CG going to far!

[dustindame]

I dont think that it is going to far in all the movies that are made but just some. The stuff that they do looks extrodinary, and it makes movies like lord of the rings possible, for it having such large war scenes. But it seems like they are using it for simple stuff in some movies and you can tell what is done. Even though they do make big backgrounds in some movies they should make more and not rely on the blue screen for as much as they do in some movies.

What does everyone else think?

[JBond]

I think CG should stay out of James Bond movies, some scenes in Die Another Day were awful.

[Necross]

I don't think its going to far, i mean I bet there were people saying that color was going to far when it first came out. CG hasn't been perfected yet, and it will only improve movies. I hate it when people act like a movie that has CG isn't artisitc. It is so, its a branch of film and it takes a lot of hard work to make it work right, like you mentioned, it made LOTR possible.

[dustindame]

And i dont think the CG isnt artistic, i think it is great and i cant wait to see what comes in the future and how far it advances. I just think that sometimes they use it in scenes that they dont need it in.

[sniktawt]

It should be "CGI" not "CG" in the title , I thought our little buddy , cg went and snapped on us by the look of that title.LOL.;)

[PsychoMike]

I don't think that CGI has gone too far. I mean there has been sfx in movies for years CGI is just an extention of what has been around for a while.

Like most new technologies CGI has its good and bad points. It makes many Sci-fi and fantacy movies possible. However, some directors focus too much on what they can do and sacrifice the story. Also it seems CGI is used by some directors for no reason other than to have CGI shots in the movies.

[Citizen Kane]

Originally posted by JBond
I think CG should stay out of James Bond movies, some scenes in Die Another Day were awful.

Agreed. CG almost invariably makes a movie into an overblown spectacle if its at the filmmakers's disposal; it gets overused. Besides, there's much more to the Bond formula than action sequences.

[Inferno]

I'll tell you what cgi has ruined...."making of" documentaries. I use to love watching shows about how they did the effects in King Kong, Alien, Star Wars OT, etc. Seeing what original and unusual ways they had to us to achieve certain shots. But now its all just watching some fat git at a computer.

[Necross]

Originally posted by Inferno
I'll tell you what cgi has ruined...."making of" documentaries. I use to love watching shows about how they did the effects in King Kong, Alien, Star Wars OT, etc. Seeing what original and unusual ways they had to us to achieve certain shots. But now its all just watching some fat git at a computer.

What did you expect. Want us to continue to use cardboard and strings. :rolleyes:

[sniktawt]

ROTJ was , is and will always be The best Space Battle in Movie History.

[sniktawt]

And Lando kicked so much ass !!!!!!;)

[FaceOff]

To me one of the best CGI movies is Terminator 2. Some movies like VAN HELSING go to far with the cgi. I wish they would use less of it. Or if there going to use it alot make it realistic.

[cg124]

I'm not going to far your the one who's going to far and... oh you mean CGI;)


yeah it definetly does go a little bit too far, the film makers should learn that you can't make everything out of CGI.

[Andrey83]

Hehe. Just think of Star wars EP I and Ep II. They could actually transform the whole film into a epic sword and sandal film. Because the whole frikkin film is blue screen. Just change it and you got yourself a new film :)

[dustindame]

Although i really like CGI in those big war scenes from lord of the rings and the troy war scenes look if they could be just as extrodinary.

[droidguy1119]

Wrote this for journalism last year before Reloaded...

What Is The Matrix?
The sci-fi sequel and films like Episode II and Daredevil might point to digital disaster

During the Superbowl, Warner Brothers unleashed its’ newest spot for the upcoming sequels The Matrix Reloaded and The Matrix Revolutions. The highlight for fans (such as myself) was definitely the fight between Neo (Keanu Reeves) and thirty or so Agent Smiths (Hugo Weaving). To pull off multiple Smiths, the makers of The Matrix had to create an entirely new process, which, to put it in some extremely basic shorthand, would be that using some high-tech equipment, Weaving’s head was scanned into a computer in detail, from every hair to every pore on his face, and then turned into a sort of “digital puppet” of the actor that directors Larry and Andy Wachowski can place and essentially direct.

Certainly, from one perspective, this is a breakthrough in computer technology, and this process, termed “digital cinematography,” will revolutionize the world until we’re seeing it made fun of in Rob Schneider films. Unfortunately, the fact that this is the case is not a good indicator for the future. Even before 1999’s Episode I, the movie industry was being slammed for relying too much on special effects to carry a film instead of story and acting. So the question is: Are we going too far?

One of the indications that things may not be totally sunk is the receipts. Star Wars certainly has some impressive tricks, but audiences are beginning to get bored of them. Spider-Man, with a moral plot and a classic story has so far pulled together a whopping $800 million dollars. Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter, together, are worth more than $1 billion dollars, and are both based on classic books. One of the year’s biggest success stories is the completely effects-free My Big Fat Greek Wedding, which has racked up $236 million, a number far, far beyond the some $5 million it took to make it. The Matrix itself escapes on the foundations of its’ deep, intelligent mind-boggler of a storyline. Meanwhile, junk like the effects-filled Ghost Ship and I Spy are still moldering in the cinema. People are smarter than they look, and the weak storylines supporting recent films are being noticed and harshly criticized.

On the downside, that certainly hasn’t stopped studios from hacking out more eye candy than brain food. While it may be a good movie, Daredevil certainly seems to be suffering from an overstuffing of flashiness and cool, and ultimately hurting itself. It looks like the movie would better succeed at being “cool” if it wasn’t so distracted by how cool it thinks it is. The flaw with films like these are that there’s some sort of belief that one has to bring the plot to a grinding halt to set up an over-the-top, $15-million-dollar fight sequence, and since everyone in movies is already under the misconception that “bigger is better” the plot grinds itself to a halt so much it disappears. Episode II, for instance, is such an overload of visual images that we just gawk and phase out the sub-par dialogue and undernourished story bits.

In my own views, audiences mostly know good from bad, and the right direction will be out there. If you disagree with me (or even if you don’t) feel free to email me. But as long as I’m still watching movies (yeah, right…until I die), no amount of money George Lucas and Industrial Light and Magic can rub on the negative will keep me from yearning for story and substance over the next Jar Jar Binks.

[Andrey83]

That is a very well written and good article Droid! Very good!

Whas that for a newspaper or something?

[droidguy1119]

Yep, thanks for the compliment. :)

[sniktawt]

GOOD ARTICLE

[Necross]

You know whats funny, in 20 years from now, they will invent something else that makes movies look even cooler, It seems impossible to me, but then again I am sure it seemed impossible to everyone who first watched Star Wars in the theatres. Anyway, my point is someone will say, I wish they would go back to the old special effects that they used in the LOTR trilogy and the Matrix. The new stuff today takes away from the films. I guarantee someone will say that. Not me though, more new stuff, the better.

[adnamasevoltam]

CGI is our generation of graphics...of movies. some look bad...some look spectacular...but that is our era of movies and movie making. if u dont want the special effects...go rent the old movies and be happy...dont complain about it.

[PsychoMike]

Good article Droid.

I agree the CGI needs to support a movies plot instead of become it.

[cerealkiller182]

CGI has gone to far. I'm sorry to say it but the new star wars have awful effects. The only thing thats real are the people. So far the 3 movies who are perfect examples of good CGI is Jurassic Park, terminator 2, and spider man. So i agree totally with droid. For example in jurassic park, spielberg used mechanies for closeups of the dinosaurs which looked great. To show the entire dinosaur they used cgi which were also good. They werent over the top. It might have been easy though to create a dinosaur since no one knos for sure what they looked like

[Andrey83]

i would add ID4 to that list too.....

[droidguy1119]

I thought ID4 was good, and not a lot of it was CGI. The ships and stuff, sure, but the buildings exploding were models, for instance.

[Scythe]

It went too far in Van Helsing for sure. That movie was such a let down.

[fineus fog]

i agree that sometrimes diectors are using cgi just to sell their movies van helsing is the perfect example of what bad cg is.. some of it is just horrendous, didnt the director learn anything from mummy returns!!!
Models will always look better because they are actually photgraphed on film which gives a representation thats closer to the human eye than digital, look at the bigatures in LOTR they look amazing -minas tirith in particular

[Mat]

I think bad screenwriting hacks using old formulas are going too far.

[Necross]

I agree about the minature stuff, using models and minatures for castles and towns and stuff are better than full CGI, it is basically realistic besides the size you know what I mean? Other than that I think they can do what they want with CGI, I won't every say a movie is gonna suck because it might have too much CGI in it.

[dustindame]

I like when they use minatures for stuff. Ususally you cant ever tell the difference

[fineus fog]

ROLL ON KING KONG

RUMOURS: 100m Long 50m Wide minature of Manhattan


Roll on Dec 2005

[dustindame]

Sounds cool