|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2004 0:19:17 GMT
totally away from football, but I'm currently having to put together a paper thesis on this at the moment... Any film buffs (of which there are plenty of on here) got any opinions on CGI as a whole in film these days? A useful new toy in modern directors tool box? or too much CGI for the sake of it going on these days, potentially costing the jobs of make-up artists, set designers, stunt preformers etc...
great Quentin Tarantino quote on it recently about comparing Kill Bill to the Matrix...
"I watched Keanu watching and I suddenly felt it. You know, my guys are all real. There's no computer fucking around. I'm sick to death of all that shit. This is old school with fucking cameras. If i'd wanted all that computer game bullshit, I'd have gone home and stuck my dick in my Nintendo.
"This CGI bullshit is the death knell of cinema. Movies are far too fucking expensive at the moment and it's killing the fucking art form. The way it's going, in ten year's time it will officially be killed."
;D
|
|
|
|
Post by broadack on Jan 30, 2004 0:43:24 GMT
i would not say CGI is or even will be the death of cinema, i just believe at the moment CGI is like a new toy for the directors. It is now being completely over-used to the point where the main focal point in the film is something that someone sat at a computer has created, that is not an art, that's sticking your dick in a nintendo ;D but in all seriousness, CGI is a great development, but it is time for film studio's to be producing quality film's and not just throwing money at the problem (matrix 2 &3 being prime examples). totally agree with waht tarentino had to say, i would have probably worded it slightly differently but the bulk of what he says is true. i mean look at the lord of the rings trilogy, ok the narractive might not be to everyone's taste, but that proves that CGI can be used and not overshadow the film, yet add a completly new dimension. CGI-death of the cinema.......nah novel ideas for films, filled with awful acting, blighted by terrible scripts directed and produced poorly, with CGI's providing a subterfuge for how shit the film actually is, that will be the death of the cineam hope that helps  |
|
|
|
Post by Chorley on Jan 30, 2004 9:34:52 GMT
Hmm..."Labyrinth" v. "Lord o' t' Rings"? "Never Ending Story" v. "Matrix 2"... ..."Star Wars - Return Of The Jedi" v. "Phantom Menace"... "Fraggle Rock v. "Max Steel"... ...yeah, I'll stick with my ropey bit's o' puppetry, thankyerverrmuch...!!!  ...ooh, an' Dave Bowie was in "Labyrinth" an' all... ;D |
|
|
|
Post by greyman on Jan 30, 2004 9:44:12 GMT
I'd ask when was the last time you were truly astonished by a moment in a film? My reaction to most CGI nowadays is either 'that's clever - I couldn't see the joins' or 'God that's crap'. Whatever happens though, I don't have an emotional response to it. That has to come from the content of the film.
|
|
|
|
Post by Widget123 on Jan 30, 2004 9:58:02 GMT
CG in film has always been a contentious issue. IMO the turning point in any argument on it centres on over/under use of it. CG should be used to amplify certain scenes in a film or to add an effect which cannot be replicated in the real world. CG should not IMO be used for the sake of it.
Titanic *spit* used CG very effectively to create the illusion of the orginal ship for the film. The CG in th13teen ghosts is fucking amazing for the most part - take a look at that film and see ropey CG ruining a scene (the cogs section in the final act or 1/3rd of the film). And then theres squaresofts "final fantasy - the spirits within" its completely jaw dropping to think just how much effort has gone into the CG for FF.
The matrix revolutions severely disappointed me - the fight scenes at the end looked like the crappy CG and wirework they were. considering some of the advances the wachoiski brothers have made in utilising CG they disappeared so far up their own arses that they overplayed their hand.
I dont agree with tarantino that CG will be the death knell of film. moreover i think it'll move it forward as a medium. but it has to be done in moderation to retain the aspects of production which traditionally are used in film. Yes CG adds to the spiralling budgets of films but it alone is not to blame for the stupid money which can be spent of "hollywood blockbusters".
Widget.
|
|
...ooh, an' Dave Bowie was in "Labyrinth" an' all... ;D
