main
side
curve
  1. In Memory of LAJ_FETT: Please share your remembrances and condolences HERE

ST Practical or CGI?

Discussion in 'Sequel Trilogy' started by JediJurist, May 7, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Satipo

    Satipo Force Ghost star 7

    Registered:
    Mar 29, 2014
    I give up.
     
  2. JediKnightWax

    JediKnightWax Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    May 21, 2014
    Why film anything at all? Just make everything CGI. Live action is so last century.
     
  3. ezekiel22x

    ezekiel22x Chosen One star 5

    Registered:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Taste-in-film rumble! Just like the old days, but instead of Greasers vs. Socs it's space wizard movie fan #1 vs. space wizard movie fan # 2.
     
    Andy Wylde likes this.
  4. Jcuk

    Jcuk Jedi Grand Master star 5

    Registered:
    Mar 16, 2013
    Thunder road baby!!!! Lol!!!!! :))
     
  5. Darth PJ

    Darth PJ Force Ghost star 6

    Registered:
    Jul 31, 2013
    But you don't appear to be the most 'discerning, intelligent film fan' and you don't like them... so that kind of dumps on your argument somewhat. :)
    I agree that the use of digital Clonetroopers is a good example of of how the PT took digital immersion forward, in relation to its contemporaries,... but as I said before, I don't see that many people complaining about the lack of costumed actors in the last Planet of the Apes film... So (rhetorical questions) why does the use of a CGI clones in Star Wars set Lucas apart from someone like Wyatt and Matt Reeves? Is it that SW has to be irrevocably tied to production values of the 70's and 80's (because of the nostalgia element) whilst something like Planet of the Apes is allowed more freedom? Is it that the PT was just too inventive and ahead of the game, that it was the PT that was the litmus paper for the cutting edge technology? I'm not sure... but I do find this debate interesting.
     
  6. darth-sinister

    darth-sinister Manager Emeritus star 10 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Jun 28, 2001
    More that they hated Lucas and everything he stood for with the Saga.
     
    Andy Wylde likes this.
  7. Satipo

    Satipo Force Ghost star 7

    Registered:
    Mar 29, 2014
    I think there's a difference there between the Apes and the troopers. Back in the day the only way to achieve the Apes needed for the story was actors in suits. Burton's version (as flawed as it was) still did a sterling job on that front, but the mo-cap work on the Apes films not only delivers, but crucially, any shots that do jump out are forgiven because the story and characters work and draw you in. Also, the Apes films are surrounded by real locations and real sets more than the PT was (though to be fair that is partly due to the nature of the different stories told).

    With the troopers, the men in armour worked well and to some better than the digital versions and cycling back to one of my original points, for those people that found the story and characters in the PT to be lacking, the FX become an easy target, especially when they do (to some) appear overly synthetic and add to the video game feel for some stretches of the films. I totally understand the use of CG troopers for wider shots and armies. But I don't think they look as good as the actual troopers used in the OT, and I certainly think most actors would prefer to be on set with actual troopers on actual sets.

    Maybe it is just a sensibility thing. In general I prefer a more tactile approach to filming, and it's not just the PT I would apply that feeling too. I would also apply that to every other blockbuster or film that comes out, but I'm not on message boards discussing those other films.
     
    TK327 and vinsanity like this.
  8. vinsanity

    vinsanity Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 28, 2013
    Maybe because those movies were good, the perfomance of Andy Serkis and the other apes are great and we are also talking about mo-capping a non-human character so comparing with the clonetroopers is basically talking apples and oranges here. Maybe using CG apes was the best way to capture a more realistic ape movement (you can see photos and videos of the actors walking with those canes with the mo-cap suit, something they couldn't do using a costume (even thou in the old Apes movies, the apes walk almost like the humans) Still, the Tim Burton movie maybe rubbish but those costumes were fantastic.

    The option of doing all CG clone troopers was an option that Lucas made, in my opinion wrong.

    Again the "nostalgia" nonsense argument... Well, Andy Serkis did tell the Imaginarium (his mo-cap company) is working for EP VII, so saying EPVII is going to be "tied" to production values of the 70's and 80's is invalid. And not every production value made before 1993 is bad or made with nostalgic feel, sometimes it just looks better than CG.
     
    TK327 and Satipo like this.
  9. Darth PJ

    Darth PJ Force Ghost star 6

    Registered:
    Jul 31, 2013
    So are people then admitting that they find fault with the effects largely because they don't like the movie in question? Well at least that makes things a bit clearer. Hardly objective though...

    Satipo - Planet of the Apes... the original, definitive one, did just fine with actors in costumes. I remember them riding horses, jumping, shooting guns etc. And as you say, in Burton's version, the apes were even more versatile. There's no reason why, for the close up's at least, they couldn't have just had Serkis et al in costume and makeup. It would have been more 'real' surely? But they chose digital nonetheless.
    I certainly understand why the use of costumed actors for clones is a preference (it's not like I'm anti-costume), and of course there are some dodgy shots of CGI Clonetroopers in both AOTC and ROTS, but logically that same sentiment has to be applied elsewhere? I thought the apes in both 'Rise' and 'Dawn' were obviously CGI... great though they were... but it didn't bother me, I just excepted it and appreciated the attempt at 'digital immersion'.
     
    Andy Wylde likes this.
  10. SimitarLikeTusk

    SimitarLikeTusk Jedi Knight star 3

    Registered:
    Mar 10, 2014
    I answered you this exact same thing before, giving the example of the Hobbit. People like consistency with movies in the same series. Certain fx gives movies a charm that audiences appreciate and directors like gl and Jackson shouldn't have underestimated. POTA is a reboot more than a prequel and I'm not sure anyone has any nostalgia for the makeup from the older movies because they're like 40 year old movies and really are dated.
    So in lieu of actual talking, acting monkeys existing, CGI mocapped apes was Matt Reeves last resort. A clonetrooper talking a few lines in a cgi suit isnt cgi as a last resort. Its flaunting it for no reason and that is the reason people dislike its use in the movies.
     
    Satipo and vinsanity like this.
  11. vinsanity

    vinsanity Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 28, 2013
    Yep and Lucas could have gone practical clonetroopers easily, could've just hired those guys of the 501st, give them the sketches and they would build those costumes, the same way JJ and KK hired those fans of the R2 club to build R2 for EPVII.
     
  12. Satipo

    Satipo Force Ghost star 7

    Registered:
    Mar 29, 2014
    The Hobbit and LOTR is a better example than the Apes films. Can you see the difference in sensibilities between those two sets of films, PJ?

    Also, I'm not saying that the only reason people take issue with "too much CG" is perceived deficiencies in story and character, although people will always be more forgiving if they are drawn fully into the story. Even if the story and characters had been flawless in the PT, my own personal preference visually would be for as much in camera stuff as possible. That applies to all films for me.

    No one is saying let's use dated or dodgy FX so the ST looks like it was shot in the 70s, which seems to be what you're getting at with this "they should have used the Apes make up from the original films" comparison. What some are saying is that George went too far with the digital stuff using tech that wasn't quite there enough to look better than practical in camera stuff in certain cases and that there is a better balance to be struck, which some of us hope the ST will do.

    If people think the PT looks stunning and the CG work was a blessing and well used throughout I fully respect that - it's a preference and an opinion that I don't personally share but I don't think anyone is wrong for thinking it.

    Also, I don't think many on here are truly objective when it comes to these issues. PJ, you're as biased as the next person. That's kind of the point isn't it? We all have certain tastes and preferences, none of which are really right or wrong.
     
    Jedirush2112, Abadacus and vinsanity like this.
  13. ezekiel22x

    ezekiel22x Chosen One star 5

    Registered:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Funny, because I prefer the visuals from the Hobbit films. I love the LOTR films, but in some ways they do strike me as a tad too "gritty" for Tolkien's style of epic fantasy.
     
    Satipo likes this.
  14. Satipo

    Satipo Force Ghost star 7

    Registered:
    Mar 29, 2014
    Which is cool. It's all subjective. For me, the Hobbit feels like watching a video game a lot of the time, albeit one I find entertaining in large chunks. For me, for example, there is a disconnect the more CG there is, especially when digital stunt doubles are used. Once I know there is no danger involved in the stunt, the thrill dissipates for me. I love the choreography of the barrel chase scene, but I don't feel any second of danger or peril because it's bordering on being a cartoon.
     
  15. JediKnightWax

    JediKnightWax Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    May 21, 2014
    CGI isn't perfect yet, so in films with extended use of CGI it comes off looking fake or cartoony. It's best used sparingly.
     
  16. vinsanity

    vinsanity Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 28, 2013
    Yeah, it did look cool on the big screen, but after watching it on blu-ray quality, the composite, lightning, not the best and CG Legolas, ugh...
     
  17. Darth PJ

    Darth PJ Force Ghost star 6

    Registered:
    Jul 31, 2013
    In all honesty I think I'm less biased Satipo (probably as you think you are)... for the simple reason I like both the OT and the PT... so it's not like I feel the need to ascribe the best use/technique of effects to my favourite SW movie. My favourite SW movie being ANH followed by TESB, ROTS, AOTC, TPM/ROTJ... I have no axe to grind against any of the movies particularly. I love TESB, yet I see the advantage of (and like) digital Yoda over puppet Yoda etc. Yet those who argue that puppets are 'more real' seem quite happy to disgard that same requirment for reality once the same principle is applied to a movie they like.

    I do completely get why some don't like the proliferation of digital effects... as you say, it's all about preference... and obviously this isn't aimed at you, but I do think it kind of defeats the object of this level of debate when it's reduced to 'Oh... CGI is fine when we're talking about it in a film I like'... because that kind of undermines all the nuanced discussions had about why digital can't be as good as practical (which I don't nesersarily agree with, but at least I understand the internal logic of). :)

    They did use mo-cap for the Clonetroopers in ROTS, who were also non-human.
     
    Andy Wylde and Satipo like this.
  18. Satipo

    Satipo Force Ghost star 7

    Registered:
    Mar 29, 2014
    Good point, but to be fair, I don't think many are anti-CG in a blanket sense. Just not enamoured of CG when over-used or poorly done (in most films), though I appreciate again that that is open to personal taste and interpretation too.

    As for the issues regarding FX (whether practical or digital, the principal is the same) and story. I would argue the FX should serve the story. Part of that involves drawing you into the world of the story. If the FX are distracting rather than drawing you in, whether through lack of quality or by being too in your face, they are failing in what is to me there primary function. The more engaged you are in the story and character, I believe the more tolerant people will be of the FX. The counter of which is why excellent FX can also make up for deficiencies in story and character when it comes to spectacle for some. So it's a fluid thing for me.
     
    Immortiss likes this.
  19. vinsanity

    vinsanity Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 28, 2013
    Oi?
     
  20. Darth PJ

    Darth PJ Force Ghost star 6

    Registered:
    Jul 31, 2013
    All I look for is a bit of consistency when applying that valid (even if I don't necessarily agree with it) criticism... I.e apply it evenly to Marvel Avengers, Spiderman, Planet of the Apes, Guardians of the Galaxy etc. :)

    I don't believe Clonetroopers belong to the genus Homo. They are non-humans.
     
    Andy Wylde likes this.
  21. Satipo

    Satipo Force Ghost star 7

    Registered:
    Mar 29, 2014
    I do. We're not on a Marvel board ;) As for Apes, they use CG when they need to and as much in camera stuff as possible - to great effect. And I've used the Hobbit vs LOTR parallel often.

    Also, to be fair to the PT, we're discussing what was cutting edge as far back as 1999, some of which does still hold up very well indeed.
     
  22. I Are The Internets

    I Are The Internets Shelf of Shame Host star 9 VIP - Game Host

    Registered:
    Nov 20, 2012
    I miss stop motion.
     
  23. vinsanity

    vinsanity Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 28, 2013
    Irrelevant point (not to say absurd, but whatever) We're talking about the motion capture here and there's nothing non human about the clone troopers (they didn't walked like 4 legged animals, crawl over walls, jump 80 ft, etc).
     
  24. Satipo

    Satipo Force Ghost star 7

    Registered:
    Mar 29, 2014
    Actually, now you mention stop motion, I loved the stop motion feel of the Watchers in Noah. Crazy design and feel that felt odd at first but by the time I loved their characters, I couldn't care less how they had achieved the FX. That would be my point with someone like JarJar. People moan about him being CG. His CG his excellent. It's his character that (for some) is the real problem. But it's easier to blame the CG. Watto for example is a fun character and great CG so an all round good combo. That's why for all the back and forth in this thread, it's really a secondary issue. The film will look fantastic whatever approach it takes. But if the story and characters aren't great it will all be hollow.
     
  25. vinsanity

    vinsanity Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 28, 2013
    Uhh, good example, loved those creatures.

    Yeah, the character in a technical point of view still looks great. Watto in TPM looks a little dated in some scenes but in ATOC he still looks pretty good for 12 year old CG character.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.