CGI in movies : Good thing or a Bad Thing

[matrix_ghost]

I was posting in a thread our local matrix forum where we had a discussion on the use of CGI in movies.
And i think it's something that can be discussed here too.

Personally i'm PRO CGI , although i have to admit that it's the worst and best thing to happen to movies at the same time.
Obviously it's a great tool to finally make all these big movies like Matrix , SW , LOTR , superhero movies. 'The only thing that limits you is you're imagination and money.
But the misuse of CGI is something that is worth mentioning also. CGI is also a very cheap way of making something , that otherwise can be done in real life as well.

IMO these are the criteria for CGI :
1 Know that a scene really can't be filmed in real life (360 degreee moves in burly brawl) and/or really too expensive to shoot in real life despite the fact that it can be done .
2 Know that you can insert emotions within that CGI ( T-1000 being a true menace , whereas the CGI animals in then Episode 2 arena just weren't menacing)
3 Achieve a realism that is coherent with your story ( the noirish look of SKy Captain fitted the story perfectly)
4 Do not use CGI when you know you can shoot a scene in real time with far better effects then CGI could ever achieve

Anyway ,what do you guys think of CGI in movies ?
A good thing or the worst thing that happened too movies ?

And if care to explain you're choices of movies where CGI was used to great results or movies where CGI was used in the wrong way

[xwolverine2]

CGI rules.......

[Cyrusbales]

There is no need to use all this CGI, look at blade 2, there is a hwole scene almost exclusively CGI and it looks obviously fake. Same goes for episode 3. CGI has ruined a lot of films, Hellboy used it well though, But generally it's unnecessarily used. A lot of really good fight scenes are done without the aid of CGI, so why bother with it? It's just being lazy!

[Kable24]

It all depends on the movie. Although some film makers go way to far with it.

[Cyrusbales]

Originally Posted by Kable24

It all depends on the movie. Although some film makers go way to far with it.

Too many filmmakers!

[Wolfwood]

I think it's a good thing, unfortunately some people have become to dependent on it. I think it's allowed filmmakers to turn out more bang, then substance.

[Immortalfire]

Originally Posted by Wolfwood

I think it's a good thing, unfortunately some people have become too dependent on it. I think it's allowed filmmakers to turn out more bang, then substance.

*cough*GeorgeLucas*cough*

[The Amazing Lee]

CGI when used correctly...is GOOD.

It's like the recipe to a GOOD meal.

If you have too little or too much of any one ingredient than you are going to spoil what could have been a really nice dinner!

[The Amazing Lee]

CGI when used correctly...is GOOD.

It's like the recipe to a GOOD meal.

If you have too little or too much of any one ingredient than you are going to spoil what could have been a really nice dinner!

[Immortalfire]

Originally Posted by The Amazing Lee

If you have too little or too much of any one ingredient than you are going to spoil what could have been a really nice dinner!

Thanks, Dr. Phil

[Kevin Roegele]

Before CGI existed, there were still movies with too many special effects and not enough plot and characterisation.

CGI is a tool, it is neither a good thing or a bad thing on it's own.

Look at the incredible use of CGI in the Lord of the Rings trilogy. I'd argue it could never have been made without CGI (and never had been made previously).

Superman Returns also used CGI in a wonderful manner.

Jurassic Park actually has very little CGI but uses it to it's fullest.

[mastermindjcg]

When you look at the pre-CGI work of esteemed filmmakers like George Lucas, Sam Raimi, and Peter Jackson, you see three cats who've been on the forefront of F/X driven popcorn fare from day one, so it doesn't hurt to embrace the technology should a director choose to milk it for all it's worth and cutting your teeth doing MTV videos with Christina Aguilera shaking her ass around is not the place to go straight to directing the next crappy remake of a beloved classic horror flick.

[Warhammer]

Some people truly underestimate the importance of CGI.
...Then people overuse it and ruin the movie.

My point, only use CGI for movies that need it.
With CGI, filmakers should make sure that the movie is balanced with actual substance when with CGI, and not an overuse.

[Darth Elektra]

It all comes down to the film.

[Warhammer]

*cough*AttackOfTheClones*cough*

[Max J Power]

Depends

[amazingfantasy15]

CGI should be used to enhance the action not replace it.

1 Know that a scene really can't be filmed in real life (360 degreee moves in burly brawl) and/or really too expensive to shoot in real life despite the fact that it can be done .

- 360 scenes in the Burly Brawl were unnecessary and looked incredibly fake once it went totally CG.

2 Know that you can insert emotions within that CGI ( T-1000 being a true menace , whereas the CGI animals in then Episode 2 arena just weren't menacing)

- All the menace from the T-1000 came from Robert Patrick (and the other actor's playing the character's) acting, not the CG. All the Star Wars prequels had too much CG and not enough direction.

3 Achieve a realism that is coherent with your story ( the noirish look of SKy Captain fitted the story perfectly)

- Didn't like Sky Captain, the creators were too busy thinking if they could, they didn't stop to think if they should.

[CConn]

It's a tool like anything else in filmmaking. It can be used effectively, or it can be used to the detriment of the film. I will say, in most movies nowadays it's overdone.

[KingOfDreams]

Something like this is neither good nor bad. It depends on the movie and the filmmakers who use it. Goerge Lucas, for example, overused it. I mean, every set in the filming of the prequels was mostly blue screen...and he didn't have to do it that way. Of course, a lot of CGI is still expected and probably needed for movies like those. The Matrix had a ton of CGI as well but I think it was appropriate considering what the movie was about. LOTR has a lot of CGI as well but I didn't feel like I was looking at CGI so much as I did with the Star Wars prequels. Batman Begins has a very tasteful use of CGI I think in that, like amazingfantasy15 just said, it enhances the action and doesn't replace it.

[HUMAN]

When people overuse it where they didn't need it, the film suffers. Revenge of The Sith needed it in a lot of places but the two preceding prequels overused it when it didn't need it. Jar Jar is the prime example.

Lord of The Rings used it perfectly. PJ used minitures, latex costumes and practical effects mixed with CG in a lot of places and the film was beautiful. When you can't get around using CGI, use it. When you can spare it, don't use it.

Nothing pains me more than to see a film where something would look more real if they did it practically than if the CGed it.

That's partially why a lot of films have suffered lately. Nobody concentrates on a great story and good filmmaking, just a quick CGI fest.

[xwolverine2]

the only movie i know that was practically killed by CGI was spykids2.... and MAYBE ultraviolet(ill let it slide because it felt like part of it)

[Motown Marvel]

only when used responsibly, and executed well.

[tinister]

I think the blame for bad movies falls on bad film makers - not the use of CG in those bad movies.

CG technology is simply another tool available to the film maker.

Bad film makers use the technology as a crutch to hide their inability to tell a story.

Good film makers can tell a good story even with the smallest shoestring budget. And so - they use CG as it is intended to be used - as a tool to visualize the story that they are telling. And they don't make every excuse to use CG unnecessarily.

[primemover]

"Tarzan say CG bad unless it is good!"

This hatred of CG is just stupid, mainly because the people who hate it usually only think of the bad and never the good, it's like saying acting is bad due to many films having bad acting.

[Addendum]

That's because the good films that use CGI do it so well, that it doesn't leave a bad taste in the mouth.