Why do superhero movies keep using CGI if costumes and animatronic look more realistic ?

>You need CG for Hulk or else he wouldn't be the Hulk.
Eat shit.

Attached: s-l1000.jpg (600x800, 79K)

its probably a lot quicker to shit out cgi movies every year then take the time to continually make new and good looking props/costumes/monsters whatever.
notice I didn't say cheaper? cause im sure its not cheaper, but that doesn't seem to be a concern anymore.
personally puppets are the way to go. doing that shit right can come off creepy and much more immersive.

Because you cannot film a scene until all practical effects and props are 100% complete.

You CAN film a scene and then send it to the CG team to work on while you're busy filming more scenes.

CG tightens up the production pipeline. That's why it's so ubiquitous.

Price

They're trying to be a little more comic-accurate. That's not comic-accurate.

Didn't have a good example on hand?

The level of prosthetic and animatronics you seen in Thriller and An American Werewolf in London not only cost a small fortune, but would take hours to prep and hours to shoot right on set.

The transformation scene from American Werewolf in London took something like 3 weeks to fully get right; when in the film it's only a 5-6 minute long scene.

CG allows you to film base plates and what you need and then ship the rest off to the local CG house.

>The transformation scene from American Werewolf in London took something like 3 weeks to fully get right

Yes, but it's still remembered as one of, if not THE, best transformation effect of all time.

So much CGI nowadays is forgettable or uninspired.

The single ugliest/worst scene in the entire MCU is not a good enough example for you?

And how does that matter in the face of all the shit he just mentioned?

It's basically the reason why actual film isn't used anymore for projection. Too expensive when you can just use digital.

Cheaper and easier to use

Werewolves in newer movies look like such shit, like damn. Re-rendering all that fur is probably too much trouble so they always look like obvious CGI.

Though to be fair, I hated that stock eyes/ear/mouth motion they used everytime the animatronics had to growl.

It's pretty obvious why they're using CGI on the Hulk. I think their question is why do it for guys like Spider-Man and Captain America who are just regular guys in practical suits.

As for why, even if they're not replacing an actor with a CGI model, they still need to include them in the mocap to account for their presence around other CGI effects. Rather than doing a bunch of spot touches to fix them up, it's probably easier just to use a fully modeled costume and have a computer handle the entire thing.

Because their classics usually only work in 2 dimensional/nonillustrated form and overdesigned trash appeals to mainstream audiences or atleast some douchebag executive thinks it does and makes sure nothing will ever challenge that notion.

Fur's always render-intensive, so you don't really see it unless it's a character who's not meant to be entirely realistic, like Rocket.

As for the animatonic wolf stuff. I think it's because they think that's all they can do.

a lot of plebs seem to think animatronics and effects makeup looks "cheap" and "fake" and "pathetic".

Also, CGI is easier to use, but against popular belief is actually more expensive.

Filming people in actual costumes would push interest in competing brands (Sentai, for one) and Disney/WB doesn't want that.

>Dr Bruce Banner and his stand 「T H E L O N E L Y M A N」

SyFy originals have better compositing than this. The lighting on the actors doesn't even match the backdrop!

>if costumes and animatronic look more realistic ?

They don't. They really, really don't. This is nostalgia goggles at it's peak, second only to the star wars fans who remember the Vong arc fondly.

The current status quo is combining all three in the most effective manner; you don't notice costumes or animatronics because the former is touched up with CG, and the latter is used only for actual mechanical stuff now, as opposed to biological imitations.

Attached: educational.png (128x106, 10K)

'cause you're screwed when your animatronic gets wrecked by the other animatronic

youtube.com/watch?v=u8NA7IQMf_Q

Doesn't look like Hulk compared to the MCU one

>They're trying to be a little more comic-accurate.
What, like the Supreme Intelligence being a female AI called Mar-Vell?

No, like MCU Hulk looking like comic Hulk

Why do we keep faking people on the moon instead of sending people there? Because it's cheaper and easier, nitwit.

Am I the only one who was scared shitless of this music video as a kid?

>Pixar
>Doing special effects for live-action.

It's also easier to change CGI on the fly. That's one of the reasons why the Hobbit movies were so fucky, Peter Jackson couldn't make up his mind about Azog's design.

Hell no. That last frame with Vincent Price's laugh still gets me.

Man I remember my little brother was horrified of that , and used to scare the fuck out him with it!Good times!

I was a bit unnerved by ZombieMichael. And that last bit with the eyes made me flinch the first time I saw it.

>Oh, hi Thor.

But that would be Ang Lee's Hulk.

underrated