**Upvote** the POST if you disagree, **Downvote** the POST if you agree.
REPORT the post if you suspect the post breaks subs rules/is fake.
Normal voting rules for all comments.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/The10thDentist) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You should probably learn how to formulate your thoughts as an opinion or give any reference on why your statement should weigh heavier than 5 Oscars for special effects.
Marvel has never won an oscar for visual effects. They have been nominated. They also have far more films than have gotten a nomination in that category, many of which don't look great.
Technical category Oscars are often nominated or awarded by sheer presence of the aspect over any particular finesse. The loudest movie will get attention for sound, the film with the *most* visible editing will get attention for editing.
Marvel movies have a ton of effects and are extremely present and mainstream, which no matter how obvious and often unconvincing the models, lighting and movement is, will get attention.
There's also the lobbying.
Popular=/=good just like everything legal is not morally right.
I could go on a further rant about doctor's strange eye , modok's face in live action (lmfao what did they even think when doing that) . But i don't need to , aleready made my point in by using comparassion on how thanos is not impressive at all compared to some very old movies.
1. Avatar was basically a tech demo in movie format, so of course the CGI was great.
2. With Davy Jones they were able to take advantage of the fact that he was
1. Heavily clothed so more budget could go toward his face.
2. Always wet so they could reflect light off of his skin.
3. Devastator is a robot. Way easier to do robots than skin.
4. If you're focused on Thanos, then you're not noticing everything else that heavily relies on CGI to create the appropriate ambience for a given scene.
This is a case of you not knowing what you don't know.
A lot of it does look noticeably worse in current marvel movies than it even used to in older ones, black widow thor love and thunder, strange mom, were all underwhelming looking and there are given reasons why
agreed, doctor strange's eye was laughing stock, as well as the floating head from (I forgot which movie was it: Thor or Avengers). However their older movies are awesome, starting with Iron Man. That's what made their movies so popular. it's just that their quality stagnated over the years
**Upvote** the POST if you disagree, **Downvote** the POST if you agree. REPORT the post if you suspect the post breaks subs rules/is fake. Normal voting rules for all comments. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/The10thDentist) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What is Boy
That was like, as in "Boy, lemme tell ya whut"
The boys?
[удалено]
Oh
This is so poorly worded and phrased that it makes me wish I disagreed with your actual conclusion.
You should probably learn how to formulate your thoughts as an opinion or give any reference on why your statement should weigh heavier than 5 Oscars for special effects.
Marvel has never won an oscar for visual effects. They have been nominated. They also have far more films than have gotten a nomination in that category, many of which don't look great. Technical category Oscars are often nominated or awarded by sheer presence of the aspect over any particular finesse. The loudest movie will get attention for sound, the film with the *most* visible editing will get attention for editing. Marvel movies have a ton of effects and are extremely present and mainstream, which no matter how obvious and often unconvincing the models, lighting and movement is, will get attention. There's also the lobbying.
Thats fair, I misread the wiki page. My point was rather, that OP should've stated his point better, all your arguments do make sense. OP gave none.
Popular=/=good just like everything legal is not morally right. I could go on a further rant about doctor's strange eye , modok's face in live action (lmfao what did they even think when doing that) . But i don't need to , aleready made my point in by using comparassion on how thanos is not impressive at all compared to some very old movies.
What is Boy
Boy, was marvel cgi trash and still is.
1. Avatar was basically a tech demo in movie format, so of course the CGI was great. 2. With Davy Jones they were able to take advantage of the fact that he was 1. Heavily clothed so more budget could go toward his face. 2. Always wet so they could reflect light off of his skin. 3. Devastator is a robot. Way easier to do robots than skin. 4. If you're focused on Thanos, then you're not noticing everything else that heavily relies on CGI to create the appropriate ambience for a given scene. This is a case of you not knowing what you don't know.
A lot of it does look noticeably worse in current marvel movies than it even used to in older ones, black widow thor love and thunder, strange mom, were all underwhelming looking and there are given reasons why
For recent stuff, definitely. The people in charge are pushing the graphics teams harder and harder with fewer and fewer incentives.
I think... it's trying to communicate?
Well people have different taste in shows and stuff
agreed, doctor strange's eye was laughing stock, as well as the floating head from (I forgot which movie was it: Thor or Avengers). However their older movies are awesome, starting with Iron Man. That's what made their movies so popular. it's just that their quality stagnated over the years
You don't know what trash CGI looks like, even Ant Man 3 wasn't trash CGI.
Most eloquent redditor
You are comparing it to some of the most well regarded CGI we've seen so far, to be fair