I have to concur with the artificial, rubbery looks and the unreal movements. I think too much is put on CGI effects and less on story anyway.
I have to concur with the artificial, rubbery looks and the unreal movements. I think too much is put on CGI effects and less on story anyway.
"Alienated-so alien I go!"
At the risk of sounding like Skullhead, I definitely think that real miniatures (i.e. spaceships with encrusted greebles [from model kits]) look better than CGI starships. And when was the last time anyone was scared and grossed out by a digital creature vs. an animatronic one, say from Stan Winston's studio? Even a puppet/rod-operated creature with the rods erased by a computer are superior than a full-CGI one.
Computers are best at compositing vs. the old optical printers during the blue-screen, now greenscreen, era. Computers have their role. But I think the analog version is far better.
Brian Dennehy: "I'm now 80 and I'm just another actor and that's fine with me. I've had a hell of a ride," ... "I have a nice house. I haven't got a palace, a mansion, but a pretty nice, comfortable home. I've raised a bunch of kids and sent them all to school, and they're all doing well. All the people that are close to me are reasonably healthy and happy. Listen, that's as much as anybody can hope for in life."
The quality of CGI depends on the size of the super-computer rendering it. The lower the budget, the smaller the computer will be. The smaller the computer, the more the animation must be dumbed down, to not take forever to render.
"Well my son, life is like a beanstalk, isn't it?"--Dalai Lama
Like any special effect, CGI should serve the story. When it BECOMES the story, the film is sunk.
CGI actors never ask for points. CGI actors never arrive on-set drunk. CGI actors don't argue with the director or lighting crew. CGI actors don't ask for a bigger trailer. They don't fight with other cast members.
And these days, CGI actors are probably a hell of a lot cheaper.
Just watched the video. He's spot on.
Cobra handling and cocaine use are a bad mix.
I agree. I had watched this video before I saw this thread here. The guy makes a good case for CGI being worse than it was a few years ago. It all comes down to the 'time' factor. In a rush to get these green screen films out on time, they're rushing the effects and it shows. They should probably spend a little more time in the writers rooms as well because most of these big budget monstrosities are sorely lacking in originality and depth.
"And if Warhol's a genius, what am I? A speck of lint on the penis of an alien?"
I actually prefer older films to current. I think the last one I saw in a theater was Last Jedi. I was a radio/tv/film major and learned to like techniques used to convey a story. i think the effects in Brazil, for example, are way better than a lot of cgi because they had limited space and resources, so they got inventive with camera angles and effects, props and the use of wide angle lenses. When used correctly, though, cgi can be a fantastic part of the story, but i think a lot of film making these days relies too much on cgi to the point there is some incredible laziness.
"Alienated-so alien I go!"
Indeed...there was a genuine sense of wonder when you watched films when you were a child as to just how they made things happen on screen. Unless you bought one of then few specialist movie magazines there was no way to find out how things were done.
I also have a fondness for model work and miniatures. Some of those things took a team of people months to make. Somehow no matter how good and convincing modern CGI looks, ultimately everyone knows its basically a bunch of guys sitting in front of a computer rendering. I am not saying there is no artistry there, but the difference is the tool is available to them to be able to realise anything they want. In years past, filmakers had to figure out from scratch how to realise things on screen, and often ended up inventing new technology to find a solution.Examples would be motion control, stop motion and slitscan.
And it follows that when watching older movies that are re released on dvd/blu ray etc with new making of docs, they are often far more entertaining to watch to see how things were done, how problems were solved, seeing miniatures and models being built etc. Modern making of docs simply dont have the same appeal, and are largely promotional tools involving a lot of praise and backslapping among the cast and crew.
I only clicked on it because I thought it was going to be something more interesting...
Just watched Endgame. Triumph of CGI over acting.
Cobra handling and cocaine use are a bad mix.
I got tired of CGI by the 3rd movie of The Matrix. Might as well just watch animation.
the second and third matrix movies did not need to happen. It was an incoherent mess meant to support a bunch of cgi. Far better is the prequel that almost was like Heavy Metal, Animatrix. There was some beautiful animation in that. Did not like the one with all the psychedelic crap going on though.
"Alienated-so alien I go!"
^^^Not my point. I'm not saying there wasn't some decent acting. I'm saying the CGI drowned it out.
Cobra handling and cocaine use are a bad mix.
CGI will never overtake someone telling a ghost story on a dark and stormy night.
The older I get, the better I was.
I would go along with that. The first 45 minutes particularly that dealt with the aftermath of the snap, the mourning of fallen colleagues, and the many moments of emotional interaction between the characters were very pleasing to me.
And there will always be those who will describe such movies as three hours of endless CGI and fighting scenes etc. Which this certainly was not.
My quibbles with Endgame are not the CGI. What the fuck do you expect with a battle that huge, Ray Harryhausen stop motion? I don't think the CGI will ever take away the gut-wrenching codas at the end of the film.
I don't like country music, but I don't mean to denigrate those who do. And for the people who like country music, denigrate means 'put down.'- Bob Newhart
I can't see why nobody complains about CGI Princess Leia from Rogue One? One more perfect example of the Uncanny valley effect for me.
Over the Labor Day weekend TLC was playing a Jurassic Park marathon, all three (four?) movies one-after-the-other.
CGI never got much better than that first JP for me -- when the brontosaur first comes into view it still gives me shivers. You can see the texture of the skin, the rippling of muscle underneath the skin, and the way the thing moves gives a real sense of weight to it. The CGI in that movie was, and still is, fucking awesome.
Bookmarks