xkamelx
Global Moderator
Check Those Corners
Posts: 11,108
|
Post by xkamelx on Jun 12, 2005 21:55:34 GMT -5
Has CGI Taken the 'Special' out of 'Special Effects'?
For some of us older viewers, do you remember when you first saw the original Star Wars? In the opening scene we see the Star Destroyer passing over the camera, and it seems to go on forever, and ever?
Or in Aliens, how there was only about 4 men in Alien costumes, but the way it was filmed made them look like real aliens, and made it look like there were hundreds? I mean, I am more scared of the aliens in Aliens, then I would be the aliens in AVP any day of the week.
Do you remember the days where a knock out punch knocked a man down, but these days a punch can knock a man 30 feet and he wil get back up (Everyone wants to be Matrix.)
Ect. ect.
Now, I'm not condeming CGI, it's a great thing - when used right. Movies like Jurassic Park, and The Matrix could not have been possible without CGI, and they used CGI PERFECTLY. The told a great story and the CGI fit perfect.
Lord of the Rings is another example of this.
TV series such as the new Star Treks and Farscape told brilliant stories, and made the CGI fit in perfectly (granted Farscape still used puppets, which I loved).
With those exceptions aside, do you feel the the magic of special effects is lacking these days with CGI?
|
|
oblivion
Admiral
Keeper of the Chapa'i
Posts: 1,844
|
Post by oblivion on Jun 12, 2005 22:24:21 GMT -5
There's a fine line with CGI. A lot of movies are using CGI when it would be possible to get a similar effect another way (models, puppets, etc). When the actors have to react constantly...day in and day out to something "not there" on the soundstage that will be layered in with CGI, it shows. There's something flat about the acting. I think the use of CGI became a problem with the last two episodes of Star Wars.
|
|
|
Post by theartak on Jun 13, 2005 0:21:17 GMT -5
Look at "Day Ater Tomorrow." Finally watched that movie. The effects are great, superb...some of the best I've seen. But it can't make up for several potential plot flaws, some of which stare you right in the face. And the acting is just like oblivion mentions...flat because they're acting against the cgi that isn't there.
That being said, the scene where the Fox News reporter gets smacked by the debris is priceless. How's that for fair and balanced...*smirks*
|
|
ConqueringWolf
Admiral
Merry Meet And Merry Part, Until We Merry Meet Again!
Posts: 5,461
|
Post by ConqueringWolf on Jun 13, 2005 8:48:31 GMT -5
I think the biggest mistake where people overuse CGI is where they want to show lots of wild high flying fast action from a distance that could not be shown with a real actor. Spiderman had some of that when they showed Peter Parker leaping from rooftop to rooftop but they did not overdo it. Now in the Harry Potter movies though...especially when they are playing Quidditch the CGI effects looks so fake and overdone that its ridiculous.
I have also made the point of saying before that I think the snake in the Conan movie with Ahnuld looks much more real than the snakes they use in these new movies that are CGI and just look so horrible.
|
|
|
Post by valderra on Jun 13, 2005 8:49:09 GMT -5
Has CGI Taken the 'Special' out of 'Special Effects'? Actually, I am a big fan of CGI - the more the better. It can give you so much more, and it certainly is more real looking than many of those paintings used as backgrounds (I am now talking about the use of CGI when it comes to scenery). Other than that, well, you usually can see it's CGI when it comes to creatures. But they look better in CGI then when they were made by Harryhausen (or whatshisname) and shown in films like the Sinbad movies. Although... I must admit that they did an excellent job. And yes, of course I remember the Star Wars trilogy with that rather impressive spaceship passing by and it looked soooo real to. All in all, I like CGI when it comes to scenery, not so sure when it comes to beings that aren't really there.
|
|
syborg
Lt Commander
Posts: 382
|
Post by syborg on Jun 13, 2005 10:36:28 GMT -5
In the Jurrassic Park movies the dinosaurs looked real. I saw a movie called 'Sim1' in which Al Pacino has this virtual actress acting in all his movies. Such things could very well become reality in the near future and put lot of actors and actresses out work. It would also do away with many other people whose names appear in the credits list who perform several functions who help in making the movie. The future computers would be so powerful, they would be able to create any kind of environment and any kind of dress, all kinds of props because they would all be CGI. Real actors and actresses do not like doing one kind of role all the time, because they become identified with that character and that affects their careers. But a CGI actor (or actress) - would be able to play a part forever without aging or changing in anyway till the show itself starts losing its appeal. The computers will also bring the cost of making TV shows and movies drop. With countless scripts already available future hi tech computer would be able 'read' them and and prepare its own scripts. The only job would be that of the director, with the help of a few commands from his computer keyboard, the CGI character would do anything he wants them to do. 'Epic movies, with a cast of thousands' would become a thing of the past.
|
|
oblivion
Admiral
Keeper of the Chapa'i
Posts: 1,844
|
Post by oblivion on Jun 13, 2005 12:25:54 GMT -5
Movies are going in the direction you describe Syborg, and the reason is money. It saves money to do it that way.
But, movies aren't improving across the board as a result. Far from it. I hope the CGI trends don't go so far that the artistry of moviemaking becomes a thing of the past.
|
|
|
Post by valderra on Jun 13, 2005 12:58:46 GMT -5
If Shrek and such movies are anything to go by, I prefer them to real actors, who are vain, getting too much money, and quite often a pain in the butt - speaking from the director's point of view. LOL
Animated characters are the future (heck, they are already the present) and real people will slowly but surely no longer be important when movies are made. I rather watch animated beings in films like Shrek, Titan A.E., Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within, than real people - except the odd one. LOL
|
|
oblivion
Admiral
Keeper of the Chapa'i
Posts: 1,844
|
Post by oblivion on Jun 13, 2005 17:44:35 GMT -5
*tries to imagine an animated version of "On the Waterfront"*
*head explodes*
I think some genres of movies would fare quite poorly with 100% animated actors. ;D
|
|
|
Post by valderra on Jun 14, 2005 3:18:52 GMT -5
*tries to imagine an animated version of "On the Waterfront"* *head explodes* I think some genres of movies would fare quite poorly with 100% animated actors. ;D LOL I am not talking about remaking classics into animated versions. No no no.... ;D But I like those animated films they produce these days and they already get those characters fantastically close to looking real - it's spooky. I especially noticed it when I watched: Final Fantasy. I remember that I had come into the room when the film was already running. I had to look twice to make sure those weren't real people talking to each other. Later, of course, I saw they were animation but for that one moment when I wasn't prepared for this kind of animation, it looked very real to me.
|
|
ConqueringWolf
Admiral
Merry Meet And Merry Part, Until We Merry Meet Again!
Posts: 5,461
|
Post by ConqueringWolf on Jun 14, 2005 9:38:50 GMT -5
As long as they don't overdo the CGI special effects it's cool. There are lots of movies I refuse to watch because the effects are too overdone and too much a major part of the movie. Such as any mission impossible movie after the first one...I never watched the second one and never will because it looks stupid.
|
|
syborg
Lt Commander
Posts: 382
|
Post by syborg on Jun 15, 2005 11:47:30 GMT -5
Movies are going in the direction you describe Syborg, and the reason is money. It saves money to do it that way. But, movies aren't improving across the board as a result. Far from it. I hope the CGI trends don't go so far that the artistry of moviemaking becomes a thing of the past. There is no denying can never replace pure genius of a writer and director - but CGI will help in scenery, dress, costumes and props. A pure drama movie with no action requires very limited CGI. Great writing and direction is still a human endeavour.
|
|
xkamelx
Global Moderator
Check Those Corners
Posts: 11,108
|
Post by xkamelx on Jun 16, 2005 22:32:02 GMT -5
As long as they don't overdo the CGI special effects it's cool. There are lots of movies I refuse to watch because the effects are too overdone and too much a major part of the movie. Such as any mission impossible movie after the first one...I never watched the second one and never will because it looks stupid. I don't think I have ever seen the second Mission Impossible either, and like you, I don't really care to. I'm not much of a john Woo fan at all. He thinks he is clever with his action slow motion effects, and uses them over and over and over and over again to the point where is he made all of the slow Morton shots real time, the movie would be about 40 minutes long, lol. There is also a mission Impossible 3 coming out next year. Now, I don't mind movies like Shrek, or Final Fantasy. As far as sci fi goes, I think Final Fantasy was a very good movie, and I was more then amazed with the animation. I would like to see more movies like that, but would not want every movie ever made to go the way of Final Fantasy.
|
|
|
Post by OctoberFire on Jun 17, 2005 2:04:00 GMT -5
I think that CGI gets overused now a days. There are some movies where I will look at it and think, I'm sure this could have been done without the use of computers, or at least if they feel they have to use CGI at least make it look convincing. I saw a film recently (which movie it was escapes my memory at the moment) where I was just horrified at the overuse of CGI special effects, I dunno even if the puppets and whatnot don't look as real as the CGI characters do, sometimes I prefer the cheesy ones of the computer ones I guess. Like you were talking about Shrek and Final Fantasy, and I agree the computer animation on those are outstanding, it's amazing at what they can do now, however just as much as I liked those movies, I love to sit back and watch the cheesy puppet ones like Labyrinth and Dark Crystal just the same. I hope they don't completly abolish this type of movies in the future, but I am sure they probably will.
|
|
ConqueringWolf
Admiral
Merry Meet And Merry Part, Until We Merry Meet Again!
Posts: 5,461
|
Post by ConqueringWolf on Jun 17, 2005 9:26:55 GMT -5
Well....one movie that was actually pretty good and was done with puppets was Team America: World Police......and lots of people went to see it....just goes to show puppets can still have appeal. And as far as classic muppet type movies there will never be another fantasy movie as good as The Dark Crystal was....
|
|