comment by The Guvnor XI -Iron sharpens Iron- (U12889)
posted 4 hours, 45 minutes ago
comment by RtM (U1097)
posted about 20 hours ago
CGI is at the bottom for me. Traditional animation, stop-animation, reality...prefer it all before the easy way out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
CGI can be a useful movie making tool if done correctly. Animation works too but there are movies that just wouldn't work without the use of CGI. Off the top of my head, Harry Potter,LOTR, Avatar, Transformers,Star Wars,Jurassic Park come to mind.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The original and three best Star Wars movies were made without using CGI. They worked just fine, certainly before George Lucas tampered with them anyway.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

CGI isn't even being used well anymore. Jurassic Park still looks better than recent films. Most of the time CGI is used cheaply to save money on the more expensive but much better practical effects. Just look at the crappy rubber Spiderman with Toby McGuire. Him running on the rooftop was cringe.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

comment by The Guvnor XI -Iron sharpens Iron- (U12889)
posted 9 minutes ago
I agree that some movies are deploying CGI poorly but others are utilising it effectively. I recently saw Jumanji and the CGI creature and environment didn't detract from the movie at all.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There u r

comment by RtM (U1097)
posted 57 minutes ago
CGI isn't even being used well anymore. Jurassic Park still looks better than recent films. Most of the time CGI is used cheaply to save money on the more expensive but much better practical effects. Just look at the crappy rubber Spiderman with Toby McGuire. Him running on the rooftop was cringe.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed. Practical effects will always be better. The only reason they're not used as much now is because they're more expensive and time consuming than CGI and sadly the movie industry these days is all about making money and profit margins. More so than ever before.

CGI can be good in the right doses, no doubt, but these days it's become overused as an industry standard at the expense of practical effects and the movie viewing experience is poorer for it these days in my opinion anyway.

And we are going to have a lost art soon because of it. Only smaller budget horror with some sort of honor code seem to be trying to keep it alive.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Watched Dog day afternoon this week...was meh...ironically was also watching Going in Style...Caine and Freeman...in the film...they are watching....dog day afternoon

I feel I should watch Glengarry Glen ross

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

They did perfectly well without it in many of the best fantasy films ever produced.

CGI just adds an unwanted dreamy feeling to the visuals imo.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Last two comments

To the last three comments

CGI has it's place but surely it was always intended to complement practical effects, not make them essentially obsolete.

I wonder what would happen if a really good sci-fi or fantasy movie was made now using mainly practical effects and no CGI like the original Star Wars trilogy ?

If it was really successful would it force the movie industry to change it's thinking on CGI and revert to using at least a decent amount of practical effects again in these kind of movies ?

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

comment by The Guvnor XI -Iron sharpens Iron- (U12889)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Superb - Going loco down in Bakayoko, the football down there is so wrong (U6486)
posted about 5 hours ago
To the last three comments

CGI has it's place but surely it was always intended to complement practical effects, not make them essentially obsolete.

I wonder what would happen if a really good sci-fi or fantasy movie was made now using mainly practical effects and no CGI like the original Star Wars trilogy ?

If it was really successful would it force the movie industry to change it's thinking on CGI and revert to using at least a decent amount of practical effects again in these kind of movies ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no chance a sci fi or fantasy movie could be done without cgi and be successful today. The standards have risen and people want realism. You can't only use practical effects because it just wouldn't look real enough. Technology has come a long way and things like motion capture are becoming very prominent.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the evolution of practical effects hadn't been stunted by the emergence of CGI then you'd have to assume that the various techniques and technologies utilised within practical effects would have been augmented and improved as well.

The simple reason that CGI has taken over and is so thoroughly overused now is not because it necessarily always looks better but because it's just much cheaper and more convenient to do.

As for realism I think that's the exact problem that overuse of CGI gives you. Too often it doesn't look realistic at all. That's not to say that CGI doesn't have it's place though.