Films/DVD Asylum

Am I the only one sick & tired of movies with CG effects?

205.188.116.71

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Thread: Display Email Next ] [ Films/DVD Asylum ]

(A)

It was cool back in 1993 to see dinosuars brought to life, Computer-generated tornados were cool to look at in Twister (but the movie sucked)
Its all common now, hell even TV commercials can qualify for special effects awards.
It almost seems like they say: "Wow! We can do this effect!!..lets build a movie around it!"
...& they ran wide-open with that idea in the Matrix movies.(Whoa.)
Don't get me wrong. I'm grateful for the technology to give us amazing visuals other-wise impossible to see. I just think it is abused.
Face it...Twister, was not made because there was an interesting story to tell, or because the charactors were interesting. Twister was made because now they can make tornados look "real".Period.
Movies with "CGI-abuse", the list is long & ugly....
just my 2cents..
Russ

Follow Ups:

Re: "Cast Away" - rico 00:37:03 02/14/05 (0)
I was amazed to find out how much CGI was used in this major live action release.
I don't like *bad* movies with CGI... - Harmonia 17:07:05 02/13/05 (1)
...like Van Helsing or Catwoman or The Day After Tomorrow... or Twister. (I didn't even like this one when it came out - I've been in enough real tornados.)
But I do like *good* movies with CGI. And I never get tired of good movies.
I liked LOTR and Harry Potter & The Prisoner of Azkaban.
I love Master & Commander/Far Side of the World and The Aviator. CGI plays an important role in all these films, although the latter two aren't what one typically thinks of as CGI movies...but both contain significant amounts of blue-screen and digital FX.
CGI isn't just about dinosaurs and outer space. It's a tool. Another color in the cinematic paintbox. The CGI FX could be airplanes & digital grading in The Aviator or fog, masts and ships in M&C/FSOTW. When the CGI is used to serve the characters and story, assuming the characters and the film itself are worthy to begin with, the result is to expand/enhance what the director can show us.
OTOH, CGI is no substitute for story and character. As long as some big (dumb) CGI extravaganzas make big money (especially internationally), big dumb movies will continue to abuse CGI.
Moreover, poorly drawn characters, stupid plot points and silly action set pieces are not entirely the domain of CGI fests - look around, dumb is all around us. All the more reason to support good films in theatrical release.
- Re: I don't like *bad* movies with CGI... - RC 19:59:24 02/13/05 (0)
  Exactly.
  Guess you said it better than I did. X-men is a good example (IMHO) of a good film with CGI, because you care about the charactors. There is a story there no matter that it is science-fiction/fantasy. Agree about LOTR.
  S.Speilberg used a little bit of CGI in Saving prvt.Ryan, but you'd never know it cause it blends in with the rest of the film as to be pretty much "invisible", which is as it should be.
  If I were a filmmaker making a movie about the American civil war...and I needed 1000 guys with rifles to run across an open field...THAT is what I'd wanna see through the viewfinder, not a pan across an empty field.
  Ah but, those kinda days are long over....never again can we have big-live-action spectacle captured on film. Too damn expensive to have over a thousand "extras" on any film.
  CGI can take care of that, but I'd bet some directors are a bit less than enthused about it.
  Russ
Star Wars fx looked phony to me. 2001's, made - tinear 13:08:03 02/13/05 (0)
with good old-fashioned miniaturization and montage, still rules.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

VH Audio

You can not post to an archived thread.