DirthNader
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2002
- Messages
- 123
- Reaction score
- 0
Hi, all. I have a question. How many of you out there feel that CGI (Computer generated immagery) is a great invention?
Here's my opinion, in case anyone wants to know. I grew up in the '80's, a time when movies were just beginning to see the fruits of computer influences. A good example is a scene in Steven Speilberg's (hope I spelled his last name right) movie, Young Sherlock Holmes, in which a Parish priest is hit with a blow dart with some pretty heavy halucinagenics on the tip. The poor old man begins to imagine that the stained glass portrait is alive and out to kill him. The figure from the window pops out and chases the maddened priest out into the street, where he is trampled to death by a carriage *ick *.
The Stained glass figure was completely CGI and looked great! In fact, it was way ahead of it's time. Overall, I enjoyed that movie and would recomend it to anyone (giving a disclaimer that the story-line is completely wrong, but then SB gives that same message at the beginning of the movie), however I feel that the use of CGI has been taken to an extreme.
I see the need for it in such films as Jurasic Park, the new Star Wars prequals, and television series like Farscape. But come on! Who wasn't dissapointed at the first rendition of a computer animated Yoda? He looked a little choppy and Gearge Lucas made a mistake in going back and forth between the puppet and the animated character (I'm reffering to Episode I, in this case). It wasn't seemless, and it took something away from the experience because, after all, when something is computer generated, it's pretty obvious (i.e. Some of the full shot scenes in Titanic.... *shivers with disgust*)
I dunno. I guess I personally prefer the days when actors actually interacted with characters that were physically tangable. Time Bandits, another great movie that I highly recomend, had Ogers, a really gigantic giant, and "the most fabulous object in the wooorld", all without the need or use of CGI. The Adventures of Baron Munchhousen (I know I butchered that one up) is another example of what was done and, in my humble opinion, should still be done when it comes to movies with imagery that is more fantastic than reality. People of skill took their time and created some of the most memorable creatures and places that film has ever shown.
I'm rambling. Just let me know what'cha think.
Thanks
Here's my opinion, in case anyone wants to know. I grew up in the '80's, a time when movies were just beginning to see the fruits of computer influences. A good example is a scene in Steven Speilberg's (hope I spelled his last name right) movie, Young Sherlock Holmes, in which a Parish priest is hit with a blow dart with some pretty heavy halucinagenics on the tip. The poor old man begins to imagine that the stained glass portrait is alive and out to kill him. The figure from the window pops out and chases the maddened priest out into the street, where he is trampled to death by a carriage *ick *.
The Stained glass figure was completely CGI and looked great! In fact, it was way ahead of it's time. Overall, I enjoyed that movie and would recomend it to anyone (giving a disclaimer that the story-line is completely wrong, but then SB gives that same message at the beginning of the movie), however I feel that the use of CGI has been taken to an extreme.
I see the need for it in such films as Jurasic Park, the new Star Wars prequals, and television series like Farscape. But come on! Who wasn't dissapointed at the first rendition of a computer animated Yoda? He looked a little choppy and Gearge Lucas made a mistake in going back and forth between the puppet and the animated character (I'm reffering to Episode I, in this case). It wasn't seemless, and it took something away from the experience because, after all, when something is computer generated, it's pretty obvious (i.e. Some of the full shot scenes in Titanic.... *shivers with disgust*)
I dunno. I guess I personally prefer the days when actors actually interacted with characters that were physically tangable. Time Bandits, another great movie that I highly recomend, had Ogers, a really gigantic giant, and "the most fabulous object in the wooorld", all without the need or use of CGI. The Adventures of Baron Munchhousen (I know I butchered that one up) is another example of what was done and, in my humble opinion, should still be done when it comes to movies with imagery that is more fantastic than reality. People of skill took their time and created some of the most memorable creatures and places that film has ever shown.
I'm rambling. Just let me know what'cha think.
Thanks