Puppet monsters with glowing eyes are scary, CGI monsters are not
-
luvdalz68 — 16 years ago(December 08, 2009 11:53 PM)
There's actually a word for Aughra's model of the solar system. It was mentioned in Brian Froud's commentary on the 25th anniversary DVD. I can't remember the name, but it sounds like "ossuary" (but that's not it). If anyone can go back and listen to that and let me know what word he uses, I'd appreciate it.
Moldy mildew, mother of mouthmuck, dangle and strangle and death!" -
Sith_Menace — 16 years ago(December 10, 2009 10:02 AM)
Lord of the Rings is an excellent example of cgi used well. In fact they combined just about every film making trick in the book to make those movies and they looked great.
I agree, the beetle creatures in this movie were terrifying.
Tracy is murdered by John Doe, Malcolm is dead and Verbal Kint is Keyser Soze -
iixnay — 16 years ago(January 18, 2010 09:03 AM)
OH my god! Yes! I hadn't thought about that scene in years but thinking about it again immediately reminded me how much it Freaked. Me. Out.
something about the look on the poor little podling's face.
Euuurk! I'm all freaked-y-out now
Wow, what an effect it can still have on me after all these years!!
'No-one should impose their own perception of fulfilment on anyone else' -
iratazork — 16 years ago(December 20, 2009 01:18 PM)
There's actually a word for Aughra's model of the solar system. It was mentioned in Brian Froud's commentary on the 25th anniversary DVD. I can't remember the name, but it sounds like "ossuary" (but that's not it).
It's called an
Orrery. -
Jeorj Euler — 9 years ago(January 01, 2017 07:03 AM)
The problem is,
Yes, quite frankly there are many fallacious arguments against CGI.
Also, this is a bit off-topic, but there's something about the work that goes into those huge models. Although there's a lot of art direction and planning in CGI creatures, if something goes wrong it can be reprogrammed, like if it moves wrong. Models have to be painstakingly created right the first time because if it all goes wrong there's no back key to fix it.
It won't continue to be that way for long. A lot of practical effects are computer-managed, or produced by devices that that are 3D-printed. There are benefits, but a key drawback is that filmmakers may become sloppier or alternately they will overuse special effects, inundating the audience with a bunch of stuff that isn't relevant to whatever points the filmmakers really wants to convey. -
rboykins-1 — 16 years ago(August 06, 2009 10:19 AM)
Sounds like alot of people here have Pupaphobia
James Cameron's
AVATAR
See a New World
12-18-09
www.AvatarMovieZone.com -
TheSolarSailor — 16 years ago(September 13, 2009 03:21 AM)
Jurassic Park was mostly CGI.
Wrong. The T-Rex was a life size animatronic with exception to scenes where it was a full body walking or running. Many Veloceraptor shots were puppets and animatronics, while full body jumps and running was CGI. The Gallimimus stampede was 100% CGI, as were shots of the dinosaur herds seen early in the film. Many of the brachiosaurus shots were animatronics as well, with exception to full size shots. The Triceratops was also a life size animatronic. Jurassic Park looks great even today because it used lots of traditional special effect techniques and enhanced them with CGI as opposed to making it all 100% pure CGI. That is the big problem today with films of this naturethey are nothing but overly-detailed cartoons with overblown action that can't be taken seriously.
Whose idea was it for the word "Lisp" to have an "S" in it?
-
blackcauldron — 16 years ago(September 29, 2009 08:59 PM)
I agree with everyone on this board. CGI can be great - if used sparingly, and to enhance the effects of "traditional" imagery. The puppets in the Dark Crystal cannot be called fake by anyone - true, they are not real animals, but they are really there. CGI in todays movies are everywhere, and it doesn't make any movie memorable. Today's CGI movies - like "The Day After Tomorrow", for example - really depend on the story and acting (among other things) to make the movie good, because the viewer knows what they are watching is fake (in the sense, that obviously the filmmakers did not film this for real, but created it from nothing). Obviously, too often these movies do not even begin to raise themselves above the rest regarding the acting and screenplay.
-
luvdalz68 — 16 years ago(December 06, 2009 08:07 PM)
That's what they'll be doing with the Dark Crystal sequel - puppets with only CGI enhancements - such as the fire on the character of "Thurma" - the girl made of fire.
"Wings?I don't have wings!?"
"Of course not. You're a boy." -
MaximumMadness — 16 years ago(December 12, 2009 06:41 PM)
I generally agree, but it's mainly because I feel that CG isn't utilized as well as it could- in theory, if it's done properly, CG can be very moving and/or frightening And it has been in a number of films.
However, it seems nowadays that CG is used for "wows" rather than true impact 90% of the time.
"Give Me Immortality, Or Give Me Death" -
luvdalz68 — 16 years ago(December 13, 2009 07:16 PM)
I agree, I think the best CGI monster ever was the T-Rex in Jurassic Park, especially when it breaks through the fence. That still gives me chills, and when I first saw it, I was just floored. "How did they
do
that?"
Moldy mildew, mother of mouthmuck, dangle and strangle and death!"