Badmovies.org Forum

Movies => Bad Movies => Topic started by: Scott on May 26, 2001, 07:54:03 AM



Title: CGI Movies
Post by: Scott on May 26, 2001, 07:54:03 AM
Maybe in about 10 years or sooner they will master this computer graphic images in the movies, but it will render the past 5 or more years of film making into the waste basket of movie history. Computer graphic movies are the worst. I'm so turned off by them. Example the RETURN OF THE MUMMY.


Title: Re: CGI Movies
Post by: mark on May 26, 2001, 12:18:29 PM
meesa tinks...(sorry)...that i totally agree...

i still can't help but think how much better The Frighteners would be if Peter Jackson had ditched that cgi phantom nonsense and used some good old dead alive puppetry. that phantom had no character. it looked like a spawn reject.

good old stop-motion, etc. seems to hold up. you know it's fake...it looks goofy at times...but for some reason it's easier to believe it than hyper-shiny digital effects. maybe it's because the old stuff was "really there" to an extent. people molding rubber and rigging motors. blood sweat and tears i guess...


Title: Re: CGI Movies
Post by: Creeps on May 26, 2001, 07:23:38 PM
Spot on.  There are a few exceptions, but, for the most part, I hate to see cgi in films.  It just looks hideous...like it doesn't belong at all.  Like with the new Pearl Harbor movie...cgi planes and cgi bombs dropping in the previews...just looks bad.


Title: Re: CGI Movies
Post by: peter johnson on May 27, 2001, 12:01:31 AM
It'll get there, but I totally agree -- sadly -- with Scott and with y'all.  It's getting there, but it ain't there yet.
Look at old Hammer:  The Reptile.  The girl turns into a were-cobra.  Cheesy mask and buggy-eyes with over-long fangs on a real actor.  Know what?  It's SCARY and EFFECTIVE AS HELL!!  We tend to laugh at the "guy in a rubber suit" monster flicks, but they didn't all suck -- there really is something about a trained actor trying to look menacing in crappy makeup that is ever so more convincing than a digital readout (Paging Mr. Lee . . . Christopher Lee . . .paging Mr. Lee . . .)


Title: Re: CGI Movies
Post by: Squishy on May 27, 2001, 04:37:58 AM
When they're good, they're very, very good--but often (more and more often, it seems) they're just as bad as any other special-effect technique can be, in the hands of an unskilled dink. Just because you CAN do it CGI, doesn't mean you should...


Title: Re: CGI Movies
Post by: Fritz on May 27, 2001, 01:39:51 PM
For the best example of CGI at it's worst, check out Mortal Kombat 2.


Title: Re: CGI Movies
Post by: alisa on May 28, 2001, 01:05:50 AM
I loved the first two Alien movies, but then they had to come out with 3 and 4 containing nothing but CGI aliens....bahh!


Title: Re: CGI Movies
Post by: mark on May 28, 2001, 09:50:02 PM
begin rambling:

i caught the end of Blade on tv this weekend. i like that movie...it has some
cool things going on there...good story (holding off vampirism with garlic injections) and some cool action scenes...
but man do those effects look bad. but since there's some decent acting for the genre (steven dorff's (?) villian holds up), the movie still works for me.

but something like spawn...i'd rather watch someone play quake.

on the flip side...i rewatched Fearless Vampire Killers recently. with it's almost zero effects...the mood is so good. can you imagine if it was made now though?

...hopefully it wouldn't be as bad as the Haunting remake...owen wilson carried that pile of crap.

Evolution looks kind of interesting...


Title: Re: CGI Movies
Post by: Flangepart on May 29, 2001, 11:35:02 AM
EVOLUTION looks to be a funny flick. I have hopes for it. As for CGI, the story is essencial, i think. Mark diden't dig the effects in Blade, but they worked for me. Maby it just got through my disbelief factor. BTW, when Dorff's chief baddie blew up, am i the only one who thought,AKIRA?


Title: Re: CGI Movies
Post by: Gerry on May 29, 2001, 02:50:06 PM
I think the problem with CGI right now is that no one has truly mastered the art.  With stop-motion we had Ray Harryhausen, a man who truly knew how to breathe life into his creations.  When they moved, you really believed they were alive.  And he knew how to direct actors to interact with the invisible.  Just watch the fight scene between the cavemen and the Allosaur in ONE MILLION YEARS B.C. and you will know exactly what I'm talking about.  And he is not alone, there were a number of masters of the "old style" special effects.  That's what CGI hasn't achieved yet.  You basically have a bunch of computer geeks out there now who can program CGI, but no one has stepped out of the crowd as a true master of the medium, who truly knows how to bring it to life.  He/she will appear, it is inevitable.  Then we will see the true potential of CGI in movies.  I just hope we don't have to wait too long.


Title: Re: CGI Movies
Post by: mark on May 29, 2001, 10:56:04 PM
flangepart:

as i was watching blade this last time on tv i totally shouted it...

...Ahhh-Keeee-Rahhhhhh!

(on the way home i stopped at suncoast...akira figures were on
sale...but no motorcycles...damn).

i did find some cool looking PEZ dispensers out now...
they look like godzilla-type monsters. a bee. a mosquito thing.
etc.