CGI is destroying movies

Tonberry2k · 03-05-2006, 02:02 PM

It's true. It takes a potentially good idea and makes it cartoony and ridiculous. CGI is good in small doses (the bats in Batman Begins) but awful in large ones (The scene with Obi-Wan on the lizard thing in SW3, Scooby-Doo). Compare Star Wars 5 to Star Wars 3. What was a main reason it was so much better? Believability. Yoda was a tangible thing. He LOOKED real. Dagobah swamp was really built. The whole movie had a sense of authenticity about it. If that film had been made now, Yoda would look like he does in the new flicks (A cartoon) and his environment would be the same. Realism helps you believe the movie. CGI makes everything look cartoony and out of place.
Puppets make the characters look real. Take the Vogons in HHGTG. Sure, the movie wasn't spectacular, but the puppets made you feel that these aliens were real. How about ET? Seemed real to me. Computers seem to be taking away any of those fantastical blurs of realism and fiction. Those puppets were sculpted to look realistic, and so far, CGI just isn't cutting it. Rebuttals?

(The only thing CGI is better than is stop animation in live action films. See Ghostbusters and Beetlejuice to know what I mean.)

Irkenwarrior12 · 03-05-2006, 03:28 PM

stopmotion is good if it is done well.

Beam Yosho the Drunkard · 03-05-2006, 04:06 PM

Does this apply to King Kong and LotR?

***Ace Mercury*** · 03-05-2006, 04:08 PM

I would argue the same for CGI; if is done well, you don't even know it's CGI. But, there's the problem: it is difficult to put in CGI such that it is indistinguishable from a physical object. There are methods to work in factors such as lighting, and the entire field does continue to improve. And, it is worth noting that there are things you can do with CGI that simply cannot be practically done with animatronics or models, due to either complexity or financial costs.

Codiekitty · 03-05-2006, 04:27 PM

CGI has the potential to do great good and great evil.

Great Good: Draco in Dragonheart.

Great Evil: Just about everything in the Star Wars prequels.

Where are these lemmings going? The Super Nintendo Super Shire! Hop in line and follow them there!

Kibbleking · 03-05-2006, 07:19 PM

CGI also brings the temptation to movie directors to make their fight scenes a little more spectacular...they just want to add a couple of *thrown through the windows* moves to this street brawl, then maybe an explosion or two, and a bit of slow mo, because, lets face, EVERYONE'S doing it, and because there's no way the actors could do any of this, we'll just animate them too for this scene, no one will notice.

That's how I find CGI is ruining movies. Instead of just filming what you want, there's a really big trend of using the resources that you have, and that means using the maximum CGI possible. It makes alot of films forget about plot and instead focus on the visuals.

**Kargath** · 03-05-2006, 08:53 PM

www.appleseed.co.jp

Yami Yoshi · 03-05-2006, 08:54 PM

There is good CGI and bad CGI. Referring to them collectively as THE DESTROYER OF MOVIES is pretentious and dumb.

While CGI may not be spectacular to you now, technology will eventually make it indistinguishable from the real thing.

**Sean P Kelly** · 03-06-2006, 08:57 AM

Yeah, I agree that George Lucas is a little over-reliant on CGI (though maybe it's because he owns ILM and wants to show what they can do). However, I believe most other directors only use it to a reasonable limit.

And, if you truely believe puppets are better than CGI:

I'll give it to you that the original Yoda looked fine as a puppet. But......

....they really messed up with the crazy looking puppet from "The Phantom Menace"

At least the CGI Yoda looks more like the classic Yoda.

Auron · 03-06-2006, 04:01 PM

I'll take Yoda #3 over #2 any day. But #1 definately is the way to go.

Gumby, dammit · 03-06-2006, 07:32 PM

I'd LOVE to see someone give an argument giving GOOD reasons why the CGI Jabba is better than the RotJ Jabba.

Yami Yoshi · 03-06-2006, 07:37 PM

It's funny how the topic title is "CGI is destroying movies" and not "CGI is destroying Star Wars".

Irkenwarrior12 · 03-06-2006, 10:21 PM

Yoda one and three. Jabba two. I HAVE SPOKEN, SO IT SHALL BE!

Gumby, dammit · 03-07-2006, 03:49 PM

Alright. There's also a good deal of modern day horror movies, an example being the Boogeyman from Boogeyman. The way I saw it, he looked awful.
(( Note: I haven't seen Boogeyman in a while. I'm pretty sure that the Boogeyman WAS CGI, but if he wasn't, please forgive me. ))

**Sean P Kelly** · 03-07-2006, 04:05 PM

^ If Boogeyman is CGI, why is there somebody credited to playing him (and having saw the movie, I can confirm it was a real guy).

Codiekitty · 03-07-2006, 04:17 PM

I've never seen Boogeyman so I'm just throwing something out here, but possibly they had a guy stand in for the Boogeyman so people knew where to look and move, then they CGI'd the Boogeyman over him?

Oh, and the Garfield movie anyone?

Where are these lemmings going? The Super Nintendo Super Shire! Hop in line and follow them there!

Gumby, dammit · 03-07-2006, 04:22 PM

Yeah, as I said, I haven't seen it in a while.
I just thought he looked kinda CGI-ish.

And on the note of Garfield The Movie, the Garfield did look bad. Really bad when he was dancing with Odie. And they're making a sequal for it.

Koga · 03-07-2006, 04:48 PM

Quote:

I've never seen Boogeyman so I'm just throwing something out here, but possibly they had a guy stand in for the Boogeyman so people knew where to look and move, then they CGI'd the Boogeyman over him?

That could very well be possible. Andy Serkis is credited as Gollum (and Smeagol) in LOTR (where he did voice work, of course) but also for King Kong (where he did Motion Capture acting).

Yami Yoshi · 03-07-2006, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CodieKitty

I've never seen Boogeyman so I'm just throwing something out here, but possibly they had a guy stand in for the Boogeyman so people knew where to look and move, then they CGI'd the Boogeyman over him?

Oh, and the Garfield movie anyone?

Where are these lemmings going? The Super Nintendo Super Shire! Hop in line and follow them there!

A Garfield movie will never have the potential to be good no matter how it's done.

omg fat joke i hate mondays LMAOLMAO!

**Booyakasha** · 03-08-2006, 09:41 PM

I think it's safe to say that the major factor in Episode III's suck-itude was the script. CGI definitely makes a movie look cheap, though.

03-05-2006, 08:53 PM	#7
Kargath THE QUESTIONATOR (Polls Mod) Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: kargath64.deviantart.com Gender: Posts: 4,934 Thanks: 521 Thanked 222 Times in 159 Posts Blog Entries: 1 Points: 3,700.47 Bank: 387,284.72 Total Points: 390,985.19 Donate	*CGI is MAKING* movies.** www.appleseed.co.jp

03-08-2006, 09:41 PM	#20
Booyakasha Mod of War Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Wisconsinland Gender: Posts: 6,989 Thanks: 83 Thanked 441 Times in 260 Posts Points: 14,105.31 Bank: 38,128.83 Total Points: 52,234.14 Donate	I think it's safe to say that the major factor in Episode III's suck-itude was the script. CGI definitely makes a movie look cheap, though. __________________ Boo--the only dude bad enough to rescue the president

03-05-2006, 02:02 PM	#1
Tonberry2k Senior Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Pensacola, FL Gender: Posts: 5,177 Thanks: 1 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post Points: 17,626.81 Bank: 530.66 Total Points: 18,157.47 Donate	CGI is destroying movies It's true. It takes a potentially good idea and makes it cartoony and ridiculous. CGI is good in small doses (the bats in Batman Begins) but awful in large ones (The scene with Obi-Wan on the lizard thing in SW3, Scooby-Doo). Compare Star Wars 5 to Star Wars 3. What was a main reason it was so much better? Believability. Yoda was a tangible thing. He LOOKED real. Dagobah swamp was really built. The whole movie had a sense of authenticity about it. If that film had been made now, Yoda would look like he does in the new flicks (A cartoon) and his environment would be the same. Realism helps you believe the movie. CGI makes everything look cartoony and out of place. Puppets make the characters look real. Take the Vogons in HHGTG. Sure, the movie wasn't spectacular, but the puppets made you feel that these aliens were real. How about ET? Seemed real to me. Computers seem to be taking away any of those fantastical blurs of realism and fiction. Those puppets were sculpted to look realistic, and so far, CGI just isn't cutting it. Rebuttals? (The only thing CGI is better than is stop animation in live action films. See Ghostbusters and Beetlejuice to know what I mean.)

03-05-2006, 03:28 PM	#2
Irkenwarrior12 Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Your mother's face. SNAP! Gender: Posts: 1,136 Thanks: 26 Thanked 23 Times in 18 Posts Points: 14,934.07 Bank: 2,423.97 Total Points: 17,358.04 Donate	stopmotion is good if it is done well.

03-05-2006, 04:06 PM	#3
Beam Yosho the Drunkard Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: The oversized rock of Hawaii. Gender: Posts: 5,664 Thanks: 5 Thanked 17 Times in 13 Posts Points: 23,834.39 Bank: 500.00 Total Points: 24,334.39 Donate	Does this apply to King Kong and LotR?

03-05-2006, 04:08 PM	#4
*Ace Mercury* Marshmallow Knight ☆ Supermod Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Southern Ontario Gender: Posts: 19,103 Thanks: 370 Thanked 1,569 Times in 812 Posts Blog Entries: 1 Points: 109,237.98 Bank: 22,102,325.90 Total Points: 22,211,563.88 Donate	I would argue the same for CGI; if is done well, you don't even know it's CGI. But, there's the problem: it is difficult to put in CGI such that it is indistinguishable from a physical object. There are methods to work in factors such as lighting, and the entire field does continue to improve. And, it is worth noting that there are things you can do with CGI that simply cannot be practically done with animatronics or models, due to either complexity or financial costs.

03-05-2006, 04:27 PM	#5
Codiekitty Just Another Face in Red Jumpsuit Join Date: May 2001 Location: Lemmingland Gender: Posts: 19,143 Thanks: 121 Thanked 174 Times in 120 Posts Points: 48,799.72 Bank: 3,021,450.74 Total Points: 3,070,250.46 Donate	CGI has the potential to do great good and great evil. Great Good: Draco in Dragonheart. Great Evil: Just about everything in the Star Wars prequels. Where are these lemmings going? The Super Nintendo Super Shire! Hop in line and follow them there!

03-05-2006, 07:19 PM	#6
Kibbleking Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Australia...WOLF CREEK AH HA HA Posts: 77 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Points: 958.00 Bank: 500.00 Total Points: 1,458.00 Donate	CGI also brings the temptation to movie directors to make their fight scenes a little more spectacular...they just want to add a couple of thrown through the windows moves to this street brawl, then maybe an explosion or two, and a bit of slow mo, because, lets face, EVERYONE'S doing it, and because there's no way the actors could do any of this, we'll just animate them too for this scene, no one will notice. That's how I find CGI is ruining movies. Instead of just filming what you want, there's a really big trend of using the resources that you have, and that means using the maximum CGI possible. It makes alot of films forget about plot and instead focus on the visuals.

03-05-2006, 08:54 PM	#8
Yami Yoshi Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Gender: Posts: 4,838 Thanks: 3 Thanked 8 Times in 7 Posts Points: 13,729.00 Bank: 500.00 Total Points: 14,229.00 Donate	There is good CGI and bad CGI. Referring to them collectively as THE DESTROYER OF MOVIES is pretentious and dumb. While CGI may not be spectacular to you now, technology will eventually make it indistinguishable from the real thing.

03-06-2006, 08:57 AM	#9
Sean P Kelly SMBHQ Mod Movies Mod Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Toronto, ON, Canada Gender: Posts: 3,347 Thanks: 9 Thanked 45 Times in 35 Posts Points: 195,105.90 Bank: 113,226.55 Total Points: 308,332.44 Donate	Yeah, I agree that George Lucas is a little over-reliant on CGI (though maybe it's because he owns ILM and wants to show what they can do). However, I believe most other directors only use it to a reasonable limit. And, if you truely believe puppets are better than CGI: I'll give it to you that the original Yoda looked fine as a puppet. But...... ....they really messed up with the crazy looking puppet from "The Phantom Menace" At least the CGI Yoda looks more like the classic Yoda.

03-06-2006, 04:01 PM	#10
Auron Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: I don't know. Where do I live? Gender: Posts: 5,782 Thanks: 7 Thanked 194 Times in 124 Posts Points: 1,613.96 Bank: 361,093.79 Total Points: 362,707.75 Donate	I'll take Yoda #3 over #2 any day. But #1 definately is the way to go.

03-06-2006, 07:32 PM	#11
Gumby, dammit Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Rats th01 Gender: Posts: 1,239 Thanks: 2 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Points: 15,304.34 Bank: 634.62 Total Points: 15,938.96 Donate	I'd LOVE to see someone give an argument giving GOOD reasons why the CGI Jabba is better than the RotJ Jabba.

03-06-2006, 07:37 PM	#12
Yami Yoshi Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Gender: Posts: 4,838 Thanks: 3 Thanked 8 Times in 7 Posts Points: 13,729.00 Bank: 500.00 Total Points: 14,229.00 Donate	It's funny how the topic title is "CGI is destroying movies" and not "CGI is destroying Star Wars".

03-06-2006, 10:21 PM	#13
Irkenwarrior12 Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Your mother's face. SNAP! Gender: Posts: 1,136 Thanks: 26 Thanked 23 Times in 18 Posts Points: 14,934.07 Bank: 2,423.97 Total Points: 17,358.04 Donate	Yoda one and three. Jabba two. I HAVE SPOKEN, SO IT SHALL BE!

03-07-2006, 03:49 PM	#14
Gumby, dammit Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Rats th01 Gender: Posts: 1,239 Thanks: 2 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Points: 15,304.34 Bank: 634.62 Total Points: 15,938.96 Donate	Alright. There's also a good deal of modern day horror movies, an example being the Boogeyman from Boogeyman. The way I saw it, he looked awful. (( Note: I haven't seen Boogeyman in a while. I'm pretty sure that the Boogeyman WAS CGI, but if he wasn't, please forgive me. ))

03-07-2006, 04:05 PM	#15
Sean P Kelly SMBHQ Mod Movies Mod Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Toronto, ON, Canada Gender: Posts: 3,347 Thanks: 9 Thanked 45 Times in 35 Posts Points: 195,105.90 Bank: 113,226.55 Total Points: 308,332.44 Donate	^ If Boogeyman is CGI, why is there somebody credited to playing him (and having saw the movie, I can confirm it was a real guy).

03-07-2006, 04:17 PM	#16
Codiekitty Just Another Face in Red Jumpsuit Join Date: May 2001 Location: Lemmingland Gender: Posts: 19,143 Thanks: 121 Thanked 174 Times in 120 Posts Points: 48,799.72 Bank: 3,021,450.74 Total Points: 3,070,250.46 Donate	I've never seen Boogeyman so I'm just throwing something out here, but possibly they had a guy stand in for the Boogeyman so people knew where to look and move, then they CGI'd the Boogeyman over him? Oh, and the Garfield movie anyone? Where are these lemmings going? The Super Nintendo Super Shire! Hop in line and follow them there!

03-07-2006, 04:22 PM	#17
Gumby, dammit Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Rats th01 Gender: Posts: 1,239 Thanks: 2 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts Points: 15,304.34 Bank: 634.62 Total Points: 15,938.96 Donate	Yeah, as I said, I haven't seen it in a while. I just thought he looked kinda CGI-ish. And on the note of Garfield The Movie, the Garfield did look bad. Really bad when he was dancing with Odie. And they're making a sequal for it.