Hulk
 

Anyone else view the trailer of this? I'm disappointed. I mean why does everything have to go CG? Not to mention the fact that the least they could have done is make it realistic a bit, it looks like shrek on steroids. When did the hulk become 20-some feet tall? I was looking forward to it, not now. I think the last superhero type action flic I liked was Spawn. I guess there is one bright spot though, jennifer connelly is in it :)

Hulk dogs!

IMHO, the Spawn movie can join the 1984 Captain America and 1993 Fantastic Four movies as one of the crappiest comic book movies of all time. Sorry. :)

The Hulk trailer looks OK to me. I don't mind the CG, The Hulk is too big to be played by an actor (at least an actor that can act). Not like the CG Spiderman... what a rip-off.

The Hulk like most superheros has gone through many versions, but to my recollection, he's never been THAT big.

I liked the shot of him whipping the tank around. Anyway, I'll go see it. It's going to be a good movie summer, I think.

The Hulk really has to be CG but I have problems with how CG it looks. Still, I bet I'll stop complaining around the second tank he throws into the air.

It will still be much better than the series in the 70's/80's. If it takes CG to do this... I ain't got no problems. 'nuff said.
Excelsior

i thought the series was pretty good ( i was a bit young back then though). i would rather see a body builder (maybe with some acting classes) in there and using cg to show his strength.

i'll say though, i'm not against cg characters, sets, etc in movies... if they don't draw attention to themselves and add to the story. imo though, i think my main beef isn't that it's a cg character, but it looks poorly done. seeing cg work in movies that are years old, this could have been done better i think. oh did i mention that jennifer connelly is in this movie :p

I agree, I don't mind the fact that its CG but I would have gotten better artists. The cave troll in Lord of the Rings was CG and that looked great! I understand its harder to animate a more anthropomorphic character since its easier to tell the difference between correct and oddly wrong behavior. This as opposed to say, a giant insect, which can be designed with more freedom. However, they can't even use this argument because look how well they animated Gollum from The Two Towers!

Strictly speaking, most of Gollum's performance wasn't animated; it was motion captured from actor Andy Serkis.

That's interesting, I'm not sure what "motion capture" is exactly but couldn't they still have done motion capture to a degree then for the Hulk's expressions? Of course, we haven't seen the movie so maybe his facial expressions and behavior will look great.

I also just thought of the fact that the Hulk is a glowing, radiation green. Perhaps this above anything else gives off that kind of unrealistic cartoon look. If his skin was a more subdued hue, like Gollum's grayish-white skin, then maybe he'd look more real?

(Actually, now that I think about it, McFarlane depicted the Hulk with a gray color in the cosmic Spider-Man storyline)

To answer Christopher's question, motion capture is comprised of a suit with reflectors attached to major body points of an actor, and captured into a computer. These reflector points are then used as reference points for the animation.

The computer then lays the corresponding points of the 3D model over those captured from the person in the suit. This is, of course, a very simplistic explanation.

Facial motion capture is possible, just not as common.

As far as the Hulk's color, he was originally a greyish hue in the first few issues. He also looked like a cross between Frankenstein and Moe Howard. Later issues depicted him as a green behemoth as a result of the Gamma Radiation. Stan Lee often used radiation as a simple answer for his Heros and Creatures. And THAT is why the Hulk is a huge green beast.
'Nuff said.

what i am surprised about is at least they didn't use the modified jurassic park t-rex model they used for godzilla :p