Forum • Non-Gaming • Film

The Avengers • Page 36

  • Page

    of 37 First / Last

  • Aargh. 13 May 2012 22:51:35 11,186 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    and
    Ultimately, many of the shots would feature fully digital characters and forest elements created by Weta. “When they come careening through the trees and the tree breaks and lands on the ground and falls behind them, both those shots are completely digital,” says Williams. “All the tree falling was done digitally. It allowed us to choreograph the action and take it that 5% further. The digital extensions were done using a combo of matte painting, 3D trees and bushes. When Thor is jumping up to hit his hammer on Cap’s shield, the profile shot – both the characters are digital and so is the forest.”
    So yeah, it is largely digital whenever things happen.

    After chasing sunsets one of life's simple joy is playing with the boys

  • bivith 13 May 2012 22:56:49 2,466 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    It's a seamless integration of location, actors, stunts, props and digital sets and doubles. It's not largely any one thing, and before reading that article I wouldn't have pegged the tree destruction as CGI.
  • GuiltySpark 13 May 2012 23:23:14 5,919 posts
    Seen 21 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    When you watch that scene again dude, you'll notice it. It may be possible to do it in real life, but not to that extent, and even if you could, you could TELL it was CG...

    Get bent.

  • GuiltySpark 13 May 2012 23:28:38 5,919 posts
    Seen 21 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    What I hate in stunts is the use of ropes. Anyone seen Crank 2 in the power station when the giant Power Ranger thing happened, and one guy flew into the other? Always looks like that to me.

    Get bent.

  • disusedgenius 14 May 2012 00:20:13 4,848 posts
    Seen 7 hours ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    bivith wrote:
    Ironically now with mo-cap even the CGI stunt doubles are based on real stunts done with stunt men in mo-cap suits!
    ...which then tends to get re-animated/heavily cleaned up anyway. :)
  • Dirtbox 14 May 2012 08:30:00 73,728 posts
    Seen 7 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Saw this yesterday.

    Was an enjoyable enough watch. Certainly no second coming and pretty unfulfilling because the army invasion was an obvious and utterly souless plot device for them to do some violence.

    Just a typical, brainless blockbuster for the sake of it.

    +1 / Like / Tweet this post

  • Deckard1 14 May 2012 09:05:44 18,111 posts
    Seen 48 minutes ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    Yeah but the Hulk is fucking awesome. AWE. SOME.
  • Armoured_Bear 16 May 2012 22:35:21 4,102 posts
    Seen 29 minutes ago
    Registered 1 year ago
    I enjoyed this, enjoyable blockbuster with some great superheros and great fights but how the f*ck did the Hulk go from being "uncontrollable" and dangerous to everybody to one of the good guys?
  • ecureuil 16 May 2012 22:38:59 74,177 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    If he chooses to become the Hulk then he can control him. Good enough for me.
  • Aargh. 16 May 2012 23:03:15 11,186 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    I too was satisfied with that plot contrivance.

    After chasing sunsets one of life's simple joy is playing with the boys

  • Armoured_Bear 16 May 2012 23:17:52 4,102 posts
    Seen 29 minutes ago
    Registered 1 year ago
    How did he suddenly have the ability to choose to become the hulk?
    Where did that come from?
  • Deleted user 16 May 2012 23:21:07
    The comics, no? I think someone covered that back in the thread.
  • ecureuil 16 May 2012 23:24:24 74,177 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    In the scene with black widow and banner in India, she mentions he's gone over a year without an incident. I'm happy to assume he's got it somewhat under control.
  • Aargh. 16 May 2012 23:27:22 11,186 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    He had it under control for that long as Norton but couldn't transform and be in control by choice.

    He does in this because it was convenient for the plot and casually explained by him always being angry.

    After chasing sunsets one of life's simple joy is playing with the boys

  • Deleted user 16 May 2012 23:27:25
    It made sense for the development of the character in the film anyway. I mean, he pretty much says it all in the 'I'm always angry' line: the trouble is obviously when something else sets him off.
  • ecureuil 16 May 2012 23:32:27 74,177 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    There are different levels of being angry. There's blind rage and there's simmering anger, it's not black and white. Yes it's done for the convenience of the plot, but it makes more than enough sense for me when we're talking about a guy that can transform in a massive invincible green thing that can destroy anything.

    I've heard a few people question this but it's a weird one to single out.
  • Aargh. 16 May 2012 23:37:07 11,186 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    Since when did subtlety of types of anger apply to Hulk?

    And there's no reason logic, consistent with that film universe, shouldn't apply. It's inconsistent with what they've previously shown of the character.

    I know I'm agreeing with ecosse so I'm just off to kill myself now.

    After chasing sunsets one of life's simple joy is playing with the boys

  • Deleted user 16 May 2012 23:41:07
    That was meant to be the difference though, no? I haven't seen more than a few minutes of the Ed Norton one, but from what they said in The Avengers it felt like he had somewhat come to terms with his condition since then.

    It certainly seemed to fit in with his conversations with Stark that it would become a more conscious thing as he began to embrace it.
  • Armoured_Bear 16 May 2012 23:43:38 4,102 posts
    Seen 29 minutes ago
    Registered 1 year ago
    ecureuil wrote:
    There are different levels of being angry. There's blind rage and there's simmering anger, it's not black and white. Yes it's done for the convenience of the plot, but it makes more than enough sense for me when we're talking about a guy that can transform in a massive invincible green thing that can destroy anything.

    I've heard a few people question this but it's a weird one to single out.
    Just because it's a superhero film doesn't meant that nonsensical, inconsistent, lazy plot devices should be accepted any more than a "serious" film IMO .

    It really stood out to me, not sure what's weird about that..
  • meme 16 May 2012 23:45:19 15,519 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    It's strongly implied at the end of the Ed Norton film that he's learnt (or learning) to control it (he meditates, and midway through begins to Hulk Out, but smiles as he's doing so). So it's pretty consistent.

    GHOSTBUSTERS

  • Deleted user 16 May 2012 23:45:22
    From the looks of things it only looks like a "nonsensical, inconsistent, lazy plot device" in the context of the other films. It was perfectly in keeping with the character arc in this particular film in isolation, though.
  • Aargh. 16 May 2012 23:45:28 11,186 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    It would've benefitted from bridging Hulk to The Avengers better. They don't seem to want the Hulk to be related to this and Nortons character showed no hint of taking that path.

    Gotta bear in mind this is all something like 6 months after that film.

    After chasing sunsets one of life's simple joy is playing with the boys

  • Aargh. 16 May 2012 23:46:26 11,186 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    Other than those 2 seconds which hardly anyone remembers...

    After chasing sunsets one of life's simple joy is playing with the boys

  • ecureuil 16 May 2012 23:47:18 74,177 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    No idea tbh, I've not read any Hulk comics. Wikipedia says it was something they started doing in the 70's, while Marvel Universe says: "For a short time, Banner successfully treated his condition with radiation and was able to maintain enough of his own personality when he became the Hulk to control himself in that form." so it's not an idea unique to this movie, at least.
  • meme 16 May 2012 23:47:43 15,519 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago

    GHOSTBUSTERS

  • heyyo 17 May 2012 00:17:51 14,322 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Perhaps it's like Dragonball, the Hulk, in that when a Saiyan (human looking alien thing) gets angry it turns into s massive ape, 100x more powerful...in this state it's completely uncontrollable and smashes everything.

    But with sufficient mental strength/personality the Saiyan is able to control himself (personality is in the subconscious) in this form and is then able to transform into a super saiyan at will afterwards (human looking but with more powerful still that the ape form)

    edit: yeah, once he finds his mind in his hulk form then he can transform into it at will. It's him, but stronger. That's why he says his "i'm always angry" line showing he's the same person in both forms

    Edited by heyyo at 00:21:33 17-05-2012

    Edited by heyyo at 00:27:59 17-05-2012
  • Scurrminator Moderator 17 May 2012 01:57:32 7,956 posts
    Seen 9 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    It's like when you need a piss. You can hold it and then let go and wow you're pissing.
    I took his always angry line as that. He can hold on and at the moment he wants to change he can 'let go'; he has no control over the hulk other than that.

    You dare to strike Scurrcules!?

  • roz123 17 May 2012 07:41:57 6,634 posts
    Seen 43 minutes ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    When he first changes the scene before he is holding Lokis Sceptre and it sort of seems like he picked it up without realising it as if he is being manipulated.
  • Armoured_Bear 17 May 2012 09:53:00 4,102 posts
    Seen 29 minutes ago
    Registered 1 year ago
    disussedgenius wrote:
    From the looks of things it only looks like a "nonsensical, inconsistent, lazy plot device" in the context of the other films. It was perfectly in keeping with the character arc in this particular film in isolation, though.
    Not to me ( did I miss something?)
    In this film he can't hold the rage in and once the hulk tries to batter the shit out of anything in his path, Black Widow, Thor, whoever.
    Shortly afterwards he only goes for the bad guys, is relatively places with the same characters he was trying to destroy shortly before and the only thing said is that "he's always angry" which may explain how he can be the hulk at will.
    That's it, utter bollocks IMO.

    Pity as it was really well done apart from that.
  • Derblington 17 May 2012 09:59:26 19,637 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    On the helicarrier they were all being manipulated by Loki, so when he changed he was angry with the team and he wasn't in control due to anger and then injury - he struggled to prevent the change. In the street battle he was "calm" so when he Hulked out he was able to direct his anger at the right enemy, with the occasional lash out at Thor.

    Edited by Derblington at 10:03:05 17-05-2012

  • Page

    of 37 First / Last

Log in or register to reply