# CGI-ed to death



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

From SF Gate:

*Special effects are the new movie monsters, their visual excess gobbling up the real story*

With the exception of small-town planning commission meetings, and perhaps "The Nutcracker," there is nothing more boring to watch than someone else playing a video game.

Whether it's your kids, your friends or your spouse at the controls, looking at a handful of computer-generated characters smash into one another for two hours -- with no personal stake in the outcome -- is a uniquely mind-numbing experience that most sane people avoid.

Yet there have been scores of movies released in the past five years -- "The Matrix Revolutions" and "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow" come to mind -- so overloaded with computer images that there's no better way to describe them.

FULL ARTICLE HERE


----------



## jrjcd (Apr 23, 2002)

go to your local "art-house"theatre and catch films like march of the penguins(best movie of the year), ladies in lavender, and crash...


----------



## RichW (Mar 29, 2002)

jrjcd said:


> go to your local "art-house"theatre and catch films like march of the penguins(best movie of the year), ladies in lavender, and crash...


I hear that "March of the penquins" is in black-and-white!


----------



## Danny R (Jul 5, 2002)

Also formal attire (tuxedo) is required.


----------



## invaliduser88 (Apr 23, 2002)

Gosh, I'll just have to waddle in and see it.


----------



## Laverne (Feb 17, 2005)

This thread was supposed to be about CGI!

So, Mark.. How do _you_ feel about CGI? :grin: Ya know, you're always posting these articles, but then hardly ever give your _own_ opinions. :sure:

Personally, I kinda miss the cheesy, old-fashioned special effects such as can be found in ST TOS. :sure:  

:grin:


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

Laverne said:


> So, Mark.. How do _you_ feel about CGI? :grin: Ya know, you're always posting these articles, but then hardly ever give your _own_ opinions. :sure:


What? You mean I can't take the stance of "I report, you decide". 

I personally take the attitude that special effects are tools to tell the story. If you cannot tell that an effect is an effect, then the effects people did a good job.

But, then, there are Pixar films which are 100% CGI. Why are they so successful? Because they tell a good story and have good characters. Pixar's "worst" film may be _A Bug's Life_, but it's still a good story.

Ages ago, the directors didn't have all this technology and such available. So, they used a technique where what you didn't see was scarier than what you did see because it was left up to your imagination.

On the other hand, it would have been impossible just 10 years ago to tell the story of the Lord of the Rings. The author criticized the character of Gollum looking fake, but what do we remember about Gollum? "My precious."

My point is: You have to have a good story and good actors portraying good characters to have a sucessful film.


----------



## Laverne (Feb 17, 2005)

Mark Holtz said:


> What? You mean I can't take the stance of "I report, you decide".


Only if you want me to start calling you 'Shep'! :sure: :grin:



> My point is: You have to have a good story and good actors portraying good characters to have a sucessful film.


I agree with Mark!


----------

