1. Join Now

    AVForums.com uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

A new day dawning - CGI is dead!

Discussion in 'TV Show Forum' started by Wolvreen, May 15, 2004.

  1. Wolvreen

    Wolvreen
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Ok, the subject title is not yet true. It was a virtual title created totally using CGI.

    With the upcoming Matt Damon flick 'Bourne Supremacy' arriving soon, maybe we will have a turnaround.

    Death to the Michael Bay inspired sh*te we currently endure, Van Helabore being one such culprit. Instead a brave new world where all CGI computers are too busy running Micro$ofts poo - continually being crashed by Bills amazing software.

    Back to action, plots, dialog. You know the stuff your parents tell you about when they muse majestically of olden times gone by (ramble).
     
  2. Miyazaki

    Miyazaki
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2003
    Messages:
    14,304
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +849
    The thing about CGI is that half the time you don't even realise it is there. It is just when you notice it that it becomes CGI (which is termed in a more derisory manner these days). Like 'Zatoichi' has CGI in it. The gore on there is terrible.

    It is all George Lucas' fault and that blummin' Jar Jar! :mad: :zonked: :laugh:
     
  3. Harj

    Harj
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2001
    Messages:
    1,164
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    London
    Ratings:
    +34
    To be fair in Zatoichi 'Beat' delibartely went for a 'comic book' feel to the blood cgi effects, my main problem is that stunts for movies are coming more and more unbelievable so no matter how well the cgi is done you still know its cgi.And then they make films that are just abysmal, with lots of stunts and effects like Bad Boys 2.

    basically i beleive alot of thought and application has gone as a result of cgi, i beleive theres a lot of good, but the howcome my fav stunts, car chases are in films like Italian Job (original), Bullet and the great Mad Max 2??

    Maybe cos they didn't have cgi? Remeber that bit in MM2 where one of the punks goes flying of his bike or car and he spins in the air? All done with a wire and a very mad stunt man!
     
  4. r47463

    r47463
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2002
    Messages:
    102
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +0
    For me Jurassic Park is the benchmark that all other CGI films have to live up to. I know they used models in some places, but I can't tell where. That was some twelve years ago and as the cost of adding CGI to films has gone down we've seen some really poor CGI e.g. 'Anaconda'. There are still many limitations in using CGI but a lot comes down to creative talent and time constraints these days. I really love the old epics with huge crowds made of real people, but now the trend is to use computers to do this like in 'Lord of the Rings' and 'Troy'. I find it looks too uniform and not random enough.
     
  5. shoestring25

    shoestring25
    Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Messages:
    3,332
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    86
    Location:
    essex
    Ratings:
    +206
    what looks best is when they make models like in lord of the rings and the original star wars. the worst use of CGI is the two new star wars films its everywhere none of it looks real none of it moves right.

    they all use CGI because it is cheaper and easier when they should be using models while it is harder, more time consuming and more expensive it does look so much better.
     
  6. MrFurious

    MrFurious
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2000
    Messages:
    14,261
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Cardigan Wales
    Ratings:
    +1,492
    with star wars ep 2 i did not realise that every single clone trooper,even the ones up close like in the final battles are all cgi,i thought it was excellent cg.
     
  7. BlueOrange25

    BlueOrange25
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2004
    Messages:
    608
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    46
    Ratings:
    +194
    It would be nice to see less CGI and more 'real' stuff in movies. But CGI is a powerful and convenient tool which makes it difficult for a lot of directors to ignore. True, there are some awful CGI effects out there, but Gollum in LoTR gives you an idea of just how effective the technique can be. Here's hoping that CGI doesn't take over, and is used as a supplement to the film. :smashin:
     
  8. Mr.D

    Mr.D
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2000
    Messages:
    11,040
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Ratings:
    +1,111
    Like everything in the film industry if you have the money you can get anything.
    If you don't have the monies and you still insist on having your massive visual effects sequence its not going to look the same way that it would if you had spent twice as much money on it .

    Comparing a film like Anaconda to Jurassic Park is meaningless.

    Money equals man hours. The more money you have the more time/people you can apply to the vfx work.

    12 people sitting in a dark room for a year are not going to churn out 200 plus shots to the same quality as 50 people in 6 months.

    Its a small industry . The same guys that do gollumn end up doing the stuff in Van Helsing and all the other "guff" that people take exception too and blame it on the "CGI" The differences are the time , director, vfx supervisor and quality of the on set crew.

    At the end of the day the director needs the shots in the film even if they copuld have done with another couple of weeks or a more time consuming approach at the outset.

    On a different note most VFX workstations run linux.

    As for practical models being better I can#t remember the last time I saw one that didn't have to be heavily relit , cleaned up and even retextured using CGI because the model guys spent 2 minutes lighting it or didn't bother shooting seperate lighting passes.
     
  9. Azrikam

    Azrikam
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Slightly off-topic, but at what point does a film stop being live-action and become animation? You could make an argument that AotC is actually an animated film because it has more CGI than live-action in it. (I'm not sure of the percentages, but I really believe this is the case)
     
  10. huwg

    huwg
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2003
    Messages:
    1,850
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    66
    Ratings:
    +121
    I've always thought that a well filmed model looks better. The original Star Wars trilogy and 2001 still look good (apart from some of the death star scenes in Star Wars). It is usually water and fire that give the game away as they are difficult to do in the correct scale.

    Many CGI shots look too clean, especially the early stuff (the last starfighter springs to mind), give me a battered 'real' x-wing any day. When used sparingly and as part of the story (flight of the navigator, the abyss, T2) it can be effective.

    I've always liked Ray Harryhausens stop motion films (sinbad, Jason and the Argonauts, clash of the titans), the creatures look fake, but there seems to be more life and menace to them. The part in Jason when the bronze god (forgotten his name) cranes his head around is still superb.

    Tron was a good story, and the CGI didn't have to look like the real world - it was inside a computer, which is why it worked so well IMO.

    If CGI is used to divert our attention away from a paper thin plot and story, which some recent summer blockbusters have been accused of, then they deserve to flop.
     
  11. Kevo

    Kevo
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2001
    Messages:
    5,354
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    86
    Location:
    Manchester
    Ratings:
    +144
    Come back Ray Harryhausen, all is forgiven !
     
  12. huwg

    huwg
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2003
    Messages:
    1,850
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    66
    Ratings:
    +121
    Just watched Spawn for the first time, (I taped it from when it was on C5 the other week).
    Good grief, were those scenes in hell deliberately made to look that bad?
    They used CGI to good effect on the cloak and suit (chains & face mask) but those hell bits were just plain awful.
     
  13. NicolasB

    NicolasB
    Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2002
    Messages:
    5,804
    Products Owned:
    1
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Location:
    Emily's Shop
    Ratings:
    +520
    Talos. Pronounced "Tayloss" in the film, but should really have a short "a".

    Damn fine skeletons too. :)
     
  14. huwg

    huwg
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2003
    Messages:
    1,850
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    66
    Ratings:
    +121
    Very Fine skeletons indeed. Amazing when you consider that Jason was made in 1963.

    I bought 2 double bill videos (£3 per tape from Tesco) last year :-
    'Jason and the Argonauts'/'Sinbad and the eye of the tiger'
    'Golden voyage of Sinbad'/'7th voyage of Sinbad'

    I'll have to dig them out to erase the CGI memory of Spawn.
    Yes, Talos can still send shivers down the spine, even if the scale is way out when he walks around the headland :laugh:

    Can't complain about the 'Lord of the Rings' trilogy though, the CGI is used to great effect.
     
  15. Rimmer

    Rimmer
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    I *hate* it when CGI is used in place of stunt actors.

    Think Spider-Man, Matrix Reloaded/Revolutions, Terminator 3: in key action scenes the actors are replaced by CGI plasticine versions! I've seen Tony Hart produce more realistic FX. Do the studios think the movie-going public is blind?

    CGI is an excellent tool so long as it isn't used to render people.
     
  16. Garrett

    Garrett
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2001
    Messages:
    31,356
    Products Owned:
    2
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    166
    Location:
    The best thief you’ll never see.
    Ratings:
    +4,014
    I have the DVD as well of Jason and the Argonauts and is one of my favourite films but in those scenes with the animation the background looks very grainy, shame they couldn’t have cleaned it up.
    Back to the point top animation. :smashin:
     

Share This Page

Loading...