Author Topic: CGI  (Read 7921 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Tarantulas

  • The FBI Pays Me to Surf
  • *
  • Posts: 2622
  • Liked: 3
  • #97 Rifftrax Fan in the World!
Re: CGI
« Reply #15 on: October 23, 2006, 02:50:52 PM »
Episode 1 killed it for me.

Something like "Jurassic Park" had it right...  Just enough to add to the shots you are trying to accomplish.


Offline Joe Don Faker

  • Big Montana
  • *****
  • Posts: 573
  • Liked: 1
Re: CGI
« Reply #16 on: October 23, 2006, 03:28:24 PM »
But when they started with the CGI Miami and the CGI New York, that was when I started to think that maybe CGI was overrated.  Now I just watch Law & Order SVU.

Ha ha.  The power of CGI wasn't enough to recreate David Caruso's film career, apparently...


Offline mrbasehart

  • Steals from Casinos
  • *****
  • Posts: 16364
  • Liked: 2111
  • Movie-Watching Machine
Re: CGI
« Reply #17 on: October 23, 2006, 06:39:39 PM »
I think the best example of good CGI would be Underworld: Evolution.

Yeah, it looks good.  Pity the film stinks, though :)


Offline Sharktopus

  • Ephialtes
  • *****
  • Posts: 7584
  • Liked: 3
  • May the Porkins be with you.
Re: CGI
« Reply #18 on: October 25, 2006, 04:45:16 AM »
Underworld Evolution is an hour and a half of exposition they left out of the first one. And writer/director Len Wiseman said as much in a special feature. They came up with so much backstory that they would dole it out over two or three movies if audience reaction to the first one allowed it. Too bad they didn't come up with two or three movies worth of plot. You do have to respect they're sticking with in-camera effects these days, though. Now how about not filtering out every last drop of color from the film, Len?
« Last Edit: November 09, 2006, 12:58:19 AM by The Sharktopus »


Offline Variety of Cells

  • Dragon Ryder
  • ***
  • Posts: 6055
  • Liked: 1521
Re: CGI
« Reply #19 on: December 18, 2006, 07:16:41 PM »
And through the power vested in me, I raise this thread from the dead.

When I went to see Apocalypto I was sitting next to a couple who were obviously not enjoying the movie very much.  The guy's cell phone also rang twice during the film, to give you a little insight as to who this person is.  Anyway, when the leopard scene comes up, I heard the couple laughing and saying "man it's just a puppet.  Looks so fake." 

I admit that you could tell it was a puppet, but it was an awful good puppet.  However, it got me thinking.  They didn't yell out at the CGI pig at the beginning, so why didn't they accept the puppet?  It's just as easy to notice that something is CGI as it is to notice that something is a puppet.  In both cases it's relatively simple, for the main reason that whenever you would normally use CGI or a puppet is when it would be impossible or too dangerous to use the real thing.  So your disbelief is already high because you know it has to be some sort of trick.  But still, when you can spot CGI (which you can't always do, same with puppets) it looks realllly fakey.  And it bothers me that the normal movie going public will accept shitty CGI, but will no longer accept decent puppets.


Offline Minnesota

  • Climbed El Capitan
  • *******
  • Posts: 5375
  • Liked: 4
  • Twins Territory
Re: CGI
« Reply #20 on: December 18, 2006, 07:46:11 PM »
Thanks Variety, I didn't know you had Keanu's powers of resurrection Speaking of CGI pigs,  Babe was quite the groundbreaking title ;)

To go further into what Variety was saying though, I agree people complain about the stupidest things like puppets, then fail to notice the more important points like plot holes.

Also some people will make fun of ANY special effects (my dad was this way), every time something happened that would suspend belief, they say "yeah right" or something like that... doesn't matter if the effects are good or bad, they just always point out special effects.

p.s. Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children is the future, I'm surprised @ how many people haven't seen it yet?!


Offline Variety of Cells

  • Dragon Ryder
  • ***
  • Posts: 6055
  • Liked: 1521
Re: CGI
« Reply #21 on: December 18, 2006, 07:50:11 PM »
p.s. Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children is the future, I'm surprised @ how many people haven't seen it yet?!

Well you have redeemed yourself in my eyes Minnesota.  I am now once again proud to live in you.  Advent Children is amazing.  I wish they would have released it in theaters. 


Offline Minnesota

  • Climbed El Capitan
  • *******
  • Posts: 5375
  • Liked: 4
  • Twins Territory
Re: CGI
« Reply #22 on: December 18, 2006, 08:00:00 PM »
yeah, that was the original topic right :) Did ya see that a double dip dvd is coming out in a couple months for 50 suggested retail and there are virtually no new additions to the old 2-disc version.

The funny thing is I've never played a final fantasy game in my life ... and that movie was like number 1 or 2 on my 2006 top ten list.


Edit: speaking of the 2006 top ten thread
http://www.rifftrax.com/smf/index.php?topic=780.0

It is that time of year if anyone wants to Resurrect that topic as well...
« Last Edit: December 18, 2006, 08:08:27 PM by Minnesota »


Offline Sharktopus

  • Ephialtes
  • *****
  • Posts: 7584
  • Liked: 3
  • May the Porkins be with you.
Re: CGI
« Reply #23 on: December 19, 2006, 12:43:13 AM »
To go further into what Variety was saying though, I agree people complain about the stupidest things like puppets, then fail to notice the more important points like plot holes.

Also some people will make fun of ANY special effects (my dad was this way), every time something happened that would suspend belief, they say "yeah right" or something like that... doesn't matter if the effects are good or bad, they just always point out special effects.

I HATE people like that! There was somebody at Superman Returns whho said "That looks fake" when the bullet bounces off Supey's eye. Of course it looks fake! It's a bullet bouncing of an eye! It looks fake when he flies too. Get over it. There are bigger things to complain about.


Offline Variety of Cells

  • Dragon Ryder
  • ***
  • Posts: 6055
  • Liked: 1521
Re: CGI
« Reply #24 on: December 19, 2006, 12:53:37 AM »
I HATE people like that! There was somebody at Superman Returns whho said "That looks fake" when the bullet bounces off Supey's eye. Of course it looks fake! It's a bullet bouncing of an eye! It looks fake when he flies too. Get over it. There are bigger things to complain about.

I agree.  At least he didn't fly like the Puma Man.


Offline Variety of Cells

  • Dragon Ryder
  • ***
  • Posts: 6055
  • Liked: 1521
Re: CGI
« Reply #25 on: December 19, 2006, 03:45:45 PM »
The best CGI is the CGI you never notice.  Like when that cow gets hit by the car in Oh Brother Where Art Thou. 


Offline Brak

  • Not Hurt By Pain
  • ******
  • Posts: 1283
  • Liked: 0
  • The Master Would Not Approve!
    • Horrid Coloring Books
Re: CGI
« Reply #26 on: December 19, 2006, 05:14:43 PM »
Since we are on the subject, how would you consider the CGI for the Pirates films?  I myself didnt realize that a lot of the landscape shots were all CGI, and when i checked out this site http://www.ilm.com/theshow/ it was just amazing how much the actually put in there.  just wanted to get your thoughts on that


Offline Grillslinger

  • Magneto-cent Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 319
  • Liked: 1
    • Grillslinger's Creations
Re: CGI
« Reply #27 on: December 20, 2006, 08:18:21 AM »

Peter Jackson's LOTR was pretty, but sometimes just...too much. When the camera flies from someone's left nostril to the top of a million-foot-high cgi construct of Orthanc into a moth's rectum, it just kills any believability.
Essentially, I'd like CGI to be able to be mistaken for model-work. That's my ideal version.

I think Orthanc was actually done with model work.

So that Star Trek update is good, huh? I heard about that and thought it would be awful. I'm glad to hear that's not the case.


Offline J-Proof

  • J-Proof
  • The FBI Pays Me to Surf
  • *
  • Posts: 2206
  • Liked: 1
Re: CGI
« Reply #28 on: December 20, 2006, 09:52:52 AM »
In referenece to Apocalypto: I thought the jaguar looked very real! So real in fact that I couldn't tell he was fake, and didn't even consider it being fake until it was mentioned in this thread. (Of course I knew the scenes with the jag and the humans wrestling and whatev' had to be fake, but I never once leaned over to Mike and said "hmm.... fake-ass jaguar, dude."

Anyway - the whole CGI topic is a very good topic. I personally think CGI is too commonly over-used so that studios can come up with the next summer blockbuster... Obviously, the Star Wars Prequels were rather over-zealous with special effects. For all three movies, not one scene existed that didn't involve CGI (something Lucas was proud of).

But if you look at a classic adventure movie such as Raiders of the Lost Ark or, heck, Lawrence of Arabia, the limitation of location and camera capability forced the directors to come up with very creative solutions to problems otherwise fixed by CGI.

A lot of movies have successfully balanced CGI with "reality." I absolutely love the Pirates of the Carribean series. And I equally love the first Jurassic Park. I even really enjoy the Star Wars Special Edition Trilogy. But some studios need to understand now, that CGI doesn't = awesome movie. In most instances, it's just annoying. Spider Man, for example: I would love the movies so much more without the fake-lookin' rubbery CGI spidey leaping around. Just get a stunt double and some rope....
J to the Pizzo
P to the Jizzay...


Offline BathTub

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8382
  • Liked: 356
Re: CGI
« Reply #29 on: December 20, 2006, 10:16:58 AM »

Peter Jackson's LOTR was pretty, but sometimes just...too much. When the camera flies from someone's left nostril to the top of a million-foot-high cgi construct of Orthanc into a moth's rectum, it just kills any believability.
Essentially, I'd like CGI to be able to be mistaken for model-work. That's my ideal version.

I think Orthanc was actually done with model work.

It was, there was heaps of model-work in LOTR in fact pretty much all those towers and cities were what they labled Bigatures because they were physically huge.

Like with the Superman/Eye thing there are times and people who just can't make the disconnect and have to go 'oh that's so fake' even though there is nothing wrong with the effects, its just that people know the situation is fake and reject it.