Comments on: Boiling Point: CGI

By: ApocalypseWhen

ApocalypseWhen — Sat, 26 Jul 2008 05:34:31 +0000

Perfect example supporting this argument, John Carpenter’s “The Thing”. With movies like Transformers, I think “Oh that’s pretty cool, but they just did that with computers.” With The Thing, you’re not only thinking “Holy shit, this is messed up”, but also “Holy shit, how did they even do that defibrillator scene”. It’s just for more satisfying for the filmmakers, actors, and audience to see a good practical effect than a good cgi one.

By: ApocalypseWhen

ApocalypseWhen — Sat, 26 Jul 2008 05:34:00 +0000

By: zooeyhall

zooeyhall — Sun, 25 May 2008 04:26:53 +0000

CGI is HUGELY overdone in today’s movies. Sorry–all you “modern” young filmakers out there–you still need a good provocative story to make a good movie. The most elaborate CGI, the loudest double-Dolby soundtrack–can’t make-up for a lame shallow plot. Today’s filmakers are too wrapped-up in “technique”. That is why so many of today’s films lack what I can only call “soul”.

CGI can never truly replace “real” objects. You know why? Because a real object–be it a special effects spaceship model or whatever–shows a million different changes in texture, color, hue, etc. that no computer can ever truly duplicate. That is why CGI is always a dead giveaway.

By: zooeyhall

zooeyhall — Sun, 25 May 2008 04:26:00 +0000

By: Kevin

Kevin — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 06:36:48 +0000

Hollywood is desperate for more cash so they feel the need to up the spectacle. CGI isn’t the devil but its overdone in 90 percent of movies. If it makes a profit, they attribute it to how much CGI they used. What they won’t realize is that they could make more money using less. Case in point is Constantine. Hell would have looked awesome in that movie if they didn’t overuse that wind effect. And the effects director congratulates himself on the DVD special features for making the wind look oh so damn cool. No its not cool.

The best practical effect of last year was Live Free or Die Hard. They crashed a real car into a real helicopter. And the actor really leapt out at the last second.

By: Kevin

Kevin — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 06:36:00 +0000

The best practical effect of last year was Live Free or Die Hard. They crashed a real car into a real helicopter. And the actor really leapt out at the last second.

By: Robert Fure

Robert Fure — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 05:49:01 +0000

Well anyone who calls a Triceratops a Tri-Horn deserves a slap to the mouth. But agreed, matte paintings are old school and awesome. Check out “John Carpenter’s The Thing” for some matte paintings so good you’ll have trouble spotting most of them. But Jurassic Park is indeed a great movie with great practicals, so I shall spare you the rod, for now. Consider yourself spoiled.

By: Robert Fure

Robert Fure — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 05:49:00 +0000

By: Cole Abaius

Cole Abaius — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 04:29:56 +0000

Although I disagree with you as a human being, I have to agree with this boiling point. The best example is Jurassic Park. The whole movie would have looked silly with CGI dinosaurs in the close-up scenes, like the one with the Tri-horn. Watching Laura Dern rise and fall with the animatronic breathing would have looked terrible, less intimate, with computer images.

Also, I happened to see a matte painting – highly detailed work – on the Iron Man set acting as a background. Pretty cool, I’d say. Old school meets new.

By: Cole Abaius

Cole Abaius — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 04:29:00 +0000

Also, I happened to see a matte painting – highly detailed work – on the Iron Man set acting as a background. Pretty cool, I’d say. Old school meets new.

By: James

James — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 00:50:36 +0000

One prime example of good practical effects I can remember recently is from “The Fountain”. Aronofsky used a lot of simple chemistry and high powered cameras to get the effects for the nebula and space scenes seen in the movie. Amazing stuff considering it’s all done with just some liquid and chemicals.

By: James

James — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 00:50:00 +0000

By: randall flagg

randall flagg — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 00:22:47 +0000

My thoughts exactly. Hollywood is like a kid with a new toy. they want to use it and use it and forget about all the other great toys that they have sitting on the shelf that until two days ago were just fine.

IMHO James Cameron always had a good balance in his use of early cgi but a lot of new directors are using cgi as a crutch instead of a tool. They come to a road block and play the cgi card to get themselves out of a corner they painted themselves into.

By: randall flagg

randall flagg — Tue, 01 Apr 2008 00:22:00 +0000

By: Allynd Dudnikov

Allynd Dudnikov — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 23:02:36 +0000

First.

and agreed.

By: Allynd Dudnikov

Allynd Dudnikov — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 23:02:00 +0000

First.

and agreed.