I understand that in movies like King Kong, they used CGI cause it was an ape. I understand why in Jurrasic Park, they used CGI, cause they are dinosaurs. But in this movie, the giants are just giant men. So the CGI comes off looking rather fake, when they try to make mens faces from CGI.
Why not just use real actors? And I think of a few that would have made great evil giants.
Are you a troll or retarded enough to think people aren't arguing over the quality of the CGI and just hate CGI? Why do you come to a website that requires cognitive thinking to understand other people when you're so stupid?
shareI like how that had virtually nothing to do with what he/she was talking about and didn't answer their question.
"I've been living on toxic waste for years, and I'm fine. Just ask my other heads!"
Ok, what do you think "use real actors and make them big?" even means? because the technology would still use CGI to get the images of actors on the screen, it's almost like he's retard and asking why didn't they use real giants. It's the 21st century, most special effects will employ CGI to some degree, even green screens use computers. It's not like a Roger Corman movie where they can just glue a cardboard fin to the back of a lizard.
SO I'm still wondering if the OP is a troll or stupid.
Thanks for giving me the non-OCD/Tourette's version.
"I've been living on toxic waste for years, and I'm fine. Just ask my other heads!"
So, why CGI giants? Why not use real actors and make them big?
shareOk, what do you think "use real actors and make them big?"
The OP is correct. CGI can not replicate the appearance and movement of a person with 100% accuracy. A combination of green screen (to project the actors playing giants onto the frame in a larger format than the actors playing people) and CGI (to blend the two shots together) would have worked better.
There, hope this soothes your pain over the phrase make them big.
You can't palm off a second-rater on me. You gotta remember I was in the pink!
they looked fine
they were not supposed to look human
as you can see they were misshapen deformed and even one of them had 2 heads
also when making a person look larger they do not project them onto anything when making the hobbits look smaller they did trick photography
like having them sit next to each other on a carriage but in reality they would build two separate carriages then have them at different angles this gave the illusion that frodo was smaller
You do understand that compositing images on a computer is not CGI. CGI stands for Computer Generated Imagery which generally refers to 3D animation. Filming real actors and then compositing them in the computer so that some look smaller and some look larger is not CGI. It's Photographically Generated Imagery that has been digitally composited.
or ...
CGI = LOTR Trolls = fake looking
Actors in makeup = LOTR Orcs = real looking
actually they did not use such methods on lord of the rings.
when making the hobbits and dwarfs look smaller they did so with simple illusions
by proper camera angle
they do not use CGI to make a person look bigger they use illusions
when making gandalff look larger than the hobbits they did so by a trick of the camera placing a camera at a specific angle so it only appears that they are larger
@OP
For $200 mil the CGI giants in this movie look like crap. They did a 10x better job with CGI giants in Wrath of the Titans for $150 mil. Using real actors scaled up or CGI'd to look like giants would still have looked fake in my opinion.
They dont look like real humans, thats why.
shareWhat the op means imo is that they should have done a combo of having 80% real and 20% cgi. So like nighy in potc where only the tentacles were cgi and the rest mainly prosthetics. Or I think the orcs in lotr are also mainly prosthetics too.
shareI'm sorry, what prosthetics would that be?
http://images.usatoday.com/life/_photos/2006/07/17/pirates-topper.jpg
Davy Jones was full CGI. The actor was used for MOCAP.
shareAs others have said everything on Davy Jones was CGI including his hat and clothes.
[/NIIYYAAAAH!]
The advantage to CGI is that you have better control of 3 dimensions and lighting. You can simulate depth of field much easier. The 3 models can get simulated lighting like that of the scene. You don't need to do any weird shots like Lord of the Rings. There isn't much need to set up wires to swing objects around. Your 3d models can interacts with other 3d models.
Avatar is a good example.
shareUnless you got some magic beans to make real actors grow big.....
---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.
> Unless you got some magic beans to make real actors grow big.....
I think you are mistaken about what happens when someone eats the magic beans.
--
What Would Jesus Do For A Klondike Bar (WWJDFAKB)?
I think you fail to realize that beans come in different forms.
---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.
Magic beans are all the same.
--
What Would Jesus Do For A Klondike Bar (WWJDFAKB)?
Of course not. their magic.
---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.
> Of course not. their magic.
So you say. Yet, every magic bean we saw in the movie was exactly the same. Plus, this movie was presented as a real history of Britain and I've never heard of any other type of magic bean in the real history of the world.
Since your claim is that there are many types of magic beans, please show one different than in this movie.
--
What Would Jesus Do For A Klondike Bar (WWJDFAKB)?
And you heard of giants coming from a sky off giant beanstalks in real history of Britain? Oh my.....
You want other magic beans? how about healing ones? http://dragonball.wikia.com/wiki/Senzu_Bean
---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.
> And you heard of giants coming from a sky off giant beanstalks in real history of Britain?
Well, the movie explains to us that the giant world is only connected to our Earth when a stalk from this magic bean makes the connection and that has only happened twice in history.
The rest of the time, giant land is unobservable and inaccessible.
So, no. I have not personally seen any giants from the sky nor do I know anyone who has. That's not proof that they aren't there.
> You want other magic beans? how about healing ones?
Very good. In the dragonball universe, those beans exist and it is unlikely that "giant beanstalk" beans do not exist. Nothing in either movie hints that the other kind of bean exists.
--
What Would Jesus Do For A Klondike Bar (WWJDFAKB)?
NOrmally a claimant has to provide proof in order to say something exists. Just because something wasnt proven to not exist does not mean it does.
The movie explains that there are magic beans created by warlocks (what else did they create?) that connect to the land of the giants, which they though were gods. By your logic since there is no proof they didnt create size growing beans, they had, therefore they exist. case closed.
but its not that simple though. first you need to find them to claim they exist in that universe. however we were nto talking about universe of the movie. we were talking about real deal here since were talking about actors, so in such universe neither beans exist. and if we are making up universes we may jut as well make up anything we want.
---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.
> NOrmally a claimant has to provide proof in order to say something exists.
Excellent observation. So, let's go back in this thread to the point where someone first mentioned alternate beans. There was a guy "Strazdamonas" that said, "Unless you got some magic beans to make real actors grow big..... "
So, let's see if he can provide proof for these magic beans that would make an actor grow big.
--
What Would Jesus Do For A Klondike Bar (WWJDFAKB)?
never once did the movie say warlocks in fact the term warlock in old English means oath breaker and has nothing to do with magic
shareBecause film makers are lazy, that's why.
Limit of the Willing Suspension of Disbelief: directly proportional to its awesomeness.
they are not human
or you have real ugly friends or something
I agree, I would have rather had actors in make up.
sharenever once did the movie say warlocks in fact the term warlock in old English means oath breaker and has nothing to do with magic