CGI, where it works and where it don't.

POSTED BY: chrisisall
UPDATED: Tuesday, November 4, 2008 23:52
VIEWED: 4451
PAGE 1 of 2

1 2 NEXT PAGE

CHRISISALL

Wednesday, October 15, 2008 7:38 PM

Obviously, In FF/Serenity it works just fine...in Iron Man & the Spidey flicks, I have to say not so much...
I think the key for me is that CGI is great for solid objects, but living beings and water have problems still...

The Day After Tomorrow boasted some of the finest CGI to date, yet those wolves just didn't cut it, I'm afraid. Even the armoured wolves in Riddick screamed fake.
Hulk? Eh... can't really be done another way so much, so I guess there I can deal...

Opinions?

Chrisisall

IMNOTHERE

Wednesday, October 15, 2008 7:58 PM

Where it works/worked:
Babylon 5 when it was first on TV
Star Trek TOS remastered (from what I've seen of it)

Where it doesn't work:
Babylon 5 10 years later on DVD (the price of being a pioneer)
Red Dwarf Remastered (Nooooooooo!!!!!)
Most "transformation" scenes - morphing doesn't look real c.f. doing it all with models and prosthetics (as per "American Werewolf" - has that been topped, yet?)

However, its continually improving, and a whole generation of actors are learning to cower convincingly at the sight of a green-painted tennis ball on a stick,

I notice that there's a bit of a backlash in advertising, though, with Sony, Honda et. al. going for "real life" stunts as an antidote to all the CGI'd cars and supermodels.

CHRISISALL

Wednesday, October 15, 2008 8:06 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ImNotHere:

However, its continually improving, and a whole generation of actors are learning to cower convincingly at the sight of a green-painted tennis ball on a stick,

LOL of the day, my friend!!!

*choke*isall

CHRISISALL

Thursday, October 16, 2008 2:14 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by ImNotHere:
Where it works/worked:

Star Trek TOS remastered (from what I've seen of it)

Oh yeah, boy does it work there, I have the entire second season, and not a bad FX addition to the bunch- even "The Apple" seemed better...

Let me list character failures:
Jar Jar Binks
Yoda (when talking, anyway)
Superman in Superman Returns (close up)
Roaming animals in I Am Legend, as well as 'the infected'
Most shots of Spidey, unless you sit real far from your TV

And, many individual shots of Iron Man worked, but as a whole, I kept getting that sense that I was watching a 'toon...

, look at Robocop 3 for cool Tippet stop motion that would have served Iron Man better, IMO. Flashy pixel manipulation is a tool, and like most tools, relying on just ONE limits the visual playing field. For instance, Robocop 2 had a stupid budget, and the stop motion dominated the FX in the final battle- result: I felt like I was watching Rudolf & the Abominable at moments.

Analyzing Chrisisall

CYBERSNARK

Thursday, October 16, 2008 3:17 AM

The problem with a lot of CGI is that it makes it too easy to show off.

On a CGI creature's face, EVERY MUSCLE can (and will) move independently. Eyebrows raise and lower, mouths twist, eyeballs bulge, nostrils flare, cheeks raise, ears twitch, chins jut, brows wrinkle, and individual hairs will stand on end --ALL AT THE SAME TIME. It's like they're trying to outdo Jim Carrey.

Look at how real people move. Whole muscle groups --whole faces can occasionally remain perfectly stationary. A slow blink or millimetre quirk of the mouth can say more than bug-eyes and a jaw-drop (check that scene in Serenity where Inara realizes that the Operative isn't a "guest." Her whole face changes just by narrowing her eyelids ever so slightly. No CG entity can match that). There's a subtlety and economy to real life forms that CGI is unwilling to match, but that animatronics and puppetry can capture.

Compare the Asgard in Stargate with the CGI Yoda and Jar Jar. Thor has a wider emotional range and more screen presence than cartoon-Yoda ever could.

It's not just faces either; check out the video game clonetrooper models in AotC and RotS. The armour is too shiny, and it fits too well. There's no sense of weight, or of there being a separate body underneath that armour (because the armour itself is just "painted" onto the motion-captured wireframe). The home-made cosplay the 501st Legion wear looks more like realistic combat rig than Lucas' professionally-done CG.

Quote:
Originally posted by ImNotHere:
a whole generation of actors are learning to cower convincingly at the sight of a green-painted tennis ball on a stick,

They will learn FEAR!

-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

LWAVES

Thursday, October 16, 2008 10:58 PM

I think the best CGI isn't the big stuff. Spaceships, monsters, aliens we all know to be fake however good they may look.
Even in the original Jurassic Park the dinos blew everyone away, but deep down you knew it wasn't real. The blend between CG and model was seamless for it's day, but still dinos didn't exist so that would always be there once the initial reaction had worn off.
Don't get me wrong though, the big stuff is great and I like it as much as the next person.

But for me the best CGI has to be the tiny stuff. A tear rolling down a cheek. Frosted breath on a cold morning when it's actually a warm day of filming. Not being able to tell which is real scenery and which is a location or set (thinking in particular of Lord Of The Rings with that one).
I've often heard in documentaries that this is the stuff that FX guys are most proud of but rarely gets the attention it deserves because it is overshadowed by the bigger stuff.

I liked I Am Legend but the CGI did suck. The creatures were too washed out.
Some may disagree with this but I thought the CGI worked well in Pleasantville. It was only basic colour changing but after it began you had to look to see what had changed it didn't force it on you and take you out of the movie.

"I don't believe in suicide, but if you'd like to try it it might cheer me up to watch."

NCBROWNCOAT

Friday, October 17, 2008 1:32 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by lwaves:
I think the best CGI isn't the big stuff. Spaceships, monsters, aliens we all know to be fake however good they may look.
Even in the original Jurassic Park the dinos blew everyone away, but deep down you knew it wasn't real. The blend between CG and model was seamless for it's day, but still dinos didn't exist so that would always be there once the initial reaction had worn off.
Don't get me wrong though, the big stuff is great and I like it as much as the next person.

But for me the best CGI has to be the tiny stuff. A tear rolling down a cheek. Frosted breath on a cold morning when it's actually a warm day of filming. Not being able to tell which is real scenery and which is a location or set (thinking in particular of Lord Of The Rings with that one).
I've often heard in documentaries that this is the stuff that FX guys are most proud of but rarely gets the attention it deserves because it is overshadowed by the bigger stuff.

I liked I Am Legend but the CGI did suck. The creatures were too washed out...

I totally agree about I Am Legend, the animals and zombies were almost unrealistic.

Also, IMHO the last 20-30 minutes of The Crystal Skull. It was CGI for CGI's sake. It was "look what we can do with our computers."

And the Jericho bomb sequence from Ironman was awesome. I saw it Sunday in Best Buy on a 62 inch plasma TV in BlueRay. Wow it looked real.

http://fireflyfaninnc.livejournal.com/

CHRISISALL

Friday, October 17, 2008 2:57 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by ncbrowncoat:

I totally agree about I Am Legend, the animals and zombies were almost unrealistic.

I dumped it and bought Omega Man.
Way better flick.

Damndirtyapeisall

OPPYH

Friday, October 17, 2008 3:49 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Star Trek TOS remastered (from what I've seen of it)

Oh yeah, boy does it work there, I have the entire second season, and not a bad FX addition to the bunch- even "The Apple" seemed better...

What's wrong with "The Apple"?

That episode fucking rocks.

And by the way CGI is never appropriate in any movie other than animation. Studios need to get back to using huge sound stages, and model makers. If you can't make it physically then it should be an animated feature.
Imagine if Ridley Scott's Blade Runner, or Legend were done today

You'd have Harrison Ford in front of a green screen, and part of Blade Runner was the atmosphere while filming. It was depressing, and because of this we got a better performance from Ford who slagged through the shooting being completely drained. Darkness from Legend would be a cartoon nightmare.

CHRISISALL

Friday, October 17, 2008 1:57 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by OPPYH:
Darkness from Legend would be a cartoon nightmare.

You know it.

Chrisisall

1 2 NEXT PAGE