Toonbots message board: Spiderman - 9.5

toonbots home ] [ message board archive ] [ the toon-o-matic software ] [ forum ]
Michael Thu May 9 15:23:36 2002
Spiderman - 9.5

Let's face it -- I would have given this movie a 10 if CGI technology were to the point where CGI people really look like people when they move. But instead, I was forced to cringe several times when Spiderman was zipping around the city because he looked *soooooooo* not real. Sigh.

But characterization was good -- Willem Defoe was DAMN good, particularly in one extremely well-written scene with a mirror -- the acting was excellent, and of course the concepts are from one of the most successful comic books ever, so as far as the story itself goes, it was excellent.

Good flick. Lousy CGI. No, I take that back. Good CGI. Just not perfect yet. I would have thought, in 1999 or so, that by 2002 we'd be able to animate human motion perfectly. Instead, I really don't believe that the mathematical models have progressed at all in that time, not from looking at them. Oh, the *rendering* has improved, I believe. But the motion is still just wrong.

mouse Thu May 9 15:33:07 2002
Re: Spiderman - 9.5

> Instead, I really don't believe that the
> mathematical models have progressed at all in that time, not from looking
> at them. Oh, the *rendering* has improved, I believe. But the motion is
> still just wrong.

is that how movement is done- using models? for some reason i thought they got data from movements of actual people. how are the models constructed?

i've had complaints about movements of other creatures i've seen done in cgi (mainly dinosaurs). some of them come from my belief that they just failed to think through whether the animal really _would_ move that way - but a lot of it seems to be that they haven't really figured out the mechanics of motion. i'm thinking of one where the motion that caught your eye was how high the dinosaur lifted it's knees running - but you had no feeling that there was any _push_ downward (which is what actually drives the animal forward). if that makes any sense.

oddly enough, i can't remember this bothering me with traditional cartoons - wonder if this is because they captured the action better, or if my belief was more firmly suspended. (or, of course, i just might not have been paying attention)

Michael Thu May 9 18:33:02 2002
Re: Spiderman - 9.5

> is that how movement is done- using models? for some reason i thought they
> got data from movements of actual people. how are the models constructed?

Depends on what they're doing. Lucas used real people for the Gungan and robot soldiers in the battlefield scene in Star Wars I, for instance. Digitized all the joint positions and went from there.

But the other approach is to design the trajectories of arms, fingers, etc. and then have the machine render the whole thing. And it just isn't quite right.

> i've had complaints about movements of other creatures i've seen done in
> cgi (mainly dinosaurs). some of them come from my belief that they just
> failed to think through whether the animal really _would_ move that way -
> but a lot of it seems to be that they haven't really figured out the
> mechanics of motion. i'm thinking of one where the motion that caught your
> eye was how high the dinosaur lifted it's knees running - but you had no
> feeling that there was any _push_ downward (which is what actually drives
> the animal forward). if that makes any sense.

That's it exactly. It's very subtle, and very difficult to model, but the brain has evolved over the course of a billion years under 1.0 gravities and by golly *knows* how things should look.

> oddly enough, i can't remember this bothering me with traditional cartoons
> - wonder if this is because they captured the action better, or if my
> belief was more firmly suspended. (or, of course, i just might not have
> been paying attention)

I think ... I'm not sure, but I agree. Part of it is probably that the background and the character are drawn together, with plausible pictures at every step. But ... dunno.

Tirdun Fri May 10 07:42:25 2002
Re: Spiderman - 9.5

> Depends on what they're doing. Lucas used real people for the Gungan and
> robot soldiers in the battlefield scene in Star Wars I, for instance.
> Digitized all the joint positions and went from there.

I'm positive they used live models for Spiderman, the problem is: how do you get a model to get into all the poses that Spiderman goes through during a triple backflip off of a swinging line and landing on a building sideways? :)

So it may not be that the model of Spidey looks wrong, it could be the position or movements in the spin, the speed he's moving and/or the feel of the impact against the buildings that register as slightly "off" in the brain.

mouse Fri May 10 13:20:09 2002
Re: Spiderman - 9.5

> I'm positive they used live models for Spiderman, the problem is: how do
> you get a model to get into all the poses that Spiderman goes through
> during a triple backflip off of a swinging line and landing on a building
> sideways? :)

how did they do the stuff in "the matrix"? - that was mostly playing with camera angles and speed, no? - so surely something similar could be done for landing on a building sideways.

of course, i haven't seen spiderman, and am unlikely to any time soon - so just speculating blindly on how the action looks wrong.

pv Mon May 13 16:57:18 2002
Re: Spiderman - 9.5

Hey, there's updates again! whoda thunkit?

> how did they do the stuff in "the matrix"? - that was mostly
> playing with camera angles and speed, no? - so surely something similar
> could be done for landing on a building sideways.

If you mean "bullet time", it's an incredibly cool thing, done so simply that it's amazing nobody thought of it years ago. Basically, you line up a bunch of high-res still cameras in an arc, fire them all off at once, and assemble the pictures into a film clip. Viola - instant 90 degree pan in 0.0 seconds real time.

The "joint positions" thing Michael referred to is called motion capture (mocap for short) and is very evolved. The problem is, it tends to make part of your hindbrain squeal, because you recognize the motions as human, but the non-human appearance of the character is startling. The human brain is VERY tuned to how people move. When you see an animated person move sufficiently humanly, a part of your brain says "hey, that's a person in a cartoon suit". When this happens to me, it feels like the mocapped figure rises out of the scene, sort of like those "magic eye" books. It's very annoying.

There are two alternatives to mocap. The first is movement models. There's been some fantastic progress in this lately, but it's still in its infancy. One of the Jurassic park movies used an early version of this system to animate a flock of running dino-creatures at once.

The second, and very widely used method, is the digital equivalent of stop-motion. It's painstaking, mindboggingly difficult, and slow. "Shrek" is probably the best example of doing this well to date.

As for the effects in spiderman - I don't think there was anything worthy of a cringe, but there were places where the motion was very creepy, because it fell into that not-quite-human thing. In this case, I'm sure it was at least partially intentional. Clearly, somebody watched a lot of time-lapse spider films before animating the wall-climbing stuff. PV

P.S. Yup, you pushed one of my buttons.

mouse Tue May 14 13:29:36 2002
Re: Spiderman - 9.5

> If you mean "bullet time", it's an incredibly cool thing, done
> so simply that it's amazing nobody thought of it years ago. Basically, you
> line up a bunch of high-res still cameras in an arc, fire them all off at
> once, and assemble the pictures into a film clip. Viola - instant 90
> degree pan in 0.0 seconds real time.

i think i remember seeing something about this- but that was used for the sort of 'freeze-motion' shots, wasn't it? i was thinking there was stuff where people were bouncing off walls and things - so the direction of 'down' was varying for the person during the course of the shot - i _think_ that was "the matrix"...

> As for the effects in spiderman - I don't think there was anything worthy
> of a cringe, but there were places where the motion was very creepy,
> because it fell into that not-quite-human thing. In this case, I'm sure it
> was at least partially intentional. Clearly, somebody watched a lot of
> time-lapse spider films before animating the wall-climbing stuff. PV

that's kind of a cool idea, to endow a human figure with non-human action. i may have to check this movie out, just to evaluate the special effects.

> P.S. Yup, you pushed one of my buttons.

let me guess - do you do anything along this line? still, i greatly appreciate the info. (and now that i know where the buttons are...)

pv Wed May 15 18:04:00 2002
Re: Spiderman - 9.5

> let me guess - do you do anything along this line? still, i greatly
> appreciate the info. (and now that i know where the buttons are...)

Only as a hobby, but that's the worst kind of fanatic. PV

spinclad Fri May 17 23:30:35 2002
Re: Spiderman - 9.5

> I'm positive they used live models for Spiderman, the problem is: how do
> you get a model to get into all the poses that Spiderman goes through
> during a triple backflip off of a swinging line and landing on a building
> sideways? :)

> So it may not be that the model of Spidey looks wrong, it could be the
> position or movements in the spin, the speed he's moving and/or the feel
> of the impact against the buildings that register as slightly
> "off" in the brain.

It also looked odd in the final sequence to see him swing from an overhead crane and it *didn't budge*. Didn't give, not an inch. I really would have expected some noticeable swaying with a human's-weight orbiting it at that speed. (Quick, what force will hold 60 kg in a 100 m, 5 s loop? ... about ten kilonewtons -- the weight of a ton. (He's pulling 15 g's.) Not enough to tip a big crane like that, _as long as it's properly counterbalanced_, but still.)

Didn't mind so much the outrageous strength of his webbing (though the concentrated force you'd think would have shredded his glove, pulled the paint off the bridge, crumbled cornices...); all in all, good comicbook physics all around.

But I left feeling he was really a jerk with MJ at the end. I expect this was true to one period of the comic as well -- I only followed the story in spots back in the 70s, but their relations broke fresh ground for angst-filled lives in the genre...

Brother Emsworth Mon May 13 00:57:30 2002
Re: Spiderman - 9.5

Momentarily considered seeing this following "Spirit" on Saturday, but the sight of the waiting lines for the 3pm showing discouraged me. Probably wait at least a couple of weeks before even considering seeing it. Never read the comics much in my youth, though I'm vaguely aware of the principal particpants and plot mythos and whatnot. Parents more or less forbade the purchasing of super-hero comics (seldom watched super-hero cartoons in earliest youth, either.)

However, in the spirit of the occasion...

Spider-Man, Spider-Man,

Does whatever a spider can...

Spins a web, any size.

Catches thieves, just like flies.

Look out! Here comes the Spider-man!

Is he strong? Listen, bud,

He's got radioactive blood.

Can he swing from a thread?

Take a look overhead.

Hey there! There goes the Spider-Man.

In the chill of night,

At the scene of a crime,

Like a streak of light,

He arrives just in time.

Spider-Man, Spider-Man,

Friendly neighborhood Spider-Man.

Wealth and fame? He's ignored.

Action is his reward.

Tune in, life is a great big gang up,

Where ever there's a hang up,

You'll find the Spider-Man!

mouse Mon May 13 13:46:18 2002
Re: Spiderman - 9.5

ok, i'm going to demonstrate my complete ignorance of all things spidey. if he previously existed only in print, where did the song come from? (it surely can't have spread _that_ quickly from the movie - could it? *whimper*)

Brother Emsworth Mon May 13 18:24:38 2002
Re: Spiderman - 9.5

> if he previously existed only in print

Not sure what led you to that assumption. The song in question came from the 1967 animated series. Former Disney and Lantz animators Ray Patterson and Grant Simmons and more importantly Ralph Bakshi (who later directed the infamouse "Fritz the Cat") worked on this series. Spider-Man was again animated in 1981, in a series called "Spider-Man and his Amazing Friends," produced by Marvel's own animation division (now defunct.) Marvel produced a seperate set of episodes, animated in the same style but with a slightly different voice cast (though Bill Woodson played J. Jonah Jameson in both series, and creator Stan Lee narrated the first one), for syndication around the same time. Spider-Man was again animated in a series which ran from 1995 until 1998 (with a voice cast including the likes of Edward Asner and Martin Landau.) "Spider-Man Unlimited," in which Spider-Man fights eveil animal mutants on another planet, aired in 1999, and was blessedly short-lived.

On the live action front, Spider-Man appeared in regular sketches on the PBS series "The Electric Company" from 1971 until 1976. Spider-Man was entirely mute, though if memory serves, thought balloons may have been employed at times. This Spidey out-foxed such rather ridiculaous villains as the Sack, the Blowhard, the Birthday Bandit, and the Tickler.

Spider-Man again received the live action treatment in a 1977 TV movie, with Nicholas Hammond, who played Friedrich Von Trapp in "The Sound of Music," as Spider-Man/Peter Parker. The series ran from 1978 until 1979, and according to Roy Kinnard in his book on live action comic strip adaptations, "had little of the comic book's charm, and suffered from cheap production and a dearth of imagination."

There was also at least one record in the 70's, I think, which apparently had Spider-Man singing! Lost the link to the web page with that information, though.

Tirdun Tue May 14 10:03:05 2002
Spiderman

> 1967 animated series.

Clunky animation, although much better than contemporaries "Fantastic 4" and "Iron Man". Both of those used awful ~12 FPS shots, overlay stills and flat pans that were purely horrific. Spidey at least managed to be watchable and somewhat fun. The theme song (a la mouse's original post) was awesome.

> 1981 "Spider-Man and his Amazing Friends,"

With Firestorm and Ice-Man, later shown back to back with Hulk episodes. Included several crossovers with X-Men (although these were odd given the team makeup of the XMen as presented). Animation was much better, and the storylines were much improved. Included the widest range of baddies, often a different uber-villian every episode! Featured a love-triangle of sorts within the cast, all of who lived 3s Company style.

> 1995 until 1998 Spider-Man TAS

Much cooler, full blown animation and a firm handle on the original comic storylines. Only downside was the really weak 3D animation sequences where the cell-drawn Spidey would swing through an awful pastel 3D cityscape. These were thankfully rare. The theme song was a 90's remix of the original, not too bad. Included the black costume (minus the massive future wars crossover) although Spidey only wore it for 2 or 3 episodes, and the Carnage / Venom story (woo!).

> 1999 "Spider-Man Unlimited"

GAH. Awful stuff. Based very loosely on "Spiderman 2999" and "Spiderman Unlimited" comics AFAICT. For those unawares, neither comic had anything to do with the Peter Parker Spiderman, both were blatant attempts to sell even MORE Spiderman titles. Note that at the time there were 4 or 5 different Spiderman comic titles based on P.Parker already, and the 2999 and Unlimited just added to this glut. Marvel went bankrupt following this line of saturation selling.

> 1971-1976 "The Electric Company"

Ye gods, I had entirely forgotten about this. REALLY cheap effects, Spiderman never really seemed to swing anywhere and all his villians ended up in the same net or wall-trap web thing. For some reason, though, it was incredibly cool to watch these later on. And yeah, the villians were really weak. Still 1000 times cooler than Spiderman Unlimited.

> 1977 TV movie

Fun to watch in a camp - 70's Batman Kapoow sort of way. In fact, I remember the wall-crawling looking suspiciously like Adam West "bat roping" up the side of a building. Coolest gadget was the "spider tracker" which had the typical "red light compass" system, only the directions were marked by a spider's legs. I don't know why I remember that.

> 1978 until 1979

I actually liked this one, although for the same reasons as the movie. It was really lame, cheap and all, but it was SPIDERMAN! Ok, same reasons as the Batman TV show.

> There was also at least one record

2 actually Spider-Man: Rock Reflections Amazing Spiderman: A Young Hero's Beginning

I haven't ever heard them. I wouldn't go looking.

OH, and MTV is apparently doing a new CGI based Spidey. I weep for the fate of our wretched society. We are sooooo doomed.

mouse Tue May 14 13:21:49 2002
Re: Spiderman

> Coolest gadget was the
> "spider tracker" which had the typical "red light
> compass" system, only the directions were marked by a spider's legs.
> I don't know why I remember that.

you remember it because you wanted one just like it. you know you did.

ok, the fact that _two_ of you are so completely informed about this multitude of spidey-vision, of which i was _completely_ unaway, scares me even more than spidey spots on pbs.

(and of course, any minute now, michael is going to chime in with all _he_ remembers, and i'll just have to start digging a bunker)

Brother Emsworth Tue May 14 14:04:39 2002
Re: Spiderman

> ok, the fact that _two_ of you are so completely informed about this
> multitude of spidey-vision, of which i was _completely_ unaway, scares me
> even more than spidey spots on pbs.

Wait! I didn't even get a chance to mention the use of the 60's theme song in a car commercial a few years back (had a notion it was for Volkswagon, but now suspect I'm confusing it with the Speed Racer commercial), or the Moxy Fruvous remix of said theme. To say nothing of the "sneak preview" of the film currently available through the fine art of Legos!http://www.lego.com/eng/studios/screening/movie.asp?title=spiderman1

Tirdun Wed May 15 08:09:56 2002
Re: Spiderman

> Wait! I didn't even get a chance to mention the use of the 60's theme song
> in a car commercial a few years back (had a notion it was for Volkswagon,
> but now suspect I'm confusing it with the Speed Racer commercial), or the
> Moxy Fruvous remix of said theme. To say nothing of the "sneak
> preview" of the film currently available through the fine art of
> Legos!http://www.lego.com/eng/studios/screening/movie.asp?title=spiderman1

OOOH, and I have a tape with the Ramones singing the SpiderMan theme! The tape is full of really crappy remakes of old cartoon theme songs mostly by bands you've never heard of. The Spidey one and the "conjunction junction" one made it barely worth the 5 bucks I spent on it.

Brother Emsworth Wed May 15 12:24:28 2002
Re: Spiderman

> OOOH, and I have a tape with the Ramones singing the SpiderMan theme! The
> tape is full of really crappy remakes of old cartoon theme songs mostly by
> bands you've never heard of. The Spidey one and the "conjunction
> junction" one made it barely worth the 5 bucks I spent on it.

I remember seeing that tape. I have a vague notion that it featured a "hip hop" version of Underdog or something. Waited until I could find a tape with the original songs myself, including "Conjunction Junction." Be hard to top Jack Sheldon, after all.

Tirdun Wed May 15 13:21:01 2002
Re: Spiderman

> I remember seeing that tape. I have a vague notion that it featured a
> "hip hop" version of Underdog or something.

Ech, yeah, thanks for reminding me of that one ;)

There was also a Schoolhouse Rocks album (probably on Rhino) that included a slew of remakes, but IIRC it was an order of magnitude higher in terms of quality of music. I'd like to find the original songs in a collection somewhere, though.

Brother Emsworth Wed May 15 22:04:35 2002
Re: Spiderman

> Ech, yeah, thanks for reminding me of that one ;)

> There was also a Schoolhouse Rocks album (probably on Rhino) that included
> a slew of remakes, but IIRC it was an order of magnitude higher in terms
> of quality of music. I'd like to find the original songs in a collection
> somewhere, though.

I'd seen that. I had a vague notion that in addition to some remixes, it mostly included original songs, though. I could be wrong. Back when Golden Books still had video rights to teh series, they released some audio cassettes with the appropriate themed videos. Missed buying a set at a used video sale due to lack of funds that day; gone by the time I returned, alas.

Brother Emsworth Tue May 14 13:53:45 2002
Re: Spiderman

> Clunky animation, although much better than contemporaries "Fantastic
> 4" and "Iron Man". Both of those used awful ~12 FPS shots,
> overlay stills and flat pans that were purely horrific. Spidey at least
> managed to be watchable and somewhat fun. The theme song (a la mouse's
> original post) was awesome.

I've only heard the theme, alas. They used to show the clunkier, barely moving "Marvel Superheroes" (including Captain America, Iron Man, and Thor) on Spanish television, and also "Fantastic Four" (which at least moves more than Captain America!) but have yet to see the original Spidey series. Have to save up to order a tape, I suppose.

> With Firestorm and Ice-Man, later shown back to back with Hulk episodes.
> Included several crossovers with X-Men (although these were odd given the
> team makeup of the XMen as presented). Animation was much better, and the
> storylines were much improved. Included the widest range of baddies, often
> a different uber-villian every episode! Featured a love-triangle of sorts
> within the cast, all of who lived 3s Company style.

Only seen English episodes of the ones without Ice-Man and Firestar and with a different voice cast. Seen episodes in Spanish, though. That little dog with the bows which for some reason accompanies Spidey and co. from time to time (called Ms. Lion, according to my reference books) seems rather out of place, and this is made even odder since you can here Frank Welker's barking followed by re-dubbed barking a few seconds later. Mildly annoying, really. Either redub it entirely or leave Welker's barking in, I say.

> Much cooler, full blown animation and a firm handle on the original comic
> storylines. Only downside was the really weak 3D animation sequences where
> the cell-drawn Spidey would swing through an awful pastel 3D cityscape.
> These were thankfully rare. The theme song was a 90's remix of the
> original, not too bad. Included the black costume (minus the massive
> future wars crossover) although Spidey only wore it for 2 or 3 episodes,
> and the Carnage / Venom story (woo!).

Saw most of this series. The theme song bothered me, frankly. Did enjoy the serialized nature of the series, though, and Ed Asner was a hoot as J. Jonah Jameson.

> GAH. Awful stuff. Based very loosely on "Spiderman 2999" and
> "Spiderman Unlimited" comics AFAICT. For those unawares, neither
> comic had anything to do with the Peter Parker Spiderman, both were
> blatant attempts to sell even MORE Spiderman titles. Note that at the time
> there were 4 or 5 different Spiderman comic titles based on P.Parker
> already, and the 2999 and Unlimited just added to this glut. Marvel went
> bankrupt following this line of saturation selling.

Something I'd meant to mention last time. Cable's ABC Family Channel will be airing episodes of all of the aforementioned Spider-Man cartoons from May 25-May 27, anf from 7-9am, ET/PT. This includes the wretched "Unlimited," alas. Give me a good opportunity to catch up on the earlier shows, though. More details, including a full episode listing, can be found here: http://www.toontracker.net/wwwboard/messages/2088.html

> Fun to watch in a camp - 70's Batman Kapoow sort of way. In fact, I
> remember the wall-crawling looking suspiciously like Adam West "bat
> roping" up the side of a building. Coolest gadget was the
> "spider tracker" which had the typical "red light
> compass" system, only the directions were marked by a spider's legs.
> I don't know why I remember that.

I used to see this on video at Suncoast, or it may have been episodes from the subsequent TV series, or both. I miss Suncoast, sniff. Again, may try to acquire the tapes at some point in the not so near future.

> 2 actually Spider-Man: Rock Reflections Amazing Spiderman: A Young Hero's
> Beginning

That first title unnerves me a bit.

> I haven't ever heard them. I wouldn't go looking.

> OH, and MTV is apparently doing a new CGI based Spidey. I weep for the
> fate of our wretched society. We are sooooo doomed.

With Neil Patrick Harris (Doogie Howser, MD) as Spidey, to boot.

mouse Tue May 14 13:16:51 2002
Re: Spiderman - 9.5

good lord. once again i am impressed by my ability to move so obliviously through the currents of popular culture, and yet remain unscathed...

> On the live action front, Spider-Man appeared in regular sketches on the
> PBS series "The Electric Company" from 1971 until 1976.

for some reason, i find this the most disturbing fact in the lot. (ralph bakshi's involvement is a close second though)

Brother Emsworth Tue May 14 13:59:26 2002
Re: Spiderman - 9.5

> for some reason, i find this the most disturbing fact in the lot. (ralph
> bakshi's involvement is a close second though)

More detailed information on Spidey on "The Electric Company" (including villain lists, sound files, cast info, etc.) can be found here, as well as links to discussion of a trippy series of comic books adapted from these episodes: http://www.spiderfan.org/noncomic/tv_electric_co/index.html

I was mistaken, it appears Spidey was only featured for three seasons. I'd have to pay extra to have digital cable installed, but if I were to do so, I could then choose to add Noggin as a premium channel. While ostensibly aimed at young children, their educational programming includes classic episodes of "Sesame Street" as well as "The Electric Company." They only show "Mathnet" once a week or so, it seems, alas.






Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.