PDA

View Full Version : Transformers 2 :: Film Production Focus


PaulHellard
07-07-2009, 07:22 AM
Hey there,

This feature article was one of the most popular features posted on CGSociety in 2009. I reckon it deserves a second look, don't you think?

There was just so much going on in the Transformers movie, we decided to focus in on Alice, the robot girl and Reed Man, the so-thin robot that builds and hides. Digital Domain show their significant prowess in VFX work that clearly stands out in the production.
Click, read and chat.

http://features.cgsociety.org//images/plugs/feature/transformers_plug.jpg (http://features.cgsociety.org/story.php?story_id=5153)

droidoz
07-07-2009, 08:20 AM
Very interesting, I might go see the movie just for the effects! Also, I wonder how the robot designs work in motion because I find them a little hard to read in those still images.
Thanks for the article!
Cheers

j00st81
07-07-2009, 10:04 AM
if these shots get any more complicated it might be just easier to draw each frame by hand ;o

hesido
07-07-2009, 11:30 AM
The fx are superb in this movie, but the addition of a human looking robot (packed with soft cheeks, fleshy lips, etc etc) is a game changer and shouldn't have been included in the movie. Tho cgtalk is not the place to discuss it, I can't help myself but underline the faulty nature of this title..

Shademaster
07-07-2009, 11:39 AM
Transformers was awesome to watch :D , one big showreel of explosions, robots, weapons and babes. Just how I like my entertainment.

stefantotalfilm
07-07-2009, 11:47 AM
Greaat article!

RobertoOrtiz
07-07-2009, 12:50 PM
The fx are superb in this movie, but the addition of a human looking robot (packed with soft cheeks, fleshy lips, etc etc) is a game changer and shouldn't have been included in the movie. Tho cgtalk is not the place to discuss it, I can't help myself but underline the faulty nature of this title..

There is a very good thread on GD that you can go and discuss the merits of the film:
Transformers ROTF, the Reviews (http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=2&t=777291)

Boone
07-07-2009, 01:55 PM
Personally, I don't think Bay spent the budget wisely at all. "Alice" was a waste of resources and would have been better spent elsewhere polishing up. There is only so much these VFX houses can cope with.

efcos
07-07-2009, 02:20 PM
amazing FX!

TyroneMaddams
07-07-2009, 03:46 PM
Freaking Beautiful!!

:love::love::love:


- Ty

Venkman
07-07-2009, 03:52 PM
I went to that movie to see VFX companies at the top of their game.

I was not disappointed. I was especially impressed how all these guys had to integrate their CG characters into shots that Bay notoriously fills with live explosions and plumes of cement dust.

adrencg
07-07-2009, 07:50 PM
Very interesting, I might go see the movie just for the effects! Also, I wonder how the robot designs work in motion because I find them a little hard to read in those still images.
Thanks for the article!
Cheers

Its the best reason to go see it. I saw it in IMAX, and I can say that without a doubt the effects in this movie are above top notch. The most impressive thing I've ever seen from an effects standpoint.

Tober
07-07-2009, 09:19 PM
Interesting article, thanks. :)


Digital Domain teams discusses the new challenges.
Grammar/typo in your sub-heading? :p

DD worked on five main categories. Alice the Pretender. The kitchen bots. Wheelie. Soundwave, and Reed Man. About 130 shots in all, with 90% really hard stuff! according to VFX Supervisor Matthew Butler. Bay felt he had already shown the transformations in the first film, so wanted to move on to other things. However, Reedman and Alice the Pretender were two that were designed to transform.
I think you mean to say 'were two that were designed to transform in ways that have not previously been seen' or such. All five transform, Reedman and Alice do so in a much less conventional manner though.


Gizmodo did a production focus on Alice too:

Gizmodo - Why Just 2 Seconds of Transformers 2 Took 3 Months to Complete (http://gizmodo.com/5305809/why-just-2-seconds-of-transformers-2-took-3-months-to-complete)

Navstar
07-07-2009, 09:39 PM
So much hard work and long hours to create really amazing, technically brilliant visuals... for such a terrible movie.

Script criticism aside, I think the Bay-formers designs for TF2 were too out there. The Decepticons got very snakey, lizardy and "creaturey". Many were too intricate and ended up looking flimsy and delicate. And with some, I wasn't sure what I was looking at. Is that a leg? An arm? What part of his face is that?

sergioduque
07-07-2009, 10:19 PM
i didnt get the human robot either apart from that hell yeah! awsome effects work! i would love to see some of the concept art.

vshen
07-08-2009, 01:22 AM
Watching the effects of this film was mind boggling! My favourite was the forest fight with optimus. I would have loved the fight scene with the fallen and optimus to be longer and some of the desert fight scenes to be cut. Also I would've like to see the fallen to transform to something.... A toaster.... anything really.... it is transformers.

Nidirhab
07-08-2009, 09:48 AM
46 robots it's not good idea, the first Transformers movie was a classic with 16 robots and first movie more better that second one!

byder
07-09-2009, 12:04 PM
Loved the movie, and the visuals really were impressive! Its great reading articles like this! :)

The fact that the one robot converts to a girl, put it quite close to the relms of Terminator... coz she doesn't quiet transform....

Still, loved it!!

unwrap
07-09-2009, 10:28 PM
Horrible cheesy mindless movie, but good VFX, probably the only positive thing...

Pixanaut
07-10-2009, 08:13 AM
If Alice can shape herself as a human, why didn't she just shape herself as Micheala... the Decepticons know about her from the first movie, and know that she and Sam are together. Sam would have willingly kissed his own girlfriend.

Wicked VFX.
Script FAIL.

Laa-Yosh
07-10-2009, 09:53 AM
If Alice can shape herself as a human, why didn't she just shape herself as Micheala... the Decepticons know about her from the first movie, and know that she and Sam are together. Sam would have willingly kissed his own girlfriend.

Wicked VFX.
Script FAIL.


That's your biggest problem? How about this, from Topless Robot's TF2 FAQ:

So how do the Decepticons plan to get the symbols, I guess?
Well, the Decepticons have very cunningly created a hot chick robot who they enrolled in the same college and put in the same astronomy class as Sam. And they made her a huge slut.

There's a slutty Decepticon?
Yeah, she's a real ho. The Decepticons apparently have an incredibly powerful slut-making program, because she has it down, man. Anyways--

Didn't Sam touch the shard and get the symbols stuck in his head on his first day of college?
Yes.

So the Decepticons made a slutty robot to attend his college and enrolled her in classes and put her in on-campus housing just in case Sam ended up being important at some point in the future?
Apparently. It was an elaborate plan, but it sure paid off.

Not to mention how she didn't have a clue about Bumblebee... and wasn't in any contact with the Decepticons anyway... so wether she looks like Michaela or not doesn't really matter in the end ;)

Briareos
07-10-2009, 07:35 PM
I believe this thread and article is about the visual effects work put into the film.

If your gonna bash the film, thats fine. But this isn't the place. Give some respect to the artists that put alot of work into this project.

RobertoOrtiz
07-10-2009, 08:37 PM
I believe this thread and article is about the visual effects work put into the film.

If your gonna bash the film, thats fine. But this isn't the place. Give some respect to the artists that put alot of work into this project.

Amen,
Lets add to that that there is already a very good thread on GD that you can go and discuss the merits of the film:
Transformers ROTF, the Reviews (http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?f=2&t=777291)

Pixanaut
07-10-2009, 09:24 PM
I believe this thread and article is about the visual effects work put into the film.

If your gonna bash the film, thats fine. But this isn't the place. Give some respect to the artists that put alot of work into this project.

Please take no offense in my comment up above. Honestly, the VFX in this were stellar... Entertaining and fun to watch.

I'm no Bay-hater either. The guy does what he does, and for what he does, he goes balls-out... which is admirable. I've found most of his films fun to watch. Popcorn flicks, sure, but once in a while (actually, more often than not - I have enough drama in my life), that's what I want.

My problem is with the studio and to some extent, the writers. It's unfortunate that they didn't have the time to really focus on this a bit more. (Which pains me to say because I've done VFX for many of the shows these two writers worked on.) The studio's release date was too soon, the writer's strike didn't help, etc... a lot of factors.

You artists did great, it's the story that let me down. I've been in that situation many times myself... you put your heart and soul into something, pushing your pixels until you're burned out, but ultimately proud of what you've accomplished - and rightly so - and then you see the final product, and find that your awesome elements are sandwiched between mediocre blocks of dialogue, the brunt force of painful exposition, and ignored plotholes.

I stopped doing CG over a year ago to pursue writing because I'm just tired of the endless hours spent making incredible effects for wafer thin stories. It is disrespectful to the guys who don't see the light of day for the better part of a year. You guys deserve better out of Hollywood's writers.

ktxed
07-10-2009, 09:38 PM
DD are officially GODS ! :buttrock:and possibly of alien origin ;)

ChristopheFauconneau
07-11-2009, 12:58 AM
i must admit the best animations, particles, 3d directing and layers using i've ever seen are in this movie, really impressive work !

strangely, it has been made by 3d masters for a childish audience; commercial purposes are mainly working for vfx quality, fortunately...

Masakari
07-21-2009, 07:11 PM
I've seen the movie twice, and it is without doubt the best fx i've ever seen, simply amazing work from DD, ILM, and all the others i unfortunately don't know the name of. Top notch! :thumbsup:

Of course, the movie itself is kinda bad, but thats another topic.

I do have the same issue most people have said - the designs are overly complicated, and combined with Bay's direction, it results in a visual mess in a lot of shots. Likewise, 46 robots is too much, with the script, their design, and the direction, you can barely "understand them".

SantoAnderson
01-07-2010, 03:52 AM
I watched this Blu Ray last night, with the sound off. I am constantly blown away by the quality of the mats, the match-moving, animation, lighting, rendering, and volume of geometry on screen at any given moment. But it's so sad that this movie was so BAD. Whoever had the idea to give a robot testicles should quit his day job... but I digress, beautiful VFX.

pimeto
01-07-2010, 08:38 AM
Transformers has really wonderful CG, but its nothing compared to Avatar! :bowdown:
I dont get the point of this second look at Transformers.... :curious:

tinonetic
01-07-2010, 12:44 PM
transformers definitely has great effects.


terrible story line and acting

TheRedDread
01-07-2010, 09:33 PM
Stunning VFX.

MikeNash
01-08-2010, 11:34 AM
Pfft bunch of over detailed eye confusing robots to make you think its better then it really is cos you can't see what hell going on half the time.
But... never the less its still really good hehe

Lets hope they slow it down on next one, so really shows of how badass it is.

District 9 deserves best of 09 or Avatar if there was to be one in the future hopefully :).

nightwoodwolf
01-14-2010, 04:59 AM
awesome movie and awesome work !! ... those artists rocks

CGTalk Moderation
01-14-2010, 04:59 AM
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.