Subscribe To Avengers: Endgame Fans Surprised By CGI Hair Shots Updates
Brie Larson as Carol Danvers Captain Marvel in Avengers Endgame Marvel Studios

It's not exactly breaking news that a major superhero movie like Avengers: Endgame would use a lot of CGI. But VFX magic is used for more than just the obvious things, like transforming Mark Ruffalo into the Hulk. Sometimes it's even used for hair. (And mustaches. But that's a different story.) Marvel fans were apparently taken aback by a couple of examples of computer-generated technology used in Avengers 4.

One fan on Twitter highlighted two examples from one of the movie's behind-the-scenes making-of featurettes. The images showed both Carol Danvers/Captain Marvel (Brie Larson) and Steve Rogers/Captain America (Chris Evans) being transformed through the visual effects process.

Yeah, that's a colorful way to put it. I can't say I'm personally surprised by the level of green screen used in Avengers: Endgame but I am surprised by the huge role hair played in this movie. It's been a big talking point since the first trailers came out showing new looks for Black Widow and others, to note the time change. After that, talk surrounded Captain Marvel's various looks, and what she almost didn't have, since her role in Endgame was written and filmed before her solo movie.

Fans had stronger (and funnier) reactions to the CGI shots than I would've expected, and they disagreed on the necessity for what was done to both Captains. Here's one conversation from the Twitter replies:

Fan 1: Dammit, Russos... The CGI never looks 100% real with this stuff...

Fan 2: Both of these examples could literally not be avoided without the use of CGI. Caps helmet was only cgi'd because [test] groups couldn't tell the two apart.

Fan 1: Of course they could be avoided. The Cap fight could have been shot with the helmet from the start, if the Russos had thought it through more clearly. And if they couldn't - then just reshoot the damn scene with a helmet. It's expensive and costly, but they had time and money.

Fan 3: Cap didn’t have his helmet after the battle of New York. He threw it somewhere. They didn’t film him with it because he didn’t have it. They DID think it through. Test audience were just too stupid to tell the two caps apart in their fight.

Fan 1: Cap could have easily gotten a new helmet, or retrieved his old one. And they should have thought about the fact that it's hard to tell two identical people apart.

Other fans tried to explain what was happening and why the Russo Brothers and VFX team would've needed CGI here:

There were also discussions about what "space hair" really looks like vs. a cinematic example:

Here are more reactions, because I found the response to the CGI more interesting than the visual effects work itself:

• Yall are pissed at the CGI as if Marvel made you pay for it or something. [If] it weren't for these bts shots, you wouldn't even notice.

• It’s cute that you don’t understand the millions of reasons CGI is used.

• To be fair we didn't notice most of it. But yeah this is COMPLETELY unnecessary.

• And you didn’t notice 99% of it, therefore it’s not a problem.

Of course, since we're talking about CGI in a superhero movie, someone had to do it:

A low blow.

It's interesting that even in late 2019 fans can still be surprised by what goes into the superhero sausage. You don't even need to be making what would become the highest-grossing movie of all time to use visual effects to help tell the story.

But what do you think? How much CGI is too much -- just when it's obvious to the viewer in the theater, or when you can think of more practical ways the filmmakers could have conceivably gotten a shot? Does CGI bother you at all or do you not care? If you don't care, are you just here for the comments and/or to tell everyone they are stupid? Go ahead and own it.

Captain Marvel End Credits Scenes, Explained

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Blended From Around The Web

 

Related

Hot Topics

Cookie Settings