• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

The Inhumans Marvel/IMAX

Christopher said:
Outsiders to a field look at a challenge and declare it impossible. People who actually do it for a living look at a challenge and get to work solving it. Which is why the first group is not working in that field. And the challenges involved here are ones that visual effects artists already solved a quarter-century ago.
Click to expand...

Impossible? Where did I say that exactly? Nowhere that's where, because what I *did* say was "impractical". Different thing.

Also, outsiders to the field of practical craft like to pretend that if they can imagine something then there's no reason why it can't be done, with absolutely no regards to the realities of what it actually takes to do these things. Physically possible, maybe. But not on this budget and certainly not worth the hassle.
 
Last edited:
Exactly. It is just way easier and far less complicated for everyone involved to just do it through. And I have to admit, after thinking about this a bit more, I don't mind if it doesn't look 100% realistic if it's at least interesting, but this doesn't even look that interesting.
Christopher said:
Consider the Dinosaurs sitcom from the '90s. Every performer in that show was constantly walking around in a heavy rubber suit topped in a massive animatronic head with radio-controlled servos moving the eyes, lips, and facial expressions and being operated in real time by one or two puppeteers. And they managed to do this on a regular basis for 65 episodes. What I'm proposing would be a much simpler and lighter rig, since I'm thinking it'd be mostly rod-puppeted or cable-controlled so there'd be less need for servos and power packs. Although today's servos and power packs are probably a lot lighter than what they had in the '90s, so a radio-controlled rig might work too. People don't realize it because of the obsession with CGI, but the state of the art in animatronic and puppet FX has been improving steadily right alongside CGI. Have you seen the behind-the-scenes video from The Last Jedi showing all the practical creature effects they're doing? The skill is there.
Click to expand...
I don't really see where Dinosaurs is comparable, for one thing those were full body puppets, not a rig someone would wear on their head, and it was an incredibly complicated production. Not to mention that the entire show was based around those puppets, while Medusa's hair is a very, very small part of Inhumans.
I also couldn't imagine trying to actually film this thing on set, I can't image how crowded it would get with all of the wires and pupeteers and whatever else it would take. And if they were actually going to have them flowing around her, then I would think there would also be the danger of them getting tangled up either with Serinda or even on themselves.
As for the rod and wire work involved, it wouldn't be that much more difficult than the wire work they do every week on Supergirl to make Melissa Benoist fly. She's strapped into a tight, uncomfortable harness, there are a bunch of stagehands pulling on ropes to lift and maneuver her through the air, sometimes there are even people puppeteering her cape so that it moves the way they want it to. Again, this is something they pull of on a weekly basis, and it doesn't impair Benoist's ability to perform, because actors are not fragile and are capable of rising to challenges.
Click to expand...
That's basically just a couple of wires that lift her off the ground, not dozens of wired tentacles that are going to be flying around her and the other cast members.
This is a lot more complicated than this.
 
Re: Medusa's hair

I've been trying to think of a way to phrase this without coming off as a Marvel Fanboy or apologist.

I do agree that this footage doesn't seem to entirely live up to the potential of the concept. Perhaps a theatrical release and its accommodating budget would have been more appropriate for the project.

However, It seems to me that we've only seen footage from very early in the story, probably not even beyond the first episode. As far as Medusa's hair is concerned, that shot of Black Bolt and Medusa walking down the stairs (which is very reminiscent from a shot in the comics, by the way) could possibly be the audience's introduction to those characters.

Now, all of us know exactly what Medusa's hair can do. But for those members of the audiences that are unfamiliar with her powers, do you give that away right in that introductory shot, or do you wait for a dramatically appropriate moment?

What we saw on the trailer seemed like a reveal to me. Where the uninitiated would go "Oh, that's what she can do!" I do believe, and indeed fervently hope, that we've only seen the beginning of what Medusa can do in this footage, and that they are saving the really good shots for later.
 
Last edited:
Something that may be of relevence that I didn't post earlier when I first saw it because it seemed spoilery was that Serinda Swan was spotted on the Inhumans set with...

...her head shaved. In order to be replaced later by CGI? There are other possible explanations, but that's the only thing that makes sense to me. If so, it would lend credence to my theory that the wig and the footage we've seen are introductory and a mis-direction on the part of Marvel and IMAX.
 
Turtletrekker said:
Something that may be of relevence that I didn't post earlier when I first saw it because it seemed spoilery was that Serinda Swan was spotted on the Inhumans set with...

...her head shaved. In order to be replaced later by CGI? There are other possible explanations, but that's the only thing that makes sense to me. If so, it would lend credence to my theory that the wig and the footage we've seen are introductory and a mis-direction on the part of Marvel and IMAX.
Click to expand...

Or to save money on having to do the CGI by getting rid of her hair as a plot point.
 
Christopher said:
And it looks terrible. Honestly, even the obviously CGI animation of Julie Mao's hair in free fall in The Expanse was more convincing than this.

I think they should've gone for a practical effect instead of CGI. Built an elaborate articulated "wig" prosthetic with a number of distinct tentacle-like tresses that are individually puppeteered with wires and rods, then digitally erase the wires, rods, and puppeteers from the frame. Have her hair always be in motion, like the way it seems to be in the comics.
Click to expand...

Christopher said:
Not really. Computer wire and rod removal has been a routine digital effect for over two decades. (It was first used to remove the pipe holding up Marty's hoverboard in some shots in Back to the Future Part II.) Puppeteering and animatronic effects have been in use for generations and there are still plenty of skilled artists in the field, even if Hollywood has become overly enamored with CGI. (The prequel to The Thing from a few years ago had really sophisticated, realistic animatronic effects that took months of work and reportedly looked great, but the producers cut them out and replaced them with much more fake-looking CGI at the last minute, because of the industry prejudice that CGI is "superior" rather than just a different tool in the kit.) It would basically be a "tentacle" effect, and that's a pretty straightforward thing to puppeteer. Yes, the wig would be heavy for Serinda Swan, but if there were wires and rods supporting the "tentacles" of hair, that would ease a lot of the weight. See, I'm imagining it the way it looks in the comics, always spread out and flowing, never just hanging straight down like in the show.

Besides, all the things Medusa does with her hair would require a lot of strength in her neck and back muscles anyway to handle the strain. So it's more convincing if the actress really is carrying some weight around and it shows in her body language.
Click to expand...

Christopher said:
All of those technical problems are soluble with the application of skill. There are plenty of talented experts who have been solving problems of exactly this magnitude for generations -- and doing it so invisibly that you don't even realize they were there.

Consider the Dinosaurs sitcom from the '90s. Every performer in that show was constantly walking around in a heavy rubber suit topped in a massive animatronic head with radio-controlled servos moving the eyes, lips, and facial expressions and being operated in real time by one or two puppeteers. And they managed to do this on a regular basis for 65 episodes. What I'm proposing would be a much simpler and lighter rig, since I'm thinking it'd be mostly rod-puppeted or cable-controlled so there'd be less need for servos and power packs. Although today's servos and power packs are probably a lot lighter than what they had in the '90s, so a radio-controlled rig might work too. People don't realize it because of the obsession with CGI, but the state of the art in animatronic and puppet FX has been improving steadily right alongside CGI. Have you seen the behind-the-scenes video from The Last Jedi showing all the practical creature effects they're doing? The skill is there.

As for the rod and wire work involved, it wouldn't be that much more difficult than the wire work they do every week on Supergirl to make Melissa Benoist fly. She's strapped into a tight, uncomfortable harness, there are a bunch of stagehands pulling on ropes to lift and maneuver her through the air, sometimes there are even people puppeteering her cape so that it moves the way they want it to. Again, this is something they pull of on a weekly basis, and it doesn't impair Benoist's ability to perform, because actors are not fragile and are capable of rising to challenges.
Click to expand...

Christopher said:
Outsiders to a field look at a challenge and declare it impossible. People who actually do it for a living look at a challenge and get to work solving it. Which is why the first group is not working in that field. And the challenges involved here are ones that visual effects artists already solved a quarter-century ago.




Again: Dinosaurs. The puppet heads and costumes they wore were far heavier and more constricting than a modern, lightweight "wig rig" would be. And they didn't need "control and power cables" -- the technology for completely cable-free, radio-controlled rigs has existed since the first Ninja Turtles movie in 1990. Plus I'm talking about something that would mainly be rod- or wire-puppeted anyway. I've made that abundantly clear.

The problem is that today's audiences and filmmakers have become so addicted to CGI that they've forgotten how much animatronics can already do, how much it was doing 20 or 30 years ago that rivaled all but the best CGI today. It's like the people who assume the pyramids had to be built by aliens because the ancients couldn't have had the modern technology "needed" to build them. The fact is, you don't need modern technology; it's just that modern people have become so dependent on that technology that they've forgotten how much people were able to achieve without it.




Exactly where I'm coming from. The limitation of CGI is that it only looks good if you have the time and money to get it right. On a lower budget, if you want to create something that looks physically real, you'd have more luck with something that actually is physically real. That's the mistake people make when they assume CGI is the only way to do effects anymore. Different techniques are better for different things, and CGI should be saved for the things that can't be done practically. And there are a ton of things that can be done practically that are being done by CGI instead and look worse as a result.
Click to expand...

The words you're straggling to find there are... IT NEEDS BETTER CGI.
 
I'm so happy that I'm not bothered by the production or the hair, it's rare I'm on the good side of these things. In some ways it kind of reminds me of an update to those syndicated shows of the 90s, I like that it has a bright and straight-forward, if even at times, a bit cheesy look. It looks comic booky and when we have so many other shows with toned-down visuals and palette I think this just looks kind of fun. Maybe it's won't be so great but it seems many have written this off before it's even aired.
 
How does the show that looks to have a budget of $5 and outright altering non-human Inhumans to look like average humans in any way "comic booky"? Its not colorful either. Honestly, if they removed Lockjaw this would be less "comic booky" then Iron Fist, and that had basically no comic book elements outside of a slightly glowy fist every so often.

Personally, this looks like the absolute cheapest looking superhero show in many years, along with seeming to hate its own source material and being made by someone who is known to not like the comic book superhero stuff. Really, for me it was written off as soon as the showrunner was announced, but literally every thing we see about it just justifies my choice more and more.
 
kirk55555 said:
How does the show that looks to have a budget of $5 and outright altering non-human Inhumans to look like average humans in any way "comic booky"? Its not colorful either. Honestly, if they removed Lockjaw this would be less "comic booky" then Iron Fist, and that had basically no comic book elements outside of a slightly glowy fist every so often.
Click to expand...

There's powers incl. living hair, costumes, Crystal's hair, green guys and alien architecture, the moon, guys with glowy bug eyes...

I'm not familiar with the source material (I mean Black Bolt and Lockjaw were n a couple comics I remember from years ago but...) so maybe that's part of it. I'm just looking at it as a new show and looks more fun than the Inhumans stuff we've been exposed to on AoS.
 
I realize what my issue with this, it seems like it's got some really cool ideas, and it really looks like it's trying to be this big epic sci-fi superhero stories, but either lack of budget, or lack of skill on the writer's part, is preventing it from really pulling it off.
Honestly, what these trailers are doing more than anything, is making me want to check out the Inhumans comics, rather than watching the show.
 
So the second trailer is somehow worse than the first. I really think this is going to be a huge flop. This could have been a great movie to launch a brand new set of characters... what happened?
 
Kevin Feige didn't really want to make the movie (from what I've read he only agreed to do it in exchange for Ike Perlmutter, who at the time was still his boss, giving the okay for a Captain Marvel movie). Once Disney separated Marvel Studios from Marvel Entertainment and gave Kevin Feige full control, he dropped Inhumans, and Perlmutter turned it into a TV show because he thinks the Inhumans can be turned into an X-Men-killer property, or something.
 
If he's trying to turn it into an X-Men property, the people making it didn't get the memo, because it looks drawn significantly from the Jenkins/Lee run (with Maximus blending with Woz) with some homages to the original FF story. I do agree that Feige probably didn't think he could make a good movie out of it, though, and the TV show isn't replacing some awesome movie they would have done, but I don't get the idea that people think Marvel Entertainment was trying to use the Inhumans to make an X-Men product when they're co-producing X-Men products for TV anyway.
 
I actually think a movie focusing on the Royal Family could have been great. I figured they were going to save them until after the Infinity Stones saga was finished, but I guess not.
 
There's no way this thing gets a second season, right? It looks like it's 8 episodes and done to me... and they've ruined The Inhumans for forever. I could see this an Gifted being huge flops right out of the gate for Marvel properties.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top