By now, most have seen the Hulk trailers for the upcoming movie. A few may have run across the various publications; magazines, books and so forth. That said, I have one complaint about the Hulk â€" the Hulk’s muscles are done very poorly. Especially, the way they move... it’s not natural looking.
I know that Stan Lee described the Hulk as “a block of muscle and not a body builder,†but when someone has that much muscle, he should have more definition in the arms... Just look at the available Hulk trailers, photos etc... His chest and arms are like pudge without hardly any bicep, shoulder or tricep definition...
When a person lifts something or exerts strength, his muscles contract and extrude... This isn’t the case with the CGI Hulk. His arms are aways flabby without definition when they should be like the 13†toys. Are we to assume that the Hulk has fatty tissue all around him, because that’s how it is for guys who don’t have definition. Aside from that, the movement of his muscles aren’t natural... the tricep and bicep move accordingly to the shoulders and certain indents are made on the arm... Not so with this Hulk.
Actually, I have two complaints... All the Hulk shots I’ve seen so far are blurry and quick to elude the audience... Jurassic Park was an eye opener because the Dinosaurs looked convincingly real... and in broad daylight! I sincerely hope the Hulk can simulate this as well... A 150 Million Dollar movie should.
Well, I did locate one picture of a real up close of the Hulk and must say that I really am impressed and cant tell it is CGI
http://entertainment.msn.com/netcal/default.aspx?netcal=150
How do you make seperate links on this page by the way???
I can see where you're coming from, Sage. A TON of people have expressed that same concern ever since the ads for the Hulk ran during the Super Bowl. But honestly, I can say that the latest trailer that is being circulated has made me take even more interest in the movie. I'm not much of a Hulk comic book fan, so I don't know too much about the comics, original animations, etc. But the first time I heard Ang Lee was directing, I knew we'd be in for some visual treats. I know an entire movie shouldn't be based on that, but look at some of the stuff the CGI Hulk's doing during the trailers. Tossing tanks away like they're nothing, and doing other feats that would be hard to replicate without effects. I'm not trying to glorify the use of FX in modern movies, but I think that comic book movies like the Hulk benefit somewhat from the use of FX. Now to base a main character on FX is a pretty ballsy move. Only time will tell to see if it paid off or not.
I read a "review" the other day where a guy downloaded a workprint off of the Internet. He said the movie was terrible, the FX sucked badly, the movie was plodding and boring, and that Bana sucked as an actor. This was based off of the workprint though, keep that in mind as far as the FX go. It's hard to tell whether the guy was serious or if he was just adding to the negative word-of-mouth. So who knows how the film will turn out. It's all just a matter of opinion in the end.
Nick
It's hard to tell whether the guy was serious or if he was just adding to the negative word-of-mouth
Whenver there's something that is considered 'cool' there's always someone who tries to seem above it all be belittling what everyone else is saying is cool. For every 100 people who like "Titanic" will be 10 who think it's stupid and you think "Army Of Darnkess" is cool, for which there's always at least ine is have to express his ultra-coolness by expressing that "Army Of Darkness" is stupid
Dolph Lundgren wrote:
>Tossing tanks away like
> they're nothing, and doing other feats that would be hard to
> replicate without effects. I'm not trying to glorify the use
> of FX in modern movies, but I think that comic book movies like
> the Hulk benefit somewhat from the use of FX. Now to base a
> main character on FX is a pretty ballsy move. Only time will
> tell to see if it paid off or not.
Yes, I know that CGI would be necessary to simulate tossing a tank. Heck, the Hulk could toss 10 tanks easily... My point is that "visually," his muscles don't look strained or at least exerted... When throwing something, someone of his shear size would be ripped with muscles, not look soft and pudgy.
Imagine walking up to the Hulk himself and telling him that his arms look too flabby!
He'd growl and bend down to your face...."m m m m my Mr. Hulk what a nice complexion you hhh have!"
Hey, but you have to admit, his arms look pudgy...
Well, I gave this some consideration. Perhaps you could reason it all away as this ultra dense skin looking like pudge and obscuring the muscle underneath. Look how weird Mr. Hyde is looking from LXG with all the ultra definition.
As thick as skin is, that doesn't explain that certain mucles extrude when moving in particular ways. There's a pic at Hulk.com where he blasts out of the H-Chamber flexing his arms in anger... You'll notice that there's hardly any bicep extrusion when in real-life, that would be the most signifcant change. Also, where are the veins? I see very minimal, if any... For sure, veins would be popping out, for skin, thick as it may be allows for this. If the Hulk is throwing objects, etc... you would clearly see extrusion of mucles and veins.
My stomach is too flabby.
I'm sorry but all of this talk about flabby arms and muscle tone doesn't change 1 fact for me. The Hulk looks very fake and cartoonish to me. My son said Scooby Doo looked better and I tend to agree. I will still see the movie but I will not expect much.
So is mine...damn Whoppers. I'm going to sue Burger King for ruining my body. :-D
Yeah, but that's okay, you're not $100 million worth of CGI.... (or am I assuming too much?)
No, but when I'm finished with my lawsuit I will be worth 100 million...and then I'll be heading straight over to George A. Romero's house with a suitcase full of cash and shouting "Let's make DEAD RECKONING!"...all the way!
I've seen the commercials and I agree the Hulk looks too much like a cartoon. I didn't notice the muscles or anything like that, just that he looks like an animated action figure. They should have 'dirtied' him up a little, added texturing etc. He kind of looks like a simple color render that hasn't had the final touches put on it yet.
Very possibly, each cg animation shot goes through many steps and I get the feeling that some of the trailers on some movies areput out before all the production work is done, so you sometimes see some CG stuff that is not quite done yet
Ok, I just saw a different commercial that had different scenes in it. They showed several closeups of the Hulk, which looked much better than any of the shots I'd seen before.
In the thread titled WHAT'S UP WITH SPECIAL EFFECTS? I already weighed in on how silly I think the Hulk looks in the new movie, so I might as well add my unsolicited two cents on this thread as well: I think the Hulk looks like he should be interacting with Bob Hoskins in WHO KILLED ROGER RABBIT?