Jump to content

Good article about the current state of CGI in Hollywood blockbusters


Jay
 Share

Recommended Posts

The Hobbit 3. Astonishing how lifeless and artificial looking big spectacles have become.

There's a moment when you see elven soldiers very close to the camera during the battle (doing nothing but just standing there) and they're clearly CGI... What the hell. It took me completely out of the movie.

But who cares if they keep bringing in the cash. :sarcasm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The one that points out the goofy virtual cameras that zooms all over places a real camera never could? I think that's a big thing that takes you out of a film!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How could you forget that?

I somehow managed to block the image in my mind to prevent internal combustion in the days following my viewing of the film.

The one that points out the goofy virtual cameras that zoome all over places a real camera never could? I think that's a big thing that takes you out of a film!

Not necessarily. It could be used to great stylistic effect, like the Goblintown sequence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both of those Jurassic Park shots look pretty bad.

Jurassic Park, or Jurassic World?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The one that points out the goofy virtual cameras that zoome all over places a real camera never could? I think that's a big thing that takes you out of a film!

Thats something that often ruins the suspension of disbelief for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spot on article. Cue some idiot prattling on about how CGI should be artistic not realistic.

That's not the point. If you can't make something realistic, you have no license for artistic freedom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My favourite leads right now on how to use CGI are Fury Road (a lizard, an imaginary landscape, deleting loads of safety cables, a dust storm, tornadoes, an impossible shot), and Gravity (almost everything due to non-Earth physics and impossible shots, dessigned as an animated film with live action elements). The opposite approaches work brilliantly in each case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My favourite leads right no how to use CGI are Fury Road (a lizard, an imaginary landscape, deleting loads of safety cables, a dust storm, tornadoes, an impossible shot), and Gravity (almost everything due to non-Earth physics and impossible shots).

Both are pretty faultless examples of how to use CGI.

Spielberg also uses it well in general.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, gravity astronaut suits look sometimes like rubber.

I noticed this while watching the other day 'Spacecamp' for the first time. While the bluescreen is awful, i noticed how real the astronauts suits felt compared to nowadays CGI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My favourite leads right now on how to use CGI are Fury Road (a lizard,)

This still has to pass Luke Skywalker's anatomical test, so when i see it I'll tell you if its faultless. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't it depend on the project?

It definitely does, but most blockbusters these days - even the fantasies - are not that stylized and instead generally want to approximate our reality, which puts a greater pressure on the effects to perfectly match what's actually being captured in camera.

What's interesting is that Mad Max is the most heavily stylized blockbuster in years and was also done with relatively little CGI. We've officially flipped around to where rejecting digital effects is now creating the weirder and more awe-inspiring effect on an audience, stylistically. Hopefully it means we're finding the ideal middle ground that will become standard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, only Bullock's and Clooney's faces were CG. The suits were real.

Eh? Well i'm speaking of the 'impact' scene. with bullock CGI stunt moving her arms like a maniac.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because changes aren't happening!

Star Wars Episode 7?

Also Nolan films seem to prefer practical effects.

his films are loaded with CGI in addition to practical effects. Inception looked so fake and Interstellar...what a mess.

Jeff Bond had a nice discussion regarding JW and how it's effects look like effects while discussing this article last week on Facebook.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Say what you will about the film itself, but I don't think there was absolutely anything wrong with Interstellar's effects

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interstellar's special effects are flawless from what I recall

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't it depend on the project?

It definitely does, but most blockbusters these days - even the fantasies - are not that stylized and instead generally want to approximate our reality, which puts a greater pressure on the effects to perfectly match what's actually being captured in camera.

What's interesting is that Mad Max is the most heavily stylized blockbuster in years and was also done with relatively little CGI. We've officially flipped around to where rejecting digital effects is now creating the weirder and more awe-inspiring effect on an audience, stylistically. Hopefully it means we're finding the ideal middle ground that will become standard.

Yes! CGI in moderation. The middle ground between Harryhausen's claymation and Michael Bay's CGI orgy.

* Sigh * I miss Stan Winston.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The one that points out the goofy virtual cameras that zooms all over places a real camera never could? I think that's a big thing that takes you out of a film!

Yet you praised it in The Adventures Of Tintin! Spielberg had that camera flying all over the fucking place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The one that points out the goofy virtual cameras that zooms all over places a real camera never could? I think that's a big thing that takes you out of a film!

Yet you praised it in The Adventures Of Tintin! Spielberg had that camera flying all over the fucking place.

That's because it's a friggin' animated film! There is no camera.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The one that points out the goofy virtual cameras that zooms all over places a real camera never could? I think that's a big thing that takes you out of a film!

Yet you praised it in The Adventures Of Tintin! Spielberg had that camera flying all over the fucking place.

But through that whole action-packed one-shot, it never passes through walls; at most, it passed through open gaps in the architecture, much like a drone camera.

And speaking of Tintin, I know this is off-subject, but just real quick: do you or somebody you know here have JW's handwritten score for The Adventures Of Tintin? PM me with an answer.

Otherwise, back to the thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Say what you will about the film itself, but I don't think there was absolutely anything wrong with Interstellar's effects

Interstellar's special effects are flawless from what I recall

Yep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nolan's application of special effects has always been outstanding. Though in both Inception and Interstellar I wasnt as blown away by them visually as I was hoping. But thats a personal niggle rather then an actual critisism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, only Bullock's and Clooney's faces were CG. The suits were real.

The suits were filmed in space next to giant mock-ups of space stations. Then only the faces were added in post.

The shot of the station getting destroyed was done by using a spare replica of a real space station that NASA had lying around. For security reasons the camera crew was attached with a giant tether from earth's surface. I read it was not an easy shoot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The one that points out the goofy virtual cameras that zooms all over places a real camera never could? I think that's a big thing that takes you out of a film!

Yet the highway one in WotW is one of the best and most 'invisible' examples I've ever seen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh yeah...

RufioHookGrin01.jpg

Cheap shot! Spielberg's quality versus misfire ratio speaks for itself.

The tripods in WotW were unsettling me (although that's probably sfx and John Williams rather than the special effects)

Yes. The sound design is incredible in that movie actually. Shame I hate it though.

One misjudged sfx moment though is when a being from an advanced world takes time to spin a bicycle wheel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I take a fairly lax attitude when it comes to CGI, unless it's really shit. It is just the way cinema is these days. Hell, if we're being honest, the apes in Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, even though a painstaking amount of work went into them, never convinced you you were watching real creatures (perhaps Maurice aside).

My main CGI gripe is with gore and blood, namely in horror and action films. This is really where I want to see practical effects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember the apes in the first movie, especially the main one, made me snigger out loud when I saw the trailer before another movie, they were that awful. But after eventually watching the movie I found they seemed to improve in the second half. The sequel was more consistently canny than the first. But still CGI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My main CGI gripe is with gore and blood, namely in horror and action films. This is really where I want to see practical effects.

You psycho!

This is one of the reasons why I disliked Dredd so much. CGI blood all over the place. People using the excuse it added to the comic-book sensibility of it all....do me a favour.

There are instances where CGI blood can look pretty good, or at least not so off-putting as it's used in conjunction with practical effects. I think Rambo gets the balance right, though inevitably some of those shots are starting to look a little dated now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.