ST Who else wants to see even less CGI?

There is something about watching the original trilogy that TFA didn't consider; use of actual props when engaged in flight and movement, and more stop animation. I truly appreciate the quality of seeing a model versus CGI. It'd be fun to direct in that manner I'm sure, and considering all the puppetry and real props they used already, why they didn't go to that level is almost dsiheartening.

So the questions I ask; Who else wants to see even less CGI in the next two movies? If there is a large number on the same page, how would we push that energy and hope towards our coming directors?

 

I thought the CGI in the TFA was perfectly balanced. I think the Rathars were the only things that made me even think about CGI

 

Why? Just for the sake of doing it? Use whatever is best for what you wantnto accomplish. None of this nostalgia for its own sake.

 

But the nostalgia was their goal. So I'm interested in knowing whether or not others are eager for that area of filming. With the technology we have, introducing that old element of using models would certainly be groundbreaking in modern film.

 

Let BB-8 be the example I speak of. I was confident when I first saw him he was true model/puppeteering while the majority of those around me saw him as CGI. If they can do it with him, they can do it with the rest of the film.

 

no.

 

Actually yes. If no then why?

 

No.

 

The rathtars were the most blatantly obvious examples of CGI in a real environment. I have no problem with CGI used subtly when necessary, but I'd like the story to be told in a way that CGI is not necessary in most scenes.

 

I agree with most people here. I don't think we need to forgo CGI for the sake of forgoing CGI. It's pretty much industry standard now to be honest. I'd be curious to know the cost of stop motion animation vs CGI today.

 

CGI is fine when it isn't overused or used or misused. For the most part TFA was a nice balance of practical effects and CGI. Simply put; CGI allows you to do things that are simply not possible with practical effects however practical effects are often grittier and feel more 'real'. When used properly in tandem you end up with something that looks pretty amazing. For the most part, TFA did that. I hope that Episode VIII carries on that tradition.

 

IMO the balance in TFA was very good, but they indeed should have skipped the Rathars. I rather watch Luke fight the ol' stop-motion Rancor anytime
I wonder how much improvement they could do with model spaceships 'n stuff. I know that a space battle is easier in CGI but ILM pulled it off brilliantly in the ESB when the Falcon flew in the asteroid field being chased by these Tie fighters, in that scene the used like 48 layers.....

 

Well, it really comes down to this:

Do you want another movie next summer? Or three years from now with stop motion effects that would make Ray Harryhausen blush?

 

Compared to a lot of contemporary films in the action/sci-fi genre, the mix of practical and CGI was the best its been since films like Independence Day or Star Trek: Generations. No, i'm not talking about screenplay or direction but purely production. Those films may have been lacking in a number of departments, but production wasn't one of them.

I'll say this too: I think people have become so disenchanted and fatigued with CGI (reasonably so) that practical effects and real sets will once again be revolutionary and a return to a more humanistic means of story telling. It's being perceived as the new saviour of film making that will set the industry back on course. Not so. Remember why CGI came along. The strings and seams of practical effects, at times, prevented the art from being taken seriously. Not to mention cost expense. Although I definitely am a stronger advocate of less green screen in favour of more live sets and practical effects, I cannot deny some of the awe inspiring spectacle that CGI has brought to the big screen too.

There's been numerous examples of how both CGI and practical effects work hand in hand. James Cameron's epics, Terminator 2 and Titanic, write the book on this style of film making. So, I say get the best of both worlds since they compliment one another so well.

You know what I do want to see more of? Original script writing

 

I never found myself wondering if it was a video game or a film. I had no issue with the CGI.

 

Don't care. In The Force Awakens they didn't use stop motion for Jar Jar Binks, but they might as well not have used CGI. As long he's not in the movie it's fine.

 

Absolutely NOT. The OP is missing the point of what Abrams went for. He wanted to give the actors as many real things on set to interact with as possible. And, some things do still look better shot on film rather than recreated. But, not everything. It wasn't a contest to see what they could get away with. And, it wasn't a commentary on the hatred of digital technology. There are lots of cool things that still cannot be done practically. Why limit the storytelling just to be able to say that you resisted CGI usage?

If the story calls for something that is best accomplished with CGI, use it.

.

 

I don't mind CGI, but those Rathars were horrible.

 

it's star wars! oh and btw.

 

Yes, exactly! SW predates CGI!

 

Yes, less CGI. However I fear that we are going to see more CGI. More exotic worlds, more CGI characters. Just cross your fingers and hope they don't misuse it.

 

I felt TFA was pretty restrained with its alienness.
They toned down the aliens and exotic locations quite a bit
I wouldn't want it toned down further.

Of course if they decided to do everything 1950's stop motion style, I would be overjoyed.

 

Absolutely TS!!

The only 2 characters I had issues with in TFA were (no surprise) Maz and Snoke. That being said - Snoke has grown on me and Maz wasn't "offensive" just saw no reason that they needed to be cgi...

 

thejeditraitor

Hey man,

Your Av looks awesome! I'm surprised no one has come up with the theory that Snoke is Darth maul after he had his tattoos and horns removed

 

I actually think the lack of CG hurt the film in places (for example, the planets all look generic and boring compared to the prequels).

I don't want nothing but CG, but I think there's a place for both and if anything TFA leaned too much towards practical.