Marvel's The Avengers |OT| (Dir. Joss Whedon) [Spoilers unmarked]
- Thread starter 3N16MA
- Start date
- Status
Xia, when they do a shot like this. Are those buildings actually all modeled/textured in 3D, or are those images taken from somewhere else and "pasted" into the scene, then re-lit to fit the background?
There are indeed at least 30 minutes of deleted scenes. However, I doubt a "director's cut" will be released as much as I would love one. We'll probably just get all the deleted scenes as extras on the blu ray like all the other Marvel Studios' films.
a secret-boss
Banned
Wow that bus scene was actually green screen
I dunno. I mean, they aren't bad, but I just don't feel a sense of emotional connection to the words. And there's no real danger, no risk to it.
ThatCrazyGuy
Member
damn, I thought that bus scene was all physical effects. Interesting.
I wonder if they'll do a cast commentary for this one.
PhoncipleBone
Banned
The power of ILM. KNEEL!
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
There's a couple different approaches you can take for digital mattes, from actually painting in the added background elements from scratch to digitally inserting images then touching them up to full on models and textures. In each case, lighting usually has to be readjusted to some degree. It's not uncommon to use a combination of those methods in a shot either (i.e. actual geometry for the midground, flat images for the background). I'm not sure what approach they actually took for this specific shot since we didn't do it.
ThatCrazyGuy
Member
Cool, thanks for the info. I've just always wondered if they would waste time to model/texture all those buildings for a 3 second shot, especially if the camera never pans or moves across it. Just knowing how long it takes me to model/texture a building like that (especially if you need it to look realistic), the tight crunch of movie projects, and practicality, I just could never fathom that they would physically make those in time.
PhoncipleBone
Banned
Oh, I know. I kneel. Before the godlike CG in the transformers movies
As horrible as TF2 and 3 were, the effects work in them were god tier. And seeing things like what Xia has posted just makes me more in awe of ILM and their like.
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
The specific approach taken is usually determined by a combination of factors - schedule pressure, shot length, lighting, the quality of the original plate, if the camera is static or not, if the area in the shot will be shown in later shots, if appropriate assets have already been built and if not would assets have to be built anyway for other shots, if there's something in the foreground that will draw the viewer's eye naturally, if anything in the background needs to be animated, how likely the shot will be changed in the future, etc.
Another method I forgot to mention is camera projection. That's used quite a lot now.
Glass Rebel
Member
Loki was awesome. If you wondered why he wasn't causing explosions left and right you completely missed the point of his character and what his "abilities" are. His scenes on the Helicarrier stand out as some of my favourites.
Now if you want someone who's menacing and wrecks shit up you better hope Marvel gets Fantastic 4 and Doom back.
"Fool! Hold your insulting tongue and mark my words!"
Now if you want someone who's menacing and wrecks shit up you better hope Marvel gets Fantastic 4 and Doom back.
"Fool! Hold your insulting tongue and mark my words!"
lol
Just got back. It's kinda shit.
The action direction is never exciting; expensive, but always feeling perfunctory rather than packing any punch. I imagine Joss saying, "okay, these two guys fight now" in the script and in his chair and going to sleep and letting some interns decide what happens. It's filling up space and hitting the notes that need to be hit, but what Whedon really desperately wants to do is to win over the hearts of the audience with his witty and endearing one liners.
Character goes through its tedious but necessary exposition, fights something tediously but necessarily, and then WITTTTTTYYYYY ONE LINER!!!!!!!
That's how it comes across. That's where Joss's passion and capacity resides with this project. His direction is so unremarkable with everything else that it feels like the rest of the movie was composed by a second unit director, and he's only directing the one liners. Unfortunately they only work about half the time, and feel incredibly forced when they don't hit the mark dead on.
Beyond that, there's just no momentum. There aren't any strong motivations behind all the fights between the heroes in the first half of the film. They may as well be shrugging and letting out a "meh" every time they fly at each other to knock their opponent through a wall or a tree. And it's so back and forth with stalemates straight out of a two page glamour comic spread between characters too popular to ever be able to harm each other, except for the hilariously underpowered and useless Captain America of course, that they basically set each other up as interchangeable.
Captain America's leader status is so incredibly half-assed and his role here is so sad and tacked on. It's such a shame, because as much of an idiot as Mark Millar is these days, he knew exactly what to do with Cap to make him a charismatic leader and hero character in a setting like this. Joss apparently does not. Why exactly is he left with giving a boost to Black Widow so that she can go save the world? That's what he's left with. Giving a mundane human agent a superhuman boost. And pulling a lever to save Iron Man in between fighting a couple soldiers and barely surviving. Sure was an important lever though. What a failure at utilizing the character.
Even that didn't bother me as much as the premise ending up being Avenging stale white guy in the suit that no one actually cares about, complete with the minute-long solemn gaze into his dead eyes as Sam Jackson mourns wistfully. When "Phil!!!!!" effectively becomes their battlecry during the climax I actually felt embarrassed for the film. Look, just kill an actual significant character off comic book style like you know you want to; when you want to use them again in five years and invent a retcon it won't be quite as ridiculous as when they can only wait a few issues in the comics world.
The action direction is never exciting; expensive, but always feeling perfunctory rather than packing any punch. I imagine Joss saying, "okay, these two guys fight now" in the script and in his chair and going to sleep and letting some interns decide what happens. It's filling up space and hitting the notes that need to be hit, but what Whedon really desperately wants to do is to win over the hearts of the audience with his witty and endearing one liners.
Character goes through its tedious but necessary exposition, fights something tediously but necessarily, and then WITTTTTTYYYYY ONE LINER!!!!!!!
That's how it comes across. That's where Joss's passion and capacity resides with this project. His direction is so unremarkable with everything else that it feels like the rest of the movie was composed by a second unit director, and he's only directing the one liners. Unfortunately they only work about half the time, and feel incredibly forced when they don't hit the mark dead on.
Beyond that, there's just no momentum. There aren't any strong motivations behind all the fights between the heroes in the first half of the film. They may as well be shrugging and letting out a "meh" every time they fly at each other to knock their opponent through a wall or a tree. And it's so back and forth with stalemates straight out of a two page glamour comic spread between characters too popular to ever be able to harm each other, except for the hilariously underpowered and useless Captain America of course, that they basically set each other up as interchangeable.
Captain America's leader status is so incredibly half-assed and his role here is so sad and tacked on. It's such a shame, because as much of an idiot as Mark Millar is these days, he knew exactly what to do with Cap to make him a charismatic leader and hero character in a setting like this. Joss apparently does not. Why exactly is he left with giving a boost to Black Widow so that she can go save the world? That's what he's left with. Giving a mundane human agent a superhuman boost. And pulling a lever to save Iron Man in between fighting a couple soldiers and barely surviving. Sure was an important lever though. What a failure at utilizing the character.
Even that didn't bother me as much as the premise ending up being Avenging stale white guy in the suit that no one actually cares about, complete with the minute-long solemn gaze into his dead eyes as Sam Jackson mourns wistfully. When "Phil!!!!!" effectively becomes their battlecry during the climax I actually felt embarrassed for the film. Look, just kill an actual significant character off comic book style like you know you want to; when you want to use them again in five years and invent a retcon it won't be quite as ridiculous as when they can only wait a few issues in the comics world.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Boom. Yet apparently we're the only ones that noticed and he was actually heartwarming, fleshed out character that everybody in the film cared for.
He recruited every super-hero, and he was the most genuinely nice guy from the movie. He risked his life to try to stop Loki. I didn't see a problem with that scene.
Yeah, it wasn't just a redshirt SHIELD agent, I would guess Coulson's had more screen-time in the MCU than Nick Fury, Black Widow, or Hawkeye.
Seems like you were seeing what you wanted to see in this movie. That's a fair thing of you to do, but apparently you didn't see interestingly choreographed action with a great sense of geography, and character interaction between the leads that felt natural but engaging.
Pointed banter ≠ WITTY ONE LINERS
Yup, Rogers and Stark spitting insults at each other in the lab felt completely unnatural and didn't fit the characters at all... typical Whedon. Cracking jokes at each other, slapstick moments after a battle? Nah, it should have been way more morose.
Maximus.
Member
He was a cool dude! His character was also awesome in this movie! I love his admiration for Captain America, he tried to take down a god, knowing how dangerous it was to do that. All the Avengers had close interaction with him and losing him wasn't useless(like for example in Transformers, unfortunately). I admit I wouldve preferred maybe Maria Hill as the Coulson character, but no biggie.
Edit: Also, Whedon isn't just known for WITTY ONE LINERS!!!!! He is able to take a large cast of characters, make them all feel unique, connected and important. He is able to take a team and make them feel like a team. The action, the shots all felt good and nothing seemed out of what I expected from an Avengers movie. I didnt expect The Dark Knight level of cinematography because all the Marvel movies have a certain look and feel to them. The Whedon criticism on this forum is astonishing sometimes.
Why not kill Nick Fury instead if you're going to go there? It would have more impact, we would finally lose the biggest element of cheese in all the Marvel films, and it sets up Maria Hill taking over SHIELD.
Because Samuel L. Jackson is contracted to appear in, like, 12 films. They want to make sure their money is well spent.
Maximus.
Member
I wouldnt have a problem with this, but obviously Marvel isnt willing to take this step yet.
Parallax
best seen in the classic "Shadow of the Beast"
i think of maria hill as director of SHIELD, and i think of civil war. as much as i love cobie and want to see more of her, i dont want any of that shit tainting the movies.
Because Samuel L. Jackson signed a 9 film deal with Marvel.
How can you not love this face?
He was the card company boss guy in 500 Days of Summer.
Dude, I fucking hate Civil War too.
Don't worry, he can show up in flashbacks as the agents of SHIELD continue to ask themselves "what would Fury do?" whenever presented with a problem! Lulz.
The cinematography was plain, but in no way was it poor. If it had been pushed in any particular direction stylistically, it wouldn't have been able to house the different tones of production design. More so than any of the previous films, this movie needed Thor/Loki asgardian armor, galactic/alien creatures, and iron man/technology all coexisting for the full running time. The chosen visual style put all of those things on equal footing, and the result was none of them looking absurdly out of place. The lighting of the scenes on the helicarrier for instance may have been unremarkable, but there are FANTASTIC looking shots in this movie. Each frame may not have had enough punch to immediately evoke a mood, but everything looked REAL to me in this movie, which I think was more important.
Because nobody really likes Maria Hill. Making her look bad was probably the best part of UMA2.
Phil Coulson was great. I liked that he was the only guy capable of getting under Iron Man's skin, and I liked his geeking out at Cap, because I would probably be doing that if I were him.
ConradCervantes
Banned
Maximus.
Member
I feel that Nick Fury is going to be a great tool to allow the Avengers to have the freedom they need to succeed. Maria Hill has always been more straight edged, whereas Fury has always been a bad ass. Fury made some calls that would get a normal person in his position into shit, but he somehow was able to pull everything off. I want to see more of him. I think it was right for Coulson to get killed off, seeing as his job was done.
No, I watched a movie and then critiqued it. I'm not desperate to either defend it or trash it, I have no vested interest one way or another, and I like Angel and Firefly and Astonishing X-Men and Dr. Horrible from Joss.
It's just not very good. We're early post-coitus here; give it a few months and everyone will be able to reflect on it more clearly and it'll be thrown into the pile with the rest, as the cycle inevitably goes.
Maximus.
Member
I completely agree with you. I thought it was shot well and understand why it was done how it was. I just know people complain about the look of the film, and think it is a stupid argument point, when the movie looks great for what it is.
Discotheque
Banned
I had to hold in laughter when Agent Coulson died. The trading card scene was pretty damn hilarious too with that useless female SHIELD agent reminding the audience "Sir, those cards were in his locker, not his jacket pocket" hahahahaha.
And overall Captain America felt very useless in this film, which is strange since he's supposed to be a leader. Still in the long run I ended up enjoying this a lot more than I expected too.
And overall Captain America felt very useless in this film, which is strange since he's supposed to be a leader. Still in the long run I ended up enjoying this a lot more than I expected too.
Digital NYC geometry:
Example of a fully-CG city shot (would look much better at full-res, but can't find a shot):
Mother fucking magic, man. Loved reading the info on each slide, too. Had no idea about most of that stuff.Article on how previs was used for Avengers:
And since people asked, a few more before/after shots (these were added to the fxguide.com roll call article):
They also put up another angle to that before/after shot I posted earlier with Cap jumping, along with bigger images:
fxguide also posted an actual plate used during production:
http://cdn.fxguide.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/MetLife_Roof_pano.tif.zip
You have no clue what the fuck you're talking about (on Hulk). Trolololol.
Awesome, I was actually looking around for this earlier.
No. I don't understand people who're saying 'go back to the old one'. That just makes no sense. What they will do, though, as they ALWAYS do from one iteration to another, is improve and tweak it.
No doubt they've head all the criticisms of his suit, and will work on it. IMO, the suit is damn near perfect, all that needs work is the helmet. The plastic nature of it, the color tone, the cheek cut-offs, etc.
It'll get better, I just wonder if he'll even be suiting up in Captain America 2. No doubt he will, but under what circumstances, is what'll be interesting..
Agreed with the Cap stuff, though. Disagree with pretty much everything else.
And for everyone who says that the Coulson thing was idiotic, there's fifty other people to tell you the opposite. Obviously an opinion is an opinion, but it simply WORKED in the theater, the gasps and whispers. It also cannot be argued that he didn't mean anything to the characters. He obviously did, and he alone practically REPRESENTS the entire MCU as one of the main characters who interweaved all the other movies together.
That can't happen. The guy will never die, and it'd be too against the comics imo. If anything, he finally called out on his manipulative ways (like the comics) and gets exiled for it, or runs away, etc. That way Hill can take control again, but he'd still be involved on one level or another. They need to flesh out Fury and Cap as characters more, showing both of their tactical capabilities and intelligence, imo.
Maximus.
Member
I think they had a realistic approach to Captain America. He is surrounded by heroes that are clearly more powerful than he is and he is just adjusting to a new world. They kept his powers grounded(for the most part) and did what they could with him, without pushing him away. I think it will be more of a growth for all characters, he will grow into the position, not magically be this super strong leader.
Parallax
best seen in the classic "Shadow of the Beast"
ill say this, despite being a young character in comparison to the others, his character has been consistent in his appearances that arent the avengers.
Your main critique seems to be the "tedium" of it all... it's simple enough that we just don't agree on that, but also I don't see how this was at all remediable in a film where each main character is their own franchise.
In what way did Whedon set up the characters (minus Cap) to be interchangeable? Iron Man didn't fight the Hulk because he would have been ripped in half.
- Status