Movies.ie

Comments

• francesca

  

  I think you should have added the option 'sometimes' to the answers. In some repsects CGI has greatly helped the director get their vision across but I've sat through some awful awful films which just screamed laziness on the part of everyone, hello Peter Jackson. And it is quite annoying that studios would rather sacrifice character to have an outing for the latest advancement in technology.

• Mr_Twist

  

  I hate CGI ! its one of the reasons i will not be going to see 2012 - the day after tomorrow etc put the final nail in the coffin for me... CGI wolves which looked like shit when it would have been cheaper to use real trained wolves etc...
  CGI blows donkey balls its lead to the release of so much shit onto our screens... whats wrong with animatronics i mean with the advances in the last ten twenty years its obvious that this would be more creative and realistic than the polished shit we have on our screens via CGI
  CGI my ass

• masonica

  

  When CGI is used for everything and when an idiot producer thinks that's what the audience wants then no, it hasn't. An example being that for The Wolf Man, Rick Baker an Oscar-winning make-up artist could have built an animatronic head that could have been used for the whole movie, a producer used CGI for one shot. It's an improvement when you see it used in films like District 9. CGI should be used as a tool not a gimmick.

• enigmab17

  

  Well I would have to say yes and no, but in all honesty I would be leaning towards Twists view...

   

  There are examples are fantastic use of CGI and examples of woeful, terribly terribly woeful CGI.

   

  Good Example: Terminator, Arnie re-created via CGI. That looked absolutely flawless

  Example that should never have existed: Charles Xavier (Patrick Stewart) at the end of the XMen Origins Wolverine...oooo god bad CGI makes baby jebus cry!!

   

  I don't think it is a simple matter of saying CGI has either saved or destroyed the movie industry, but it definitely hasn't done the industry any favours thus far, although I think that is more down to its use as opposed what it is capable of. CGI as we have seen in some movies.

• tetsujin1979

  

  When CG is used as a way of telling the story, as opposed to making the story redundant, then it's a good thing.
  It's only been around for about 20 years or so, and filmmakers still can't seem to get the use of it correctly.
  I'm going with good thing, but with reservations.

• ssconnolly

  

  Hard to say. For films like 2012 or Transformers they have obviously been improved and without CGI would be terrible. On the other hand it ruined Terry Gilliam's new film. Overall I'll say it made cinema more visually over the top and entertaining, not better.

• lulalah

  

  It's a yes and a no from me - in the right hands it's fantastic but when it's been overused it looks cheap and unbelievable. I agree with Masonica - it's a tool not a gimmik.

   

  I used to agree more with Twist (due to the fac that they went mad with the cgi for Captain Scarlet, grrr they ruined it) but I'm slowly coming around to it.

• SpookyD

  

  I love CGI and I think it has taken movies out of the stona age. A movie is just the sum of all of ita parts and if the visuals are good then there is one important aspect is taken care off. True there have been come bad movies with CGI in them as there have been bad movies with out.
  
  On the poll question there are 2 pics one of that really old sifi movie with the rocket crashed into the moon and the other is the air plane secene from 2012, witch looks betrer? Knowing nohting else about either movie witch would you like to see?

• coconut2674

  

  i think it's given more options in what we can portray, like cataclysms and space battles and even king kong more realistically. Though it does make us more critical when we see bad or iffy CGI, for which, other than budget there's not much of an excuse for.
  
  Don't know if you can say films are worse these days, i know my grandmother says it, but that's lazy writers in Hollywood, the CGI actually makes these endless remakes slightly more worth watching!

• Mr_Twist

  

  Id rather watch "Le voyage dans la lune" to be honest.

  Its  a classic movie full of heart and imagination not just a poorly scripted big bang.

  A movie is the sum of its parts and you cant be really making a comparision over a movie made in 1902 to a movie made today.... or can you? what about Nosferatu.. made in 1922, black and white and has a move convincing / scary Vampire than anything thats been released into the cinema in the last 20 years. I am legend being a prime example of just how bad CGI (and not staying true to the story) can ruin a movie.  

  advancements have been made in cinema and yes CGI was a huge part of that but its been abused and made to look like a cheap parlour trick. look at the classic movies like 2001 / Alien /Aliens / preditor and the new "Where wild things are" this shows that animatrinics (the forgotten art) has also made advancements from the early days and whilest looking less polished than CGI... looks more real because characters can interact more naturally as well as having those little defects adds character and dept something that gets lost in th dead eyed smooth exterior fo CGI generated surroundings and characters.... Let he leave you with this point Lord Of the Rings... perfect use of animatronics with a nice if slightly over use of CGI. A nice mix goes a long way but it has been abused.... whio would scare you more if they came at you a Zombie from Resident Evil Degeneration or an Uruk-hai from Lord Of The Rings ?

   

  I thanks you ladies and gentlement I'll be here all weekend and please remember to tip your waitress

   

  quote :

  ---

  Originally Posted By SpookyD
  
  I love CGI and I think it has taken movies out of the stona age. A movie is just the sum of all of ita parts and if the visuals are good then there is one important aspect is taken care off. True there have been come bad movies with CGI in them as there have been bad movies with out.
  
  On the poll question there are 2 pics one of that really old sifi movie with the rocket crashed into the moon and the other is the air plane secene from 2012, witch looks betrer? Knowing nohting else about either movie witch would you like to see?

  ---

• lulalah

  

  Not completely related to this topic but has anyone seen this? (Be warned the music is questionable)

   

  It looks pretty cool. CGI is definately starting to come along. It took the guy 110 days to do. Fair play to him! To be honest there's a far superior quality there than in some of the movies I've seen of late.

• Dervan

  

  A lot of the time these days CGI is difficult to distinguish ... I know people don't realise it but most explosions are now done with CGI, and car crashes and the like too... not because its cheaper or easier but because the more its used, the better it will get and eventually it will be possible to create entire movies through CGI! ..

  AVATAR will be the biggest CGI movie ever... but don't forget Titanic had  fair amount of CGI shots too ... that was 12 years ago!

Page 1 of 2  1 2 »