Are there cgi villains that are actually good?

[Broseph44]

Maybe they should have leave the moving lips out.

I can see why that bothered some people. But didn’t really bother me or affect the performance.

 

[KillerMcQueen]

Davy doesn't beat Barbossa but he was pretty great in Dead Man's Chest, IMO.

And the things that made Davy not as good as Barbossa had nothing to do with him being CGI, Davy was a good villain, and the CGI added to it effectively, without detracting a single thing from the character, heck all these years later and Jones still looks better than most modern CGI villains (or makeup villains). CGI is a tool, handle it properly, give the artists the time and money they need, and the CGI will be fine, CGI villains don't sink or swim on the quality of their effects (though good effects certainly do help), they sink or swim on the way they're written and acted, like any other villain.

 

[Greens]

Any love for General Grievous?

 

[Loki882]

He was a crap villain honestly.

 

[Broseph44]

Any love for General Grievous?

I didn’t love him, but I also didn’t hate him. Decent villain that worked well enough I suppose.

 

[MbJ]

I don't think there's anything inherently bad about CGI villains. I think it's more a problem with modern CGI-heavy blockbusters not being the place where you're likely to find interesting, well written villains to begin with. Characters like Ultron and Steppenwolf have writing problems that go beyond the fact that they're made up of CG images.

In the case of Thanos, I believe he could have been made with makeup.

You could have done him with makeup and prosthetics, but you run the risk of something like Apocalypse in the last X-Men, where he comes off looking way too scrawny and wimpy instead of the powerhouse he's drawn as in the comic books. In fact, Apocalypse is one of the very rare instances where I think using CGI over practical would have been an improvement. Actually, I feel the same way about Venom too. That should not have just been Topher Grace in a suit.

 

[terry78]

Brolin could've done Thanos on his own due to his bulk, but he has to like very otherworldly almost.

 

[pr0xyt0xin]

Gollum
Koba
Davy Jones

I'll second this list, and just add:
Abomination
General Grievous (not that he or the movie was phenomenal, just acceptable)
Kaiju/Cloverfield (and various other giant monsters)
Smaug was pretty cool.
maybe the indominus rex
And I think Ultron is at least good enough for this list.

 

[pr0xyt0xin]

And I didn't like him, but I bet some people around here did:

 

[Silvermoth]

Not to be rude but does anyone except Star Wars fans like general grievous?

Smaug is a good one though

 

[Broseph44]

And I didn't like him, but I bet some people around here did:

Ah yes! Loved Tarkin in RO I thought he looked incredible, definitely worked for me

 

[Grootster]

Any love for General Grievous?

I think General Grievous is a little underrated. I think he would have gone over better if they didn't have him walk around coughing (and if he had a little more screentime). The quality of CGI is spot on, it's a real breakthrough. I think Grievous looks far more photorealistic than a lot of other stuff in the prequels. Honestly, I feel like Grievous holds up far better than the Transformers in the 2007 movie and even Ultron in 2015, both of which look pretty bad at times (in my opinion, at least).

 

[terry78]

I feel like CG artists have gotten kinda lazier over time in regards to using it, like they just take for granted people know it's CG so need to really do exceptional work.

 

[Greens]

I think General Grievous is a little underrated. I think he would have gone over better if they didn't have him walk around coughing (and if he had a little more screentime). The quality of CGI is spot on, it's a real breakthrough. I think Grievous looks far more photorealistic than a lot of other stuff in the prequels. Honestly, I feel like Grievous holds up far better than the Transformers in the 2007 movie and even Ultron in 2015, both of which look pretty bad at times (in my opinion, at least).

Yeah a lot of the CGI in the prequels hasn't aged well but Grievous holds up.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

I think Thanos works better with CGI than makeup. He's just too big and bulky. He doesn't have a normal human build. It is kind of like The Hulk. Lou Ferrigno was good for the time, but I wouldn't trade MCU Hulk for him.

 

[TheVileOne]

Well we haven't gotten our real test with Thanos yet, so I withhold naming him.

Koba in Dawn of the Planet of the Apes was great. So was Gollum. I agree the work done on Davy jones was really good. But I think that movie was helped by having the actors onset and doing the live motion capture work. But they really seemed to nail it well.

Does Sauron in Lord of the Rings count as well? Or the eye of Sauron?

Steppenwolf was one of the worst CGI villains in recent memory.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Smaug was good.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Smaug was good.

Yeah, I liked Smaug. I just think they should have had his entire role in DoS instead of shoehorning the finale into the first 10 minutes of BotFA.

 

[Drizzle]

Any love for General Grievous?

Grievous looked cool enough I suppose, but the execution was off. The coughing combined with the Dracula voice comes off as a little cheesy, but it doesn't take away from the film too much because he doesn't have an awful lot of screentime. His voice sounded a lot better in the 2D animated Clone Wars cartoon from 2004. I think he would have worked better had Gary Oldman voiced him as originally planned, but he pulled out of the film because it would have gone against the Screen Actors Guild.

 

[redhawk23]

I feel like CG artists have gotten kinda lazier over time in regards to using it, like they just take for granted people know it's CG so need to really do exceptional work.

More of a matter that directors like Peter Jackson take it for granted that anything can be changed right to the last minute and company's have to out bid each other by constantly cutting prices. Artists have to more work in less time for less money.

 

[Silvermoth]

Oh wait does the shark from the shallows count? Now that was a movie

 

[Zant]

And I didn't like him, but I bet some people around here did:

Oh lord. Kill it with fire... Smaug and Davy jones for me.

 

[Brother Jack]

It's still insane to me how well the fidelity of the effects for Davy Jones holds up. That was one of the first times I saw a CG generated character in a movie and thought it was a hybrid of digital and practical work.

 

[terry78]

The CG Leia was good enough when it wasn't talking.

 

[Steyin]

I find Gollum to be one of the most over rated characters honestly, he was super annoying. Then again I'm not a LoTR fan by any means, but I couldn't stand him or his CGI.

Davy Jones is forgettable to me, as are the pirate films aside from the first.

Koba I can agree with.

T-1000 was honestly the best, though I wouldn't classify it as 100% CGI obviously.

Those aside, I can't think of any other ones that stand out in any way.