Spider suit is all CGI 99% of the time in Homecoming even when he's doing mundane shit

That's odd, considering they had like, four cats playing Goose. Apparently Larson has cat allergies, so maybe that explains it a bit.

I guess that makes sense. You'd think that for how much Goose is in the film they would pick an actor who doesn't get hives when near a cat.

Attached: thonk kot.jpg (750x911, 44K)

I think the actress with the speaking role ranks slightly higher on the accommodation scale than the fucking cat

Why though? Did she have any good dialogue?
I bet the cats hated her far more than she hated them desu.

It's not about the cat, it's about getting an actress who won't go blind halfway though the shoot. Allergies are some real shit.

Usually yes, but who was the more memorable and liked character in the end?

Pro tip: It wasn't the actress's role

>Apparently Larson has cat allergies
Orly?

That's just what I've read. Apparently she gets hives and they'd use a stuffed cat for scenes where she had to touch him, which is probably where the CGI came in to play.

They train animals for use in movies, it can't be that hard to just get a cat who's well-trained and docile

ew.com/movies/2019/03/01/captain-marvel-cat-goose/
>Goose shares a lot of screen time with Carol and Nick Fury, but there was one hair-raising snag behind the scenes: Brie Larson, Captain Marvel herself, is highly allergic to cats.

>“It became this joke because the crew would watch me all day doing crazy stunts,” Larson says. “But then the cat showed up on set and I was like, ‘We need to have a plan! We need to have a conversation!’”

>The filmmakers came up with a three-cat solution: One Goose is computer-generated, one’s a realistic cat puppet that Larson could hold without sneezing, and then there is the 12-year-old orange tabby, Reggie. “[Reggie was] actually a lot more directable than some actors we’ve worked with,” Boden says with a laugh. (Three backup cats — Archie, Gonzo, and Rizzo — filled in when the script required a specific trick, or when Reggie was too tired.)

>Despite Larson’s allergies, Reggie managed well with his two-legged costars. “You give them a snack, you talk to them in a relatively kind tone, and give them another snack when it’s over,” Samuel L. Jackson (who plays Nick Fury) says of the cats. “Next time they see you, it’s like, ‘Oh, that’s the dude with the snacks!’”

>Adds Larson: “I mean, that’s basically how I work too.”

>the CGI is the worst part about the MCU, it's Bollywood-tier at times
It's really no better in the other comic efforts.
Venom looks like a SyFy movie with extra budget, the DCEU is filled to the brim with unfortunate shit well below the MCU. I can't think of a single superhero movie with better CGI than Dark World.
The most notable CGI is stuff like skinny Steve Rogers and Young Sam Jackson, ILM is getting really, really good with that shit.

Attached: coinface.jpg (232x218, 9K)

Infinite money doesn't buy you infinite time for production. The CGI and effects studios get ridden like a rented mule by Hollywood, who also do everything in their power to pay them as little as possible. Marvel films are on a strict schedule, so they really don't have a lot of spare time for pre-production or reshoots, but you can always find some CGI firm willing to do a rush job for a major studio.

Wtf did she mean by this. I thought Brie was supposed to liberate us from the patriarchy, not take snacks from men? This movie is misogynistic!

Spider-Verse has better CGI than live action capeshit.
Boom. Fucking kill Hollywood and return to the cartoon era you Disniggers.

>skinny Steve Rogers
A combination of CGI, body doubling, and camera tricks.

>Young Sam Jackson
Digital facelift is a widespread technique; movies aren't even the most common place they're used.

It's a cartoon. By that measure Incredibles 2 has tip-top CGI.
What's being discussed is the seamless combination of real actors/locales with CGI effects.

Attached: quaritch_in_amp_suit_avatar-wide.jpg (1920x1200, 323K)

The best CGI is subtle stuff that's hard to notice when you are looking for it.
It's fantastically hard to make an 8' tall green muscle-man look 'real', because your brain is screaming "faaaaake!".

Attached: Hulk AOU.jpg (992x558, 36K)

How is their de-aging CGI that they use to making actors look younger so good? Compared to the rest of their CGI it's really convincing.

It's easy and nobody cares. That's it.
Try talking with non-enthusiasts sometime about all the little things in films that bug you and see if any of it even registers to them. It's the reason I don't really talk about these movies with my family anymore. To everyone else, they're all flashy and fun, and all of my criticisms are just pointless nitpicking.

Incredibles 2 is shit it doesn't feel like live action which means it's inferior.

Attached: 1550961611268.jpg (750x1041, 421K)

>ILM is getting really, really good with that shit.
ILM wasn't responsible for those. That was done by another effects house, Lola. ILM does stuff like the Hulk or Iron Man's suits.

Part of that has to do with the fact that most of the stuff in the films don't have a real-life counterpart (even if there's a physical costume on set). Characters like Groot, Thanos, Hulk... Those aren't thinks based on real life, and by default, even if they were done with practical effects, they're always going to scream "FAKE!".

To add to that, most of the effects houses, like ILM and MPC aren't exactly aching for work. ILM still has franchises like Star Wars and Transformers to do (and live-action Aladdin), and the latter's working on Detective Pikachu, most Disney's live-action reboots (and the Lion King) and the Sonic movie among other titles. And that's before getting to the other vendors and their work for other films and even commercials.

Daily Reminder:

Kevin Feige Does Nothing Wrong