Anyone else think the CGI in Matrix Reloaded looks really bad?

[Triumph]

Just from what I'm seeing in the previews, it looks like pretty crappy CGI. Three scenes that specifically come to mind
-Driving against traffic on the motorcycles
-When Neo lands on the hood of the Chrysler
-Neo holding himself up on the stick and kicking 360 degrees of agents.

I dunno, they all look pretty bad to me, like video game animations. Just wondering if anyone else agrees with me.

 

[MacBaine]

Originally posted by: Triumph
Just from what I'm seeing in the previews, it looks like pretty crappy CGI. Three scenes that specifically come to mind
-Driving against traffic on the motorcycles
-When Neo lands on the hood of the Chrysler
-Neo holding himself up on the stick and kicking 360 degrees of agents.

I dunno, they all look pretty bad to me, like video game animations. Just wondering if anyone else agrees with me.

Show me a video game that looks like that... I'll buy 10

 

[brxndxn]

-Neo holding himself up on the stick and kicking 360 degrees of agents.

I think the CGI wasn't bad.. I just thing the cartoon-style kung-foolishness of kicking 360degrees while revolving around a stick is rather poopy.

 

[MacGaven]

When does Neo land on the hood of a Chrysler? Did you mistake this for one the Agents?

The 100 Agent fight scene looks kind of crappy.

 

[notfred]

I agree about the freeway scene, the trucks that the camera goes under doesn't look very good.

 

[Gunslinger08]

Yeah, it doesn't look too impressive in the 360 degree kick.. I've actually mentioned it to a few friends, and they said they didn't notice. Guess I'm picky.

Josh

 

[Linux23]

Originally posted by: MacGaven
When does Neo land on the hood of a Chrysler? Did you mistake this for one the Agents?

The 100 Agent fight scene looks kind of crappy.

it may look that way, but it's gonna kick as$ on the big screen.

 

[AntaresVI]

I noticed this too. The local matrix nerd thinks I'm nuts.

 

[slackerinabox]

Yeah, I think it looks terrible (though not "Hulk" terrible).. They should have used more traditional techniques instead of going all CGI (i.e. instead of computerizing the agents they should have done a fancy green screen shot of a guy jumping on a car composited with a CGI car smashing.. Not that hard, really).. But I loved most of the CGI in X2 (except the tornado scene).. Let's see if M2 can beat that (we already know it can't beat LOTR)

 

[xchangx]

Matrix's CGI will never compare to LOTR.

They use too many CGI sequences, and too many repetitions of the same effect (slow/stop motion). I mean waaay too many.

 

[Paulson]

I think it's horrible... It's obvious it's fake, where in the first one, everything looked fairly real and stunning. Makes me kind of mad

 

[Angrymarshmello]

It is just a commercial...I'm sure it won't look "as bad" in the movie

 

[Maleficus]

Originally posted by: xchangx
Matrix's CGI will never compare to LOTR.

They use too many CGI sequences, and too many repetitions of the same effect (slow/stop motion). I mean waaay too many.

LOTR was an incredibly horrible movie though, Matrix was fairly good/decent. The effects fit with the movie while LOTR was just bleh

 

[Eli]

Originally posted by: Maleficus

Originally posted by: xchangx
Matrix's CGI will never compare to LOTR.

They use too many CGI sequences, and too many repetitions of the same effect (slow/stop motion). I mean waaay too many.

LOTR was an incredibly horrible movie though, Matrix was fairly good/decent. The effects fit with the movie while LOTR was just bleh

LOTR was an incredibly horrible movie?

What planet are you from?

 

[Descartes]

Originally posted by: freedomsbeat212
Yeah, I think it looks terrible (though not "Hulk" terrible).. They should have used more traditional techniques instead of going all CGI (i.e. instead of computerizing the agents they should have done a fancy green screen shot of a guy jumping on a car composited with a CGI car smashing.. Not that hard, really).. But I loved most of the CGI in X2 (except the tornado scene).. Let's see if M2 can beat that (we already know it can't beat LOTR)

Since it's so easy, go ahead and solicit your services to them for the final movie in the trilogy

 

[Spyro]

Originally posted by: Maleficus

Originally posted by: xchangx
Matrix's CGI will never compare to LOTR.

They use too many CGI sequences, and too many repetitions of the same effect (slow/stop motion). I mean waaay too many.

LOTR was an incredibly horrible movie though, Matrix was fairly good/decent. The effects fit with the movie while LOTR was just bleh

You forgot to add "IMWO" to that

 

[theNEOone]

LOTR = bleh.

but yah, in the age of final fantasy i think the cgi should've been better. i agree w/ the agent jumping on car scene, and the 100 agent fight scene, but i thought that the motorcycle scene looked realistic.

 

[GasX]

see it on the big screen before you judge...

 

[Spyro]

Originally posted by: Mwilding
see it on the big screen before you judge...

 

[erikiksaz]

Originally posted by: Spyro

Originally posted by: Mwilding
see it on the big screen before you judge...

This is true! When i saw the commercial with the 100 agents, i thought the CGI looked crappy as well. But, when i saw the trailer preview before X2, it looked MUCH better!

 

[SSP]

I agree. The CGI animations of people are not that good in the large trailers. Compared to Star wars and LOTR it?s sh!t really. BUT, I thought the CGI in Spiderman sucked in the trailers, but it wasn?t that bad in the big screens, so you never know.

 

[igowerf]

but yah, in the age of final fantasy i think the cgi should've been better. i agree w/ the agent jumping on car scene, and the 100 agent fight scene, but i thought that the motorcycle scene looked realistic.

Yeah. Final Fantasy definitely raised the bar for CG in my eyes. IMO, Star Wars and LoTR did a pretty good job though. Gollum was incredible in TTT.

Oh yeah. And the Matrix CG does look pretty crappy in the trailers. I wasn't too impressed with the CG in Spiderman either.

 

[0roo0roo]

trailer cg looked fine to me. people keep gripping about what happens to the car when it gets jumped on. u've never seen what happens to plastic bumpers in crashes? they do pop off

as for hulk, i saw the trailer with x2, it doesn't look bad.

gollum is overrated. he gets good marks because of facial performance, but not cg. they were basically animating a corpse.

 

[The Dancing Peacock]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
trailer cg looked fine to me. people keep gripping about what happens to the car when it gets jumped on. u've never seen what happens to plastic bumpers in crashes? they do pop off

as for hulk, i saw the trailer with x2, it doesn't look bad.

gollum is overrated. he gets good marks because of facial performance, but not cg. they were basically animating a corpse.

no, they did an excellent job of lighting him. That is what makes a CG element look real. You can have a fantastically intricate model or character rigged in an innovative way, but if the lighting sucks, then it looks "fake" like it was just dropped in the background plate.

Gollum, though he was motion captured, they had to animate him completely, not just his face. A believable animated CG character communicates with his whole body, not just his face. Most people when they talk, have body movements to go along with their talking. Gollum impressed many jaded CG artists I know.

 

[floccus]

That one scene with Neo fighting the replicated Agent Smith cost 4 Million... for a minute and a half of screen time. I doub't its as bad as you may think. Until we all see this on the big screen we have no room to complain... TV sucks.

Also, as for comparison to LotR... I am a diehard LotR fan and I know a lot about how Weta created all the effects. For a small little company to create Gollum is truly amazing, especially when you take into account that fact that he can be lip read. True he was motion capture, but making a character lip readable in CGI is truly an amazing feat.