CGI is NOT killing the art
Don't believe the hype folks. Puppetry has been around in one form or another since the dawn of human civilization. It's mankind's oldest art form. At it's most basic CG is just another form of puppetry. I do completely agree that CG shouldn't be used just for the sake of CG, but it's vastly superior to animatronic puppetry in terms of what you can do with a character. I just saw "I, Robot" today and there is no way you could have done that film with animatronic robots.
A few more thoughts:
Dash X said:
I've just read that MirrorMask, supposedly following the tradition of DC and The Labyrinth, will be a combination of live action and CG animation...I don't know about anyone else, but that sent a shudder down my spine
You know what? I'd wager that Dave McKean knows what he's doing. He's a very well respected artist. Mirrormask was intended to be a fantasy movie, but not necessarily a creature effects movie (though McKean and Neil Gaiman have been reportedly heavily influenced by Labyrinth and The Dark Crystal).
Dash X said:
- not that i have anything against CGI in the hands of a master craftsman (Speilberg; Jurassic Park)
Spielburg is a master filmmaker, but not a master animator. Speilberg himself has said most of the credit for Jurassic Park's animation goes to Steve Williams and the rest of folks at ILM. Also, Jurassic Park was as much an animatronics FX movie as it was a CG film. Most people don't know that most of the footage of the Dinosaurs in the JP films is actually puppetry by Stan Winston's company. The genius of a guy like Spielburg is he gets people like ILM and Stan Winston and then trusts them to do their thing and realize his vision.
Dash X said:
...However am I wrong in thinking that part, if not most of the charm of DC and The Labyrinth was in its complex puppetry, animatronics, matte paintings and practical effects?
Yup, you're right. But it's a style - and it's an expensive, technically limited style. Just like a marionette can't give as realistic peformance as, say, a Muppet style puppet animatronic puppets can't do everything a CG character can. Of course it would be silly to get rid of marionette theatre just because it has certain technical limitations - in the hands of someone like Ronnie Burkett it's an incredible artform. Animatronics isn't going away either.
Using puppets for the sake of puppets or CG for the sake of CG is the wrong way to go. Filmmakers should use what best enables them to tell their story. Being prejudiced against one technique or the other is like refusing to use a screwdriver because you love hammers. Silly, silly, silly.
One thing we're definately lacking these days is directors that have a proper understanding of both CG and puppetry and know how to use them appropriately.
Dash X said:
A good example to point out would be Yoda;
in The Empire Strikes Back, mesmorizing, magical and incredibly emotive in Attack Of The Clones, a ridiculous video game reject
But what about Yoda in Episode I - Yoda as an ugly, unemotive freak? After the **** they went through to shoot Yoda in the original trilogy and the disappointing puppet in TPM it's no wonder Lucas went Digital. Frank Oz (who, let's face it ought to know a few more things about this than us) has praised the team that did Yoda for what they were able to achieve.
Granted, I do think that Yoda wasn't *quite* ready for prime time in episode II and Lucas tends to go overboard with CG too much (Jar Jar anyone?). Still, there's no way you could have done Yoda in that movie with conventional animatronic puppetry.
Dash X said:
The creativity and craftmanship of practical, optical, and creature effects of movies such as the Star Wars Trilogy, Henson Productions, Ghostbusters, Back To The Future, ET, Roger Rabbit, Blade Runner etc - most of which are 20 - 25 years old, look far superior to CG movies from less than 5 years ago.
I totally agree those are incredibly well made movies - Roger Rabbit and Blade Runner hold up today especially well. But how many horrible FX movies were made the 80s? Hundreds, maybe even thousands. We remember the good ones but then just like now really great movies are generally the exception to the rule.
I watched Ghostbusters a few weeks ago for the first time in years. Even as a kid I thought that the GO motion creatures in it were kind of hokey, but this time I was struck by how incredibly lame it looks today. It's still a great movie and Staypuff and Slimer are great characters, but again like I said - pick the right techniques for the right effects.
What's interesting to me is the trend towards blending CG and puppetry; using motion capture to animate (or "puppeteer") digital characters like Gollum in LOTR or Sonny in I, Robot. Eventually I think CG will just be seen as another extension of puppetry.
I suspect that many puppeteers a generation from now will wonder why people agrued about things like this.
That's my $2.50 anyway.
Welcome to the Muppet Central Forum!
Sesame Street Season 55
Jim Henson Idea Man
Back to the Rock Season 2
Bear arrives on Disney+
Sam and Friends Book
). There's something about a tangible object (like a puppet) that computers just cannot reproduce. Jim Henson's insistance on using a puppet butterfly on a string in M3D is a good example of this. 
