The Amazing Spider-Man Less CG, More STUNTS In Amazing Spider-Man

[Catman]

http://www.movieline.com/2011/05/st...oir-and-saving-spider-man-from-cgi.php?page=2

You just completed some directing on Spider-Man, and you admit in your book you weren’t a big fan of the preceding Spider-Man trilogy. What makes the new film different and, hopefully, an improvement?

I think the trilogy up until now was starting to lean far too heavily on CGI for the flying and the action and everything else. It was starting to get away from… it’s silly to say “realism” of Spider-Man, because what kind of a man can stick on to a wall and spin spider’s webs? But, there’s a certain amount of reality to it, like there is with Indiana Jones and like there is with Bond. And I just felt like it was getting a little too CGI. My brother Andy and I — we work together all the time; he’s a stunt coordinator and director as well — we’ve been working very, very hard to work out the flying process. We’ve gone back to the basics — more basic flying. You see Spider-Man flying for real, and I think it gives the movie a whole new grounding really. It is more grounded than the others were.

Andrew Garfield is a very good actor — he is very much in the Daniel Day-Lewis method of getting totally into it, so we’ve integrated him into as much of the flying as we could, and as much of the action, the poses and the body movement. So you’ve got all of these really organic movements. When you see somebody flying for real, it’s far different than a CG one. You see the G-force come on as they change directions, and their arms straighten out, and then their legs flex, and then they pick up and swing again. It’s got this whole rhythm to it.

How game was Andrew Garfield to do his own stunts? Could you break it down to a percentage of what’s him versus a double?

Andrew’s very, very game. We’ve done a lot of different actions on this — some that he’s not capable of doing. We’ve had to have specialists for movement — for parkour and various things that we’ve been doing. But Andrew is 100 percent game, and if he’s not shooting on the main unit, he’ll be on my unit. Even if he’s not called! He’ll be on my unit looking at what we’re doing. We discuss it, and we talk about the Spider-Man poses and thing. Percentage-wise, I’d say it’s probably 60 or 70 percent of Andrew in the movie in the action moments.

 

[socool]

http://www.movieline.com/2011/05/st...oir-and-saving-spider-man-from-cgi.php?page=2

Basically what I said

 

[Catman]

Hmmm...

 

[socool]

Hmmm...

I was talking about something I said in another thread about how "we probably won't have high-flying swinging" It wasn't an insult haha

 

[Catman]

You got your wish then.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

So, no CGI for Spidey? Well, then, fingers crossed this comes across as good. It's a 50/50 chance.

 

[Marvel Spider]

^^ There WILL be CGI, they're just not using as much as the last one did.

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

^^ I hope there's CGI. If there isn't, thn peopel shouldn't expect any epic web-swinging aside from being practical. I mean, it can still be epic, but not on the same level as Raimi's.

 

[Ultra Ham]

There will be no CGI in a major Hollywood superhero action film.
I'm calling this!

 

[Marvel Spider]

^^ I hope there's CGI. If there isn't, thn peopel shouldn't expect any epic web-swinging aside from being practical. I mean, it can still be epic, but not on the same level as Raimi's.

Armstrong now finds himself directing some of the biggest special effects action sequences of our time. He's currently working, with his Action Team in tow, as second unit director on "The Amazing Spider-Man," in production in New York and Los Angeles. His goal is to find a perfect balance of computer graphics (CG) and real-time flying.
"What I don't like is when CG becomes the whole point of the movie," he said. "You're not making a cartoon."

As part of his work on "Spider-Man," Armstrong coordinated a multi-million dollar flying sequence with a crew of hundreds. During the scene, Spiderman, played by Andrew Garfield in the film, flies along five city blocks in upper Manhattan, swooping through archways and between buildings, sporting intricate cables that will be erased during post-production. Armstrong hopes it will be one of the most spectacular flight sequences in film history.

"Look: I love CG, provided you use it right," Armstrong said. "Morphine is a wonderful drug if it's used correctly, but when it's used too much, you get addicted. It's a killer; it defeats the whole object of its being."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/10/vic-armstrong-worlds-greatest-stuntsman_n_860017.html#s276889

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

^^ Ahhh, must have missed that part. So it's a combination? Cool!

 

[Spider-ManHero12]

edit

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Less CG than CG is our motto.

 

[louiebling$]

I have been on board for this move since the beggining....at this piece of news just makes things even greater

 

[Mako]

I love that fact that they are going to be using more practical effects rather than over using Visual effects, I think one of the reason they might be doing this is to take advantage of the 3D.

 

[Crockett]

I love the sound of approaching the effect for this with the right balance between practical and CG.

 

[NinjaCarm]

^

Amen.

I just hope to see some crazy Spider-Man speed / poses / swinging as well.

A trailer will be very telling.

 

[©KAW]

Give or take a few scenes, most of the CGI in Spider-Man was horrible. The director would use CGI when it was even necessary. Why would you CGI Green Goblin jumping 3 to 4 feet off his glider? The director was CGI happy and he used it as a crutch and not as a tool. As I like to call it, LAZY FILM MAKING. Where instead off getting off your ass and figuring out how to execute a certain scene in real life, you're in the studio point at a computer saying, "do this and do that," while drinking your morning joe.

Of course they're going to use CGI for the high flying web-slinging for Spider-Man, how else do you think Spider-Man gets on the bridge to fight The Lizard as reported. But you don't CGI Spider-Man when it should be practical, for scenes that can be executed by putting creative minds to work.

I'm glad that we finally have a creative team that admits that Spider-Man could be executed at times in a real way without CGI. Reading this guy's comments sounds like he totally gets what they did wrong in over using CGI.

 

[Catman]

Sony Images Work just isn't very good. The CGI suffered because of that.

 

[serendipity]

YES to practical effects.

Besides the "over-usage" of CGI in Raimi's trilogy, the thing that was jarring was the transition between CGI shots and real actors. And perhaps real actors took a backseat to the CGI "actors". The parkour stuff sounds great, very appropiate for the way Spider-Man would movie in real life. Still, I'd like to partly reserve opinion for a glimpse at how this will look on film.

 

[©KAW]

Sony Images Work just isn't very good. The CGI suffered because of that.

I've been saying that for about 10 years on this board and the official site. It's all about ego for Sony, and not letting a better CGI company (WETA Digital=Lord of the Rings/District 9) handle Spider-Man. If they want improvement they have go elsewhere, plain and simple.

This is no fault of even Raimi's, a bet after seeing Lord of the Rings, if you ask Raimi what company do you want doing the visual effects on Spidey WETA or SONY, he'd say Weta.

 

[Mako]

Sony Images Work just isn't very good. The CGI suffered because of that.

Wouldn't it be hilarious if that's why they went the practical route t:

 

[SpaceWay2009]

Give or take a few scenes, most of the CGI in Spider-Man was horrible. The director would use CGI when it was even necessary. Why would you CGI Green Goblin jumping 3 to 4 feet off his glider? The director was CGI happy and he used it as a crutch and not as a tool. As I like to call it, LAZY FILM MAKING. Where instead off getting off your ass and figuring out how to execute a certain scene in real life, you're in the studio point at a computer saying, "do this and do that," while drinking your morning joe.

Of course they're going to use CGI for the high flying web-slinging for Spider-Man, how else do you think Spider-Man gets on the bridge to fight The Lizard as reported. But you don't CGI Spider-Man when it should be practical, for scenes that can be executed by putting creative minds to work.

I'm glad that we finally have a creative team that admits that Spider-Man could be executed at times in a real way without CGI. Reading this guy's comments sounds like he totally gets what they did wrong in over using CGI.

I agree. CGI should be limited to certain scenes that are humanly impossible to do, like high building swinging, and things of those sort. I'm happy to see that we got a crew who is willing to be creative and do stunts, and not just sit back and use CGI most of the time.

 

[Catman]

I've been saying that for about 10 years on this board and the official site. It's all about ego for Sony, and not letting a better CGI company (WETA Digital=Lord of the Rings/District 9) handle Spider-Man. If they want improvement they have go elsewhere, plain and simple.

This is no fault of even Raimi's, a bet after seeing Lord of the Rings, if you ask Raimi what company do you want doing the visual effects on Spidey WETA or SONY, he'd say Weta.

I think Raimi would have gone with ILM. LOTR hadn't even been released yet when Spider-Man went into production.

 

[Batspider77]

Less CGI is a damn good thing,the last Movies looked like Cartoons.
More wire work,Parkour.....and CGI just when theres no other way to do it.