|
Habibi posted:How does Superman shave, anyway? Doesn't his hair resist cutting? Yeah so he uses a hand mirror and heat vision to somehow shave it away.
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 06:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 15:22 |
|
|
Booooo, giving Habibi an honest answer to a dishonest question.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 06:46
|
|
|
That was 100% an honest question, believe it or not. I thought I'd seen the "bounce heat vision off a mirror" in some panel but couldn't recall if that was real.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 06:50
|
|
|
Habibi posted:That was 100% an honest question, believe it or not. I thought I'd seen the "bounce heat vision off a mirror" in some panel but couldn't recall if that was real. https://i.imgur.com/KFT9a0Q.gifv
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 06:52
|
|
|
Habibi posted:That was 100% an honest question, believe it or not. I thought I'd seen the "bounce heat vision off a mirror" in some panel but couldn't recall if that was real. *squints eyes* Alright, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. *points fingers at my own eyes then at you*
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 06:53
|
|
|
The way this gif loops makes it seem like he gets a 5 o'clock shadow immediately after shaving. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 06:56
|
|
|
Habibi posted:Admittedly, I thought it was because he looked good in the suit, but now I am hearing it was related to his hyperemotive forehead and jaw muscles. Why can't it be both?  https://i.imgur.com/f41p7dk.gifv
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 06:57
|
|
|
GORDON posted:I did not know that. Supposedly they knocked up some test footage of him with a CG mustache to show how well it would work and Paramount still told them no, presumably just to be difficult.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 10:31
|
|
|
Well, why should another production company give in to another studio?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 11:33
|
|
|
Because what goes around comes around.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 13:36
|
|
|
Snowglobe of Doom posted:Why can't it be both? Oh my.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 15:12
|
|
|
DrVenkman posted:Supposedly they knocked up some test footage of him with a CG mustache to show how well it would work and Paramount still told them no, presumably just to be difficult. Hair doesn't stop growing when you're dead, they should've just added a CG beard to him through the whole movie instead.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 16:25
|
|
|
DrVenkman posted:Supposedly they knocked up some test footage of him with a CG mustache to show how well it would work and Paramount still told them no, presumably just to be difficult. Did they offer to pay for the post production for that?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 16:42
|
|
|
Davros1 posted:Did they offer to pay for the post production for that? Yes, according to that effects artist that did an AMA on Reddit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 16:49
|
|
|
ruddiger posted:Hair doesn't stop growing when you're dead, they should've just added a CG beard to him through the whole movie instead. I can't speak for Kryptonian biology, but humans appear to grow hair and nails after death because our skin shrinks. I am squarely pro-beard, pro-Death-of-Superman outfit though, so of course Kal's passive regeneration keeps his bristles going.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 18:29
|
|
|
Davros1 posted:Did they offer to pay for the post production for that? As mentioned, yes they actually did. By all accounts, they tried to do a lot to convince Paramount to let them do it the other way around. But that whole thing is just a footnote in the debacle that is JUSTICE LEAGUE.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 19:07
|
|
|
Still, you can't blame Paramount.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
ruddiger posted:Hair doesn't stop growing when you're dead, they should've just added a CG beard to him through the whole movie instead. https://www.snopes.com/science/nailgrow.asp Snopes rates this as false. Either way the effects were terrible and this movie got messed with way too much to be good.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 04:34
|
|
|
I was going to make a post about how compositing involves a shitload of blurs to patch over where parts made with different techniques fit together, but staring at this guy I'm becoming more and more convinced that they've replaced him with a full CG face model, Tarkin-style.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 10:47
|
|
|
DrVenkman posted:Supposedly they knocked up some test footage of him with a CG mustache to show how well it would work and Paramount still told them no, presumably just to be difficult. Why should Paramount do extra work for Warner Brother's bad planning?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 12:32
|
|
|
kilus aof posted:Why should Paramount do extra work for Warner Brother's bad planning?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 12:36
|
|
|
kilus aof posted:Why should Paramount do extra work for Warner Brother's bad planning? I mean, they wouldn't be? WB were going to pay for and do the work.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 12:42
|
|
|
There is the actual cost of CGI and so forward. But wouldn't having them having to unnecessarily CGI an actor's face mean things like viewing dailies and editing get affected which potentially causes delays and reshoots?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 12:58
|
|
|
Given the result, I don't think there's too deep a mystery as to why Paramount were unwilling to be the ones left holding the CG-face bag.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 13:10
|
|
|
josh04 posted:Given the result, I don't think there's too deep a mystery as to why Paramount were unwilling to be the ones left holding the CG-face bag. I mean, I would've played nice if I were Paramount because being owed a favor seems like smart practice in this sort of business, right? But I can also see why they ultimately said no. It's their movie that's being messed with; no matter how good the WB promises to make it look in theory, you're still handing over your own work to some other studio to mess with and you can't just make that kind of decision lightly. On top of just offering to cover the cost of the CGI work, WB probably also should have offered an outright hefty payment for being allowed to basically interfere with Paramount's production at all. ...what I don't understand, though, is why "putting in a CGI mustache" was even the go-to option, here. Why didn't they just offer to pay for practical prosthetics, which are mega easy to do? "Ten more minutes in the makeup chair" was to steep a hill to climb, here?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 13:23
|
|
|
I don't think "gently caress off" is that unreasonable an answer when someone is trying to get you to give one of the characters in your summer tentpole blockbuster characters a fake moustache entirely because of their incompetence.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 13:25
|
|
|
Not to mention big studios like WB love loving over other studios, like buying scripts out from under them, or poaching their talent, or just absorbing the other studio and then handing out massive layoffs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 14:55
|
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:I don't think "gently caress off" is that unreasonable an answer when someone is trying to get you to give one of the characters in your summer tentpole blockbuster characters a fake moustache entirely because of their incompetence. It is in fact the correct answer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 15:32
|
|
|
JL was down to $1.25M this weekend so probably nearing its box office run, finishing around $225M domestic. That's not good.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 22:29
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:I mean, I would've played nice if I were Paramount because being owed a favor seems like smart practice in this sort of business, right? This is adorable. For a somewhat better glimpse into the soul of corporate America, I would recommend a double feature of There Will Be Blood (2007) and Swimming With Sharks (1994). Mechafunkzilla fucked around with this message at 22:34 on Dec 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 22:32
|
|
|
It is hilarious that WB was so blinded by dumb desperation that they were willing to spend a bunch of money on another company's film to reshoot large swaths of their movie, then when that wasn't an option they instead decided to CGI their lead actors entire face. So good on Paramount for further loving up their already dumb plan to overhaul an entire tentpole movie in a few months. Like, even if you loathe MoS/BvS, you can't think it would have been a better option to reshoot multiple scenes with one of the actors wearing a CGI mask of their own face
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 22:45
|
|
|
So when they resurrect superman and he had a full suit on in the water, why did he become shirtless and without shoes when he was resurrected? Also I thought Man of Steel was a great movie, I have no idea how these series of movies got so much worse as time went on.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 23:11
|
|
|
sleep with the vicious posted:JL was down to $1.25M this weekend so probably nearing its box office run, finishing around $225M domestic. That's not good. That is good. I'm glad their Pet Sematary faux-Marvel movie failed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 23:19
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:That is good. I'm glad their Pet Sematary faux-Marvel movie failed. And hopefully they'll have learned the right lesson from it: that Jewish superheroes are box office poison
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 23:27
|
|
|
Mechafunkzilla posted:And hopefully they'll have learned the right lesson from it: that Jewish superheroes are box office poison No!!!
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2017 23:34
|
|
|
Mechafunkzilla posted:And hopefully they'll have learned the right lesson from it: that Jewish superheroes are box office poison Welp, there goes any hope of an Atom Smasher movie.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 00:30
|
|
|
Guy A. Person posted:It is hilarious that WB was so blinded by dumb desperation that they were willing to spend a bunch of money on another company's film to reshoot large swaths of their movie, then when that wasn't an option they instead decided to CGI their lead actors entire face. So good on Paramount for further loving up their already dumb plan to overhaul an entire tentpole movie in a few months. It's impressive that WB hit the point where they asked another company to CG a fake mustache, got told no, and didn't back off and reconsider the plan that led them to something so ridiculous. That should be hitting rock bottom.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 08:15
|
|
|
They really wanted the world to see this movie. I still want to know why during the resurrection superman blows off most of his clothes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 10:16
|
|
|
Tenzarin posted:They really wanted the world to see this movie. I still want to know why during the resurrection superman blows off most of his clothes. He's hulking out 
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 10:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 15:22 |
|
|
They should have had his pants blow off too and he is wearing red briefs underneath.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2018 13:45
|
|
