Official TMNT 2 Discussion

[TigerClaw]

I wonder what Fred Armisen is gonna sound like with this Krang.

[ernesth100]

I wish they wouldn't have shown so much either. There's no suprise anymore and I can basically guess the entire plot.

But it still looks pretty fun. Imma see it for kicks.

[Foombamaroom]

What's sad is that they've revealed their second and third acts already: Bebop and Rocksteady fight on that plane/river and then Krang fight in the end.

*sighs.* Say what you will about the predictability of the first movie, but they never gave this much away.

[LeotheLateBloomer]

To no surprise, Krang's body looks like another one of Bay's Transformers. I'd say it looks even worse than Shredder's suit in the last film. And Krang looks pretty bad as well. The way this film looks so much like his Transformers films, you wonder how long are people going to use the "he did not direct this film" excuse.

[DioLeo451]

Originally Posted by Foombamaroom

What's sad is that they've revealed their second and third acts already: Bebop and Rocksteady fight on that plane/river and then Krang fight in the end.

*sighs.* Say what you will about the predictability of the first movie, but they never gave this much away.

Actually the first movie was entirely predictable and shown through marketing and behind the scenes footage to the point where a lot of things were cut out around the time of it's release

[Foombamaroom]

Originally Posted by DioLeo451

Actually the first movie was entirely predictable and shown through marketing and behind the scenes footage to the point where a lot of things were cut out around the time of it's release

Hmmm, really? I've blocked 2014 out for the most part, but I don't remember it being nearly as bad as this? I think TMNT 2014 was just really predictable as is. It's generic.

[DarkFell]

Originally Posted by Foombamaroom

http://i.imgur.com/Tx46HHz.png
Swiggity swooty, give me that booty.

Why does Krang look like the love child of Davy Jones and one of those aliens from Invaders from Mars?

Spoiler:

]

Spoiler:

Who else is going to fear death after seeing this movie?

[Vicky82]

Originally Posted by Foombamaroom

http://i.imgur.com/Tx46HHz.png
Swiggity swooty, give me that booty.

He looks awesome.

[Commenter 42]

Originally Posted by TigerClaw

Unless some humans were a certain type of animal in a former life.

You know that whole reincarnation thing that the IDW comics dealt with? what if the same goes for Bebop and Rocksteady?

What flavor of Kool-aid is it, specifically?

You seem so peaceful and easily amused and won over.

I want to try it. I'm so tired of reasons and logic. I'm ready to convert.

But If it's Grape, I'm out. Grape's for chumps.

_______

Krang looks exactly like the concept art, which was just a photo of the brain creature swiped from invaders from Mars.

[Bry]

Originally Posted by Commenter 42

Krang looks exactly like the concept art, which was just a photo of the brain creature swiped from invaders from Mars.

It's true, though the Invasion from Mars creature looks a lot better both as an effect and as a "Krang". (And incidentally, that movie came out a year and a half before the Fred Wolf cartoon... hmm.)

The kind of CGI on display here really makes me mourn for practical effects. Practical effects (with CGI touch-ups when necessary) still look a lot better than pure CGI in most cases, but I think it's clear that PD isn't a studio that wants to put that kind of effort and/or expense in. Obviously CGI is hard work and an expense itself, but it's still not a catch-all solution for everything, and these movies' over-reliance on it makes the whole thing look weirdly cheap and noticeably unreal.

[Mew]

Originally Posted by Foombamaroom

Swiggity swooty, give me that booty.

I love this. I need this in my life. I want Kraang as a pet!

[Mew]

Originally Posted by DioLeo451

I know he's so cute and very very gross

Although, Kraang as a pet might not be ideal.
He's slimy and would probably plot to kill you in your sleep.

[Commenter 42]

Originally Posted by Bry

It's true, though the Invasion from Mars creature looks a lot better both as an effect and as a "Krang". (And incidentally, that movie came out a year and a half before the Fred Wolf cartoon... hmm.)

The kind of CGI on display here really makes me mourn for practical effects. Practical effects (with CGI touch-ups when necessary) still look a lot better than pure CGI in most cases, but I think it's clear that PD isn't a studio that wants to put that kind of effort and/or expense in. Obviously CGI is hard work and an expense itself, but it's still not a catch-all solution for everything, and these movies' over-reliance on it makes the whole thing look weirdly cheap and noticeably unreal.

Lol, I don't think it's terrible, all things considered, but yeah, he could have been done practically.

To be fair, a practical krang would have been cheaper, but less flexible.

[Bry]

Originally Posted by Commenter 42

Lol, I don't think it's terrible, all things considered, but yeah, he could have been done practically.

To be fair, a practical krang would have been cheaper, but less flexible.

There's definitely room for both, and I think more filmmakers are starting to realize that a all-CG-all-the-time SFX philosophy just doesn't work in every case. IMO, the Invasion From Mars creature looks better in that shot because it's actually real, and CGI could be used to enhance the look where necessary and give it smoother movement.

And I know I'm not exactly an unbiased source on... like, any of this... but this whole "just mo-cap everything and create it in CGI later" method? I don't think this production has the budget or the care to do it right. Bebop and Rocksteady still look like video game characters. All of the CGI sequences in these trailers look jarringly fake compared to the live-action footage. Maybe that bothers me more than most, though.

[Commenter 42]

Originally Posted by Bry

There's definitely room for both, and I think more filmmakers are starting to realize that a all-CG-all-the-time SFX philosophy just doesn't work in every case. IMO, the Invasion From Mars creature looks better in that shot because it's actually real, and CGI could be used to enhance the look where necessary and give it smoother movement.

And I know I'm not exactly an unbiased source on... like, any of this... but this whole "just mo-cap everything and create it in CGI later" method? I don't think this production has the budget or the care to do it right. Bebop and Rocksteady still look like video game characters. All of the CGI sequences in these trailers look jarringly fake compared to the live-action footage. Maybe that bothers me more than most, though.

Oh hell, the CG here is balls for sure. It's all kinds of terrible, but that's the state of things today; a testament to, like comics, the world of VFX has become faster cheaper, better, with VFX sweatshops sucking the lifeblood of what used to be an evolving, exhilarating community.

The fact still remains getting a Krang puppet would be super cheap aganst building a CG Krang; but it then locks you into decisions on the day, a burden no PD production can afford.

I can't really hold PD accountable for the Bad CG, Jungle book, Warcraft, Assassins creed, even StarWars all suffered from disastrous looking CG characters.

[TrickOrTreater]

I wonder how many people here bitched and moaned about SvB trailers revealing too much but are just gushing in their jeans over all of what THIS movie is revealing in trailers?

Which is literally everything, now that Krang has been revealed.

[sethmartin]

Originally Posted by TrickOrTreater

I wonder how many people here bitched and moaned about SvB trailers revealing too much but are just gushing in their jeans over all of what THIS movie is revealing in trailers?

Which is literally everything, now that Krang has been revealed.

I loved that SvB gave away everything in the trailers. It meant that I didn't have to go sit through that crap.

[Foombamaroom]

Originally Posted by Bry

It's true, though the Invasion from Mars creature looks a lot better both as an effect and as a "Krang". (And incidentally, that movie came out a year and a half before the Fred Wolf cartoon... hmm.)

The kind of CGI on display here really makes me mourn for practical effects. Practical effects (with CGI touch-ups when necessary) still look a lot better than pure CGI in most cases, but I think it's clear that PD isn't a studio that wants to put that kind of effort and/or expense in. Obviously CGI is hard work and an expense itself, but it's still not a catch-all solution for everything, and these movies' over-reliance on it makes the whole thing look weirdly cheap and noticeably unreal.

CGI's only good when used correctly. Take films like Star Wars (dear god not the prequels) and Mad Max for example; they used CGI as a tool rather than... well, rather than the movie itself.

CGI's an amazing tool, but it's not an amazing movie. The problem here is that the CGI stands out so much because every big shot in this film is CGI.

Let's be real here, guys, a practical Krang really wouldn't work. Maybe add some CGI elements, but it'd come across as cheesy.

But why can't they build a set? Why does the Technodrome have to be so CGI-esque? And I don't mean the wide-shots, that's fine, I mean go to a studio, and create a set for the final battle.

If you're going to make a movie that utilizes CGI characters, you need to have a realistic background. In the first movie, they literally had a set for the lair and most of the lair fight was completely CGI. Same with the roof fight.

If you have the ability to use practical effects, use them.

[Leolead]

Problem is, practical effects always look less convincing nowadays.

[Foombamaroom]

Originally Posted by Leolead

Problem is, practical effects always look less convincing nowadays.

Bull.
Watch Star Wars: The Force Awakens. That movie is irrefutable proof that practical effects can still be pulled off.