 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 Now online (1)belb ...and 426 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2614114 Today 0 Topics 127542 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
With a few exceptions, I'm noticing that big hollywood movies have dreadful CGI these days. I'm not really a fan of action movies with copious amounts of GCI to cover a paper thin plot and characters anyway, but at least films of the mid-ninteys did the computer animation thing more convincingly. Even the new Bond movie suffers from this new trend, and The Mommy Returns is on ITV3 right now and half the time the computer animation resembles the sort of thing you'd except from a videogame released in 1998. Why are things going backwards? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
who cares ? not me |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Because they want to clear the middle gorund between movies and games until they become indistinguishable and then all culture will be directed at 14 years meaning it will be Shit and Rubbish and Cheap to do and Sell loads |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
what will be left for us grown up boys then ? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
It all depends on the budget... a movie with smaller funding is going to naturally have second rate CGI. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
John Carpenter's The Thing still looks awesome as does Alien. All that latex stuff is far better than CGI when done properly. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I hate Disney/Pixar. very low brow low low brow cheap. dime a dozen and has nothing on the 40s hand painted works. final fantasy (not at all my thing) advent children looks really good, could see a remake of Akira done this way. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i think the new peter jackson movies have very well done cg, to be honest, but mostly cg is still as bad as it's always been. only really high budget movies win out because they're the only ones who can afford staying on the cutting edge. the gap of comparison becomes larger all the time. all in all, though, i think creative costumes/make-up and well done REAL sets are way, way better, but they cost shitloads more to do than doing stuff on a comp. that's why those lotr movies look great too, they could afford a shit ton of extras and fancy costumes/equipment. well, i think they look great, anyway. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I didn't think King Kong looked all that great. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I CAN'T RREMEMBERR MY MOTHERR FUCKING PASSWORRD. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
didn't look half as good as lotr, but i think the cg was decent, even though it ignored the laws of physics. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
but you'rre a fucking wankerr so who carres, not me. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
CGI is, getting better. its your eyes that are fucked...or advancing |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
because they try to hard for it to look real, in the mid 90's they were trying to make it llok cool. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
It's cos it's becoming more common. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Duelin' Firemen has AWESOME CGI! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Swears is right about The Thing and Alien, phucking awesumb. I haven't been impressed by effects since Terminator 2. (okay, so I saw something on Blade that was good, but I never watched the whole film) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
blade is awsome watch out for ghost rider for some ultimate bad cg. whoo! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
peter jackson is the dj basshunter of the movie industry |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Jurassic Park still looks very pretty, mind. Thirteen years on, or whenever it was out. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i don't get it |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I think its cause weve reached the point where people think anything can be done with CGI, where as in Terminator 2 for example it was only a few very specific effects that were done really well. even big budget films have CGI that I think doesnt cut it, The Matrix 2 and 3 for example, and some parts of LOTR, Spiderman... all have the horrible CG people editted with live action and it looks absolutely rubbish to me. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I dont know about you but I would like a return to the technicolor and vista vision type things from the 60's - 70's. everything was so gritty and yet beautiful at the same time. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I watched a film last week where a man knocked a t rex off a cliff by hitting it in the head with a JCB. all in stop frame animation. then on friday I saw a couple become encased in a giant honeycomb structure by a giant wasp, again in stop frame animation. Bring back stop frame! Gromit! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
true.)) *when the words are the sculputures of the thinkings we got the Art of pure intention to give the joy. .....and i had no idea what CGI was,but i rent Spiderman dvds on the Garofanos Video club....,and you express this idea of the new FX computer used on Cinema Art. heheee ...im tired now. Z z z z |
||||||||
| Attached picture | |||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
CGI is worse now because studios are cutting corners, thinking that their computers can do stuff faster than what they really can. Terminator 2 still has the best CGI after some 15 years. Back then they knew it would take weeks to make 3 seconds of animation, so they put their heart and soul into it. There are new movies with great FX, stuff like LOTR. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Stop motion animation is badass. I really wish they'd go back to the basics. even do a movie in Black and White. Sin city was PERFECT in B&W. I love technicolor of the 60's like in Forbidden Planet and Mario Bava's Planet of the Vampires. movies from that era are so beautiful. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i agree. but i like the way the cheap cgi was implemented in mirrormask. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Them Final Fantasy movies there are pretty good |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i dl mirrormask but it no working :( pans labryinth looks quite lovely. only a little cgi i hope |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
don't know, don't care. i go to movies to watch good actors act the work of good screenwriters. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Man... thats so unique... you really set an example for the rest of us |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i just think there's a strange importance put on special effects these days... i don't understand it |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
......................................... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
well then lets put good actors acting the work of good screenwriters with the production values of a home video and see if it's worth watching? or better yet put them infront of a projection of a typical windows screensaver lets say scrolling marquee and see if it is worth the watch. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I make over 1 million dollars a day writing movie reviews that simply say "Great special effects", that you won't see published anywhere, but get quoted on film adverts. For a cheaper job I simply say "Fantastic" or "Explosive". So, please, the more CGI, the better. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
They don't use Amiga A4000/040's with a Video Toaster any more. That's why. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yeah, perfect example was 'The Day After Tomorrow' where they CGI'd those wolves, poorly. I mean, come on. how hard is it to get a couple wolves to sniff around in a boat? granted a lot of the CGI in that movie was fucking rad. it made the movie watchable when really, it shouldn't have been. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
CGI runs otherwise good films. I immediatley get turned off by it. Unless its landscape or audiences, like stadiums. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
runs=ruins |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i agree. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Because they're using it wrong. They're overdoing it when they should be subtle. Also it's due to the style some artists employ today. Especially when it comes to creatures, they're often crafted in popular graffiti style/comic book style with bellbottom limbs and ridiculous anatomy which drastically takes away the realistic look and feel of it. Hairs are made too fluffy like they were washed in too much fabric softener. Eyes look too wet and movement is sometimes too smooth. When working in fine detail all these things may look awesome but when seen in the big picture the effect is awkward.............. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I do like CGI for overt CGI animation. Like the Incredibles. I thought that was really well done. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
