontop of the empire state building. They might have just used the model and textures from the first one to save on time. God knows this one looks like alot more cg work then the first one. Doc Oc's tenticals alone must have taken up a huge amount of time. looks like we'll be seeing alot of digital double action. Or at least alot more then the first one.

Pufferfish
04-10-2004, 09:46 AM
Im so sorry for you guys. Im so gona enjoy this movie. Sorry to read that you can't.


Well... what can you expect when there's a forum full of people who actually can find bad CG in photograph. Yep, it has happened here.

-PFish

Emmanuel
04-10-2004, 11:14 AM
I like the "The story continues" part at the end, seems they think that LOTR and MATRIX "continuity" is a nice thing even amongst Spider-Man movies :)
Maybe thats a trend for the future.
In the past most "series" had more the feeling of independant episodes (Indy, James Bond, the Clancy movies...).

samartin
04-10-2004, 11:45 AM
Originally posted by iconboy
u didnt see spiderman because the alley fight looked weird?

I'm afraid so, I thought he was just too floaty and it just didn't sit with me, but I am however prepared to do the 1st in the series just so I can go watch the 2nd :thumbsup:

I'm afraid when I enjoy a movie and there's this really naf part in it, I just :shudder: and end up hating the film, Tom Cruise being blown away from the helicopter and ending up on a high speed train :shudder:

That's just me but I do expect the 2nd movie judging by the trailer to look very cool...

eliseu gouveia
04-10-2004, 11:46 AM
Originally posted by Pufferfish
Well... what can you expect when there's a forum full of people who actually can find bad CG in photograph. Yep, it has happened here.
-PFish

LOL :beer:

Point me the thread, I gotta see that one! :D

keltuzar
04-10-2004, 02:47 PM
That it... I hate trailers they have given the whole story away! What is wrong with these people who cut the trailers? Now when I goto see the movie I will know all the scenes and not even enjoy them.
Obviously its a good trailer at the cost of what ? the whole movie?

Valkyrien
04-10-2004, 04:15 PM
frickin EXCELLENT!:bounce:

Joss
04-10-2004, 05:16 PM
DANNY ELFMAN

Isn't he doing the scoring? I know he did the first film.

Virum
04-10-2004, 05:25 PM
Originally posted by keltuzar
That it... I hate trailers they have given the whole story away! What is wrong with these people who cut the trailers? Now when I goto see the movie I will know all the scenes and not even enjoy them.
Obviously its a good trailer at the cost of what ? the whole movie?

And you still watch them. :rolleyes:

The FreakyOne
04-10-2004, 05:39 PM
Originally posted by 1001 JediNights
What song was that?

Anyway, excellant footage. I look forward to this one. And yes, I think he WAS supposed to look a bit cartoony.

not 100% sure but i think it was Mozart - Lacremosa


oh and dont expect venom on the big screen anytime soon, atleast in a spider man movie, he doesnt belong to marvel :-p

[possible plot spoiler,i think]



my guess is since harry is going to find out who spider man is that but the 4th movie or so were going to see signs of harry becoming the next goblin


[/possible plot spoiler,i think]


Originally posted by fr3drik
I just heard that Sony Pictures has announced that Spiderman 3 will have its USA opening on May 3rd, 2007. I went to their web site but I couldn't find any press info... Sam Raimi, who also directed the first and second movie, will apparently be directing the third one. Kirsten Dunst och Tobey Maguire are both starring in the third movie.

This whole talk about sequels, prequels ...some of them are actually good I think. It's rare but some sequels are even better than the first movie. You can't really just generalize like that. But of course, it's kind of pathetic to hear something like that they are making a Final Destination 3 and are thinking about following in Spy Kids 3D's footsteps ...making it in 3D. I have an idea! Let's make it a reality show while we are at it.

they actually anounced that here having 6 iunstallations of spider man movies in total :drool:

a very kick butt site that i visit freaquently... www.superherohype.com awesome site :)

keltuzar
04-10-2004, 09:11 PM
Originally posted by Virum
And you still watch them. :rolleyes:
True, but... its not the same any more :cry:

JDex
04-10-2004, 09:31 PM
Originally posted by keltuzar
True, but... its not the same any more :cry:


I think he is refering to the fact that you still watch the teaser/trailers... If you don't want to know about the story, you should avoid them, since 7/10 times they give most of the storyline away.

Unled
04-10-2004, 09:41 PM
That's what I liked about the Jurassic Park trailers. They only gave you brief glimpses and left the rest to your imagination. Leaves you :drool:

As for Spiderman, I think it's going to kickass. I have faith in Sam Raimi, and he fully delivered on the first one.

Virum
04-11-2004, 02:57 PM
Originally posted by JDex
I think he is refering to the fact that you still watch the teaser/trailers... If you don't want to know about the story, you should avoid them, since 7/10 times they give most of the storyline away.

Bingo! :thumbsup:

keltuzar
04-11-2004, 04:08 PM
then what is the use of trailers? The whole basic purpose of a trailer is to give a very small jist of the movie nothing else. Its some hot shot noob editor who thinks its kewl to put some of the main scenes in the trailer making it all good and flashy.
The whole purpose of the trailer is not to give the whole story away but just peices of information so that people are attracted to see the movie.
IMO the previous trailer was good becuase it only showed breif shots of dr.octopus and spideman doing his thing. Nothing too flashy and it made every1 talk and get excited.

JDex
04-11-2004, 04:16 PM
I highly doubt that it is some n00b editor... I'd bet dollars to donuts that it's Sony Executives saying "Everyone wants to know what this movie is about and what it looks like, so lets give them what (I think) they want. They will come to see the movie for the big screen and the sound system, they don't care if it's new storyline info or not, look at Lord of the Rings... the vast majority of repeat viewers knew the storyline before their first viewing, and they came over and over. $$$$$$$$$$$$$"


Hehe... dollars to donuts, you hear me, dollars to donuts. :D :wavey:

keltuzar
04-11-2004, 04:28 PM
Hey I noticed an easter egg!,
The scene when dr.octopus takes peter parker in the resteraunt he has glasses and in the closeup of him laughin he has no glasses check it out:-
http://img22.photobucket.com/albums/v66/keltuzar/spider3.jpg
http://img22.photobucket.com/albums/v66/keltuzar/spider2.jpg
http://img22.photobucket.com/albums/v66/keltuzar/spider1.jpg
boy I am such a geek :(

SheepFactory
04-11-2004, 04:46 PM
maybe he takes em off between the scenes and we dont see it at the trailer.

alseides
04-11-2004, 08:19 PM
I know it was a while back in the thread when people were discussing how spiderman looks "cartoony".... but I don't think they tried to make him look cartoony at all. That just wouldn't make sense. I mean its a live footage movie, why make the main character be cartoon? However, whether or not that was a desired effect doesn't really matter, because it looks ugly either way. It could still look cartoony and look really good, but it doesn't.

danielkenobi
04-12-2004, 06:49 AM
I dont think he looks cartoni. They change the color of the costum for this movie and even when is live action it looks the same to me. I mean even toby with the costum look cartoni ;).
Its ok to me the onli shot that I dont like, if is the final render, is the one in the second 44, I cant see the diference betwen the lighting inside and outside the building, And I don´t see the shadows of spiderman over the window. Maybe just my idea but the rest of the trailer is just great, the only, movie for which I prefere to miss the trailer, and wait for the cinema is Starwars. Big fan waiting for the next year, you should do the same if you are a spidi fan.
And after waching the trailer, will be alot of fun that´s for shure.

About the animation, I don´t care if it looks real, if it looks cool its ok to me. And we can´t critic the spin, or movement of some shots because we haven´t seen how he arrive to that point. I mean afte watching the movie or a complete secuence you can critic that. My opinion. :thumbsup: :buttrock:
Ps I agree sheep Factory maybe we cant see in the trailer when he took of his glasses.

FUG1T1VE
04-12-2004, 09:46 AM
I’m not too concerned on the effects on this film or if the whole story has been narrowed down in the trailer (because as most spidey fans, we know the whole story :p: ) as of yet until the movie hits the big screen. However, it shows a lot of the things he deals with in his "Daily Bugle life" from the comics. In a lot of them, after he has learned that with great power comes... he questions himself why he still puts on his costume, why he doesn't live a "normal" college life, he’s always getting fired and hired by JJ, JJ trashing the pics he takes, JJ hating spidey even after he saves his life a few times, Robie is always supporting him, and not to mention putting the life of others before his own, putting in danger the lives of those who are dearest to him, not spending time with MJ :love: :love:, so you can expect this and more on SM3, 4,5,6, 7 or however many movies they make because that’s what makes him who he is ... But like in the comics there is a lot of little things that make the comic book so great, and makes you want to read the next book.

PS: the built in webshooters still SUCK, he has to run out of web at one point or another so that when hes fighting the bad guys it creates another dilema, but thats just the fan in me.

I’m buying my tickets ahead of time. :thumbsup:

Aegis Prime
04-12-2004, 11:11 AM
The shot with Spidey in the window looks very wrong but the hell with that - it looks like it's gonna be heaps of fun anyway... :buttrock:

adonihs
04-12-2004, 05:52 PM
It's really funny to see all the people with no jobs in the buisness bashing the visual effects.

Way to boost your self esteem! :applause:

Virum
04-12-2004, 07:37 PM
PS: the built in webshooters still SUCK, he has to run out of web at one point or another so that when hes fighting the bad guys it creates another dilema, but thats just the fan in me. [/B]

I never read the books, but I like the built in shooters myself. And yes, he could still run out. REAL Spiders can run out of web. If he uses it faster than his body makes it; he will run out. The real question is will director ever have that happen.

Wizdoc
04-19-2004, 07:51 AM
FYI, the song in the trailer is Mozart's Lacrimosa, remixed (or rather, re-imagined) by Immediate Music. They do a lot trailer music.

Check out some samples here:

http://www.immediatemusic.com

CGTalk Moderation
01-17-2006, 11:00 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.