Black Panther (February 16, 2018)

He tried calling himself the Black Leopard, but it didn’t stick.

 

Yes, this was a second attempt at alteration. The first was in the latet sixties. I read about it in an Avengers letter column that was published around the time the Sons of the Serpents made their second appearance.

 

Not sure ill ever see this. I think I was over Superhero/Comic Book movies when Michael Keaton was still Batman. But then again, I wasn't into comic books either so thats prob why. My wife watches some of em when they are on so maybe someday it will be on in the background while I surf, read, or tie some flies

 

Seems to work out better than that voting thing we've been using.

 

Here's a very interesting article on some of the shoddy visual effects in the movie, both explaining why the effects were bad and how the problem is kind of pervasive in the industry due to reduced post schedules and low rates. An excerpt:

Given the hyper-competitive, high-pressure nature of the VFX world, it's no surprise that we're not seeing the best work from these studios. In Black Panther, there are two shots that are particularly disappointing: one in which the superhero flips over a car as it crashes beneath him, and another sequence where two CG characters punch each other as they fall. (The latter sequence feels like a nod to the excellent midair fight in Spider-Man 2, except it looks significantly worse.) The insider's team (who didn't work on those shots) was worried about these scenes when they caught glimpses of them in the film's trailer. They had all the trademarks of bad CG modeling. Their team held out hope that the trailers were using early, unfinished renders, but unfortunately those problems remained in the final cut of the film.

'Black Panther' is amazing. Why are its CG models so terrible?

I'm finally seeing it tonight and will comment when I get a chance. I'm glad the movie did so well: it just passed $700M world-wide, which is both amazing and unexpected.

 

It's true. I thought the CGI looked subpar in several places.

 

I just come back from seeing it today ! story was good the acting was good !

 

This is another one of those "ignorance is bliss" things, right?

Only shot that really made me doubletake was a shot of one of the actors riding an animal, late in the movie. It had all the hallmarks of a "greenscreen barrel ride" kind of thing.

 

I have worked on projects where we were told for weeks, "don't worry, this is just a temp effect -- it'll be replaced before the film premieres." And it never happened.

We did see the film last night and I thought it was fine. There were moments were some of the VFX composites weren't perfect (and once again, there were more than 14 effects companies listed in the credits), but I enjoyed the characters and story, great performances, and I thought it was one of the most unique, unpredictable superhero films I've ever seen. Unusual music, great visuals, and extremely fast-paced -- it felt very short for a 135-minute movie. Terrific technical work for the most part, totally enjoyable.

 

I caught the movie Saturday night and appreciated the pacing, acting and casting. Andy Sertis hams it up a bit as a villian, but to great effect. recommended.

 

It was simply heartbreaking watching the video/documentary from the above link about VFX house Rhythm & Hues which worked on Life of Pi and countless other productions for over 25 years. It's amazingly well put together and such a sad story...

 

I’m forced to see most of these superhero films because of my Godson. Most of them ...I’m pretty bored with. But this film was pretty unique IMO. It made me think
What separates this from the pack is that it’s going to bring in a large audience that typically skips the Marvel /DC films. It’s off to a pretty good start.

 

Took a staggering $111 million in the US on it's second weekend. With few exceptions most would take that for opening weekend. That's the second highest gross for the second weekend ever. A massive commercial and critical success, so well done all involved.

 

Thanks for posting, it's symptomatic of big business in general, as they said there are 6 majors who control the majority of the work, competition is fierce and the risks of underbidding are potentially fatal to the business. I can't think of a work around that would get the studios to pony the $$$$ for the additional work and hours they push down and not risk the future of the VFX studio moving forward for future projects.

Essential viewing for anyone who thinks it's all sunshine and roses.

 

Marvel team showed some real smarts in making Ragnarok a bit of a surfer dude movie. Two consecutive films filled with dramatic palace intrigue and majestic rituals could have proved a bit much for audiences.

 

Soon to be five majors:

Disney/Fox
Columbia/Tri-Star/Sony
Paramount/Viacom
NBC/Universal
Warner Bros.

Fox was #6, about to be absorbed into Disney in a few months ($52 billion deal). MGM/UA is just an office building, Lionsgate is kind of a "mini-major," ditto with Open Road, Dreamworks imploded and is just a splinter of Spielberg's Amblin Productions, Weinstein Films is about to go under... in some ways, the industry is getting smaller.

 

I knew some of the players involved at Rhythm & Hues and also at Digital Domain. I was there for the 2003 bloodbaths at Cinesite, so I can say for sure that the VFX business is a grim one, indeed. The Life After Pi movie explains in detail how the VFX houses are driven mad by being forced into bidding on each project as a total amount. The problem is, there's a difference between a :10 second shot being redone 10 times and a :30 second shot being redone 100 times over a period of months. And if the client is not paying for revisions, it's a huge drag and a major expense that the VFX company has to eat.

 

I've been talking to people who don't watch super-hero movies, but made a special effort to watch this one, and they all love it.

 

Hate the idea. I like "Thor" because its about a Royal family. That gives it style. I'd rather have Shakespeare than cowabungas.

 

No wonder Liam Hemsworth's not going to do anymore Thor films ( once his contract ends) unless they improve the script.

 

This concolidation happened with the music industry, too..... perhaps, this is the 'canary-in-the-coalmine' sign that we could be reaching the end of a 'golden-age'!
.....unless, Amazon will be trying to aim for a seat at that 'big boys' table.....?

 

I thought it was Hemsworth's idea to push the 'silly' on this latest one?....

 

Hemsworth is a born comedian. I expect he enjoyed making the last one much more than the first two.

 

Personaly, I agree. Thor is mythic, epic and majestic.
Just talking a business sense.
It worked.

 

Thought so, too.
The choice of director probably made him smile.
Conchords and Shadows? C'mon!