CGI, blessing or evil?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

While I was watching "Sherlock Holmes" I noted the difference CGI made in creating the atmosphere of the movie. The London of S.H. was more realistic than any I've seen before. The camera wasn't limited to painfully constricted shots to keep the movie on task.

So, for me, CGI is important in the recreation of scenes we'll never see again. It's much improved from "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow", and will continue to improve if we're intelligent consumers.

[Animavore]

I love CGI works and can appreciate them as art. The work in Avatar was outstanding. I loved London in Sherlock Holmes too and I can only imagine how awesome it would've been for them to do Dublin in a similar fashion in Michael Collins. Of course in some films the CGI can really suck.

[Clinton Huxley]

As long as CGI is done well and is not used to paper over the cracks in an otherwise terrible movie, I've no probs with it.

[klr]

When CGI is used to inadvertently portray something in RL that is not actually possible (or didn't happen) in RL ... very bad.

As in some of the flying scenes in Pearl Harbour, with aircraft flying ridiculously close to the ground. One more black mark against what was already a big, fat, Christmas dinner of a turkey.

[Animavore]

When CGI is used to inadvertently portray something in RL that is not actually possible (or didn't happen) in RL ... very bad.

As in some of the flying scenes in Pearl Harbour, with aircraft flying ridiculously close to the ground. One more black mark against what was already a big, fat, Christmas dinner of a turkey.

I've never seen Pearl Harbour and I never will. I never heard one good person say anything good about it. Its not even supposed to be bad in a good way.

[klr]

When CGI is used to inadvertently portray something in RL that is not actually possible (or didn't happen) in RL ... very bad.

As in some of the flying scenes in Pearl Harbour, with aircraft flying ridiculously close to the ground. One more black mark against what was already a big, fat, Christmas dinner of a turkey.

I've never seen Pearl Harbour and I never will. I never heard one good person say anything good about it. Its not even supposed to be bad in a good way.

It's so bad that I couldn't face watching it in its entirety. I started watching it one evening on TV, and it was so bad that I had to go out for a walk. When I came back, I had another peek, and it had gotten even worse.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

When CGI is used to inadvertently portray something in RL that is not actually possible (or didn't happen) in RL ... very bad.

As in some of the flying scenes in Pearl Harbour, with aircraft flying ridiculously close to the ground. One more black mark against what was already a big, fat, Christmas dinner of a turkey.

I've never seen Pearl Harbour and I never will. I never heard one good person say anything good about it. Its not even supposed to be bad in a good way.

It's so bad that I couldn't face watching it in its entirety. I started watching it one evening on TV, and it was so bad that I had to go out for a walk. When I came back, I had another peek, and it had gotten even worse.

I don't even have to say what I think of "Pearl Hardly".

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I had hoped for better CGI in "Elizabeth, the Golden Age". (And no, I didn't watch it for the history.)

[Clinton Huxley]

When CGI is used to inadvertently portray something in RL that is not actually possible (or didn't happen) in RL ... very bad.

Like the long-mooted Tom Cruise BAttle of Britain movie where the aforementioned midget wins the battle for us grateful Brits?

If that movie ever sees the light of day, my moustaches may combust with rage.

[Animavore]

When CGI is used to inadvertently portray something in RL that is not actually possible (or didn't happen) in RL ... very bad.

Like the long-mooted Tom Cruise BAttle of Britain movie where the aforementioned midget wins the battle for us grateful Brits?

If that movie ever sees the light of day, my moustaches may combust with rage.

All Tom Cruise's films do that to me. That's why I don't have a moustache

[Clinton Huxley]

When CGI is used to inadvertently portray something in RL that is not actually possible (or didn't happen) in RL ... very bad.

Like the long-mooted Tom Cruise BAttle of Britain movie where the aforementioned midget wins the battle for us grateful Brits?

If that movie ever sees the light of day, my moustaches may combust with rage.

All Tom Cruise's films do that to me. That's why I don't have a moustache

I can just about tolerate Mission Impossible if I'm drunk. Otherwise I concur.

[Pappa]

While I was watching "Sherlock Holmes" I noted the difference CGI made in creating the atmosphere of the movie. The London of S.H. was more realistic than any I've seen before. The camera wasn't limited to painfully constricted shots to keep the movie on task.

So, for me, CGI is important in the recreation of scenes we'll never see again. It's much improved from "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow", and will continue to improve if we're intelligent consumers.

I agree, plus it can give us scenes that could only otherwise be imagined. Now they have the ability to paint what appears to be reality in CGI it can be used to create exactly what a director wants to portray, rather than relying on what can be found in the real world.

Obviously, there will be loads of shit CGI films too, but that's to be expected - some directors/writers/studios are crap, others are amazing.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

While I was watching "Sherlock Holmes" I noted the difference CGI made in creating the atmosphere of the movie. The London of S.H. was more realistic than any I've seen before. The camera wasn't limited to painfully constricted shots to keep the movie on task.

So, for me, CGI is important in the recreation of scenes we'll never see again. It's much improved from "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow", and will continue to improve if we're intelligent consumers.

I agree, plus it can give us scenes that could only otherwise be imagined. Now they have the ability to paint what appears to be reality in CGI it can be used to create exactly what a director wants to portray, rather than relying on what can be found in the real world.

Obviously, there will be loads of shit CGI films too, but that's to be expected - some directors/writers/studios are crap, others are amazing.

The motivation for this thread was an email from my old prof at Purdue stating that he was forwarding my addy to some people in Hollywood for "technical advice" on a new project. He is frequently consulted by film-makers on historical accuracy. And sometimes they even use his advice. He considers it a promising sign.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Next question. Which historical scene would you like to see done in CGI?

(The CGI in "10,000" of the pyramid building was an example of something I'd like to see done properly. Hollywood can afford much better computers than a Uni, but once the program is written it can be donated to a research project.)

[Pappa]

While I was watching "Sherlock Holmes" I noted the difference CGI made in creating the atmosphere of the movie. The London of S.H. was more realistic than any I've seen before. The camera wasn't limited to painfully constricted shots to keep the movie on task.

So, for me, CGI is important in the recreation of scenes we'll never see again. It's much improved from "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow", and will continue to improve if we're intelligent consumers.

I agree, plus it can give us scenes that could only otherwise be imagined. Now they have the ability to paint what appears to be reality in CGI it can be used to create exactly what a director wants to portray, rather than relying on what can be found in the real world.

Obviously, there will be loads of shit CGI films too, but that's to be expected - some directors/writers/studios are crap, others are amazing.

The motivation for this thread was an email from my old prof at Purdue stating that he was forwarding my addy to some people in Hollywood for "technical advice" on a new project. He is frequently consulted by film-makers on historical accuracy. And sometimes they even use his advice. He considers it a promising sign.

Any director worth his salt that's making a historically accurate film will always want to get the fine details just right. If CGI helps them do that, that's bound to be a good thing.