ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Movies and TV CGI in a nutshell (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=187268)

irishjayhawk 07-14-2008 05:13 PM

CGI in a nutshell
 
http://bp0.blogger.com/_FBXGhy-QmVw/...0/card1664.JPG

Thoughts?


I would also put Pirates in that category even though it's not a superhero movie.

Rausch 07-14-2008 05:29 PM

I wouldn't put "Superhero Movies."

I'd add "Current Filmmaking."

Hammock Parties 07-14-2008 05:30 PM

Not true. Example - Pixar.

irishjayhawk 07-14-2008 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Claythan (Post 4846841)
Not true. Example - Pixar.

Pixar isn't CGI, at least in the modern sense of the word. CGI is usually referred to as a live action with computer sequences. Which is different than a full length ANIMATION film.

It could be splitting hairs, but the difference - at least to me - is huge.

Donger 07-14-2008 05:33 PM

I'm beginning to actively dislike CGI. If you can't film a "stunt" with live actors, perhaps it shouldn't be filmed in the first place.

Hammock Parties 07-14-2008 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donger (Post 4846850)
I'm beginning to actively dislike CGI. If you can't film a "stunt" with live actors, perhaps it shouldn't be filmed in the first place.

No, that's not true. There's some shit in Wanted that was absolutely awesome, and only could have been done with CGI. It was better for it.

CGI is a great tool. The problem is when directors go overboard with it and drench the film in it.

It should be used sparingly, like old special effects were. Digital matte paintings are awesome, as is bullet time. Wacky Indiana Jones trees are not.

Donger 07-14-2008 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Claythan (Post 4846853)
No, that's not true. There's some shit in Wanted that was absolutely awesome, and only could have been done with CGI. It was better for it.

CGI is a great tool. The problem is when directors go overboard with it and drench the film in it.

It should be used sparingly, like old special effects were. Digital matte paintings are awesome, as is bullet time. Wacky Indiana Jones trees are not.

Shut the hell up.

irishjayhawk 07-14-2008 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Claythan (Post 4846853)
No, that's not true. There's some shit in Wanted that was absolutely awesome, and only could have been done with CGI. It was better for it.

CGI is a great tool. The problem is when directors go overboard with it and drench the film in it.

It should be used sparingly, like old special effects were. Digital matte paintings are awesome, as is bullet time. Wacky Indiana Jones trees are not.

What shots, specifically?

Hammock Parties 07-14-2008 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by irishjayhawk (Post 4846857)
What shots, specifically?

When they assassinated the dude in the car? AMAZING.

Also, the part where he uses that body as a human shield while firing through his head. That was epic.

Hammock Parties 07-14-2008 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donger (Post 4846856)
Shut the hell up.

How very uncouth.

irishjayhawk 07-14-2008 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Claythan (Post 4846862)
When they assassinated the dude in the car? AMAZING.

Also, the part where he uses that body as a human shield while firing through his head. That was epic.

I'd grant you those along with the bullet cgi. Matrix like CGI I can stand.

However, the stunts they had in the film, especially the car flipping and picking him up or flying overhead of a limo, are the type of CGI that is becoming more and more prevalent. And it's replacing plot and believability.

Rausch 07-14-2008 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by irishjayhawk (Post 4846872)
I'd grant you those along with the bullet cgi. Matrix like CGI I can stand.

However, the stunts they had in the film, especially the car flipping and picking him up or flying overhead of a limo, are the type of CGI that is becoming more and more prevalent. And it's replacing plot and believability.

The more it's done the more it's done poorly.

A lot of the stuff out now looks like it's from a Saturday afternoon SciFi channel flick...

Hammock Parties 07-14-2008 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by irishjayhawk (Post 4846872)
I'd grant you those along with the bullet cgi. Matrix like CGI I can stand.

However, the stunts they had in the film, especially the car flipping and picking him up or flying overhead of a limo, are the type of CGI that is becoming more and more prevalent. And it's replacing plot and believability.

Well, I'd argue it's about the use of CGI within the context of the universe the film is set in.

I had no problem with the CGI in Wanted. I had big problems with the CGI in Indiana Jones.

irishjayhawk 07-14-2008 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Claythan (Post 4846876)
Well, I'd argue it's about the use of CGI within the context of the universe the film is set in.

I had no problem with the CGI in Wanted. I had big problems with the CGI in Indiana Jones.

Why?

Wanted didn't set itself up to be different than our reality. Instead, it merely told us there were assassins (who knew they were stunt drivers too) and they've been in humanity for 1000 years.

What is different about the context of that universe? Contrasting, the Matrix told us everything. It's all computer code and we can manipulate it. Therefore the CGI was a tool in the universe.

Hammock Parties 07-14-2008 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by irishjayhawk (Post 4846915)
Why?

Wanted didn't set itself up to be different than our reality.

Yeah, it did. In the Wanted reality there are people who can curve bullets and "see" in bullet time.

Not to mention fly out windows.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:01 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.