Worst/Hated use of CGI in movies

[CelticPredator]

Uncanny Valley for Aliens is fine with me.

 

[dark_b]

I'm surprised no one mentioned the monsters from I Am Legend. I'm baffeled as to why they were CGI.Not once were they ever actual actors, or even convincing looking- and they just needed guys in make-up!

they had translucence skin. which means that the skin was a little transparent so that you could see muscles and bones under the skin in close ups.
they wanted to make them like monsters that mutated. actors couldnt be used for that.

but as artistic choice i dont agree with the animation that they used.

 

[dark_b]

Wait..in the first pic, is that CGI too? for no reason? just him standing there?

I remember in Spider-Man 2, there was two bad shots: when Doc Ock was carrying Mary Jane away after the coffee shop attack. And when Spidey was on the crane at the end, and swings away after dropping Mary Jane off with her BF.

when they go through the window its Dunst on wires.

 

[dark_b]

yeah, they still can't make believable human beings

they can. and thats a fact

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0421715/

 

[dark_b]

Even Avatar will give you a feel of 'Uncanny Valley'
Mark my words... image metrics ain't all that advanced...

they are very advanced.
like Mova is advance IM is also very advanced but different. if you use them together you can make 95% perfect human facial movement.

 

[nathaniel]

Two face in TDK.

It just wasnt needed, looked far to fake and just didnt work. the extent of the scarring isnt the reason he goes crazy just that it was bad enough to cause disfigurement the film The man without a face showed how decent makeup can be done. Todays prosthetic techniques are so good it would be lightyears ahead of TMWAF and still look real, with the amount of money spent on the TDK they should have just got an ace artist to create the makeup.

 

[[A]]

they can. and thats a fact

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0421715/

woah, big huge facepalm at your sorry post. you obviously didn't understand my post. nevermind. if you can't multi-quote, you probably can't read too well.

 

[CelticPredator]

Two face in TDK.

It just wasnt needed, looked far to fake and just didnt work. the extent of the scarring isnt the reason he goes crazy just that it was bad enough to cause disfigurement the film The man without a face showed how decent makeup can be done. Todays prosthetic techniques are so good it would be lightyears ahead of TMWAF and still look real, with the amount of money spent on the TDK they should have just got an ace artist to create the makeup.

Wtf? Opinion fail....its not even about TDK....but seriously, that CGI was so damn crazy. Make up couldnt achieve anything like that. :dry

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

The first Harry Potter film. The poor CGI completely takes me out of the film when they occur, and since this is Harry Potter it happens every five seconds. Thankfully they fixed this for the sequels.

 

[dark_b]

i see that in 2009 its still cool to complain about CGI and composition work.

in 20 or 30 years people will complain about the pathetic bad puppets from the 80's

 

[WeaponXProject]

Van helsing which is nothing but a bad video game, all of the mummy returns, and parts of spider-man 3. Oh, and Wolverine's claws in x-men origins.

I completely agree.

Spawn had the worst cgi for a film that was released in theaters I've ever seen,
Anaconda was a close second

This is easily the worst CGI movie.

I awalys thought chrionels of riddck was kind of bad.

I thought there's was pretty good...hmm...



-Another bad one was the monkey scene in Indy 4. Terrible. Step it up Spielberg!
-Rambo's new movie had bad CG blood.

 

[victor hugo]

they had translucence skin. which means that the skin was a little transparent so that you could see muscles and bones under the skin in close ups.
they wanted to make them like monsters that mutated. actors couldnt be used for that.

but as artistic choice i dont agree with the animation that they used.

the creatures in i am legend ruined the movie for me. who cares why they went that route? the execution was horrible. horrible.

they can. and thats a fact

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0421715/

the cgi in button was good but no where near 100% believable.

i see that in 2009 its still cool to complain about CGI and composition work.

in 20 or 30 years people will complain about the pathetic bad puppets from the 80's

if its bad work why shouldnt people complain? bad effects can take you completely out of a movie. and (imo of course) bad cgi animation is worse than a bad puppet. at least the puppet is physically real.

furthermore there is no excuse for bad effects in a big budget movie in this day and age. thats why the effects in i am legend, spidey 3, or wolverine are so dissapointing. jurassic park and t2 were made nearly a generation ago and the effects still look pretty great. we know the technology is there today so when a shot looks shoddy it can only be blamed on poor craftsmanship.

 

[The Joker]

Two face in TDK.

It just wasnt needed, looked far to fake and just didnt work. the extent of the scarring isnt the reason he goes crazy just that it was bad enough to cause disfigurement the film The man without a face showed how decent makeup can be done. Todays prosthetic techniques are so good it would be lightyears ahead of TMWAF and still look real, with the amount of money spent on the TDK they should have just got an ace artist to create the makeup.

The CGI on Two Face was amazing.

 

[dark_b]

the creatures in i am legend ruined the movie for me. who cares why they went that route? the execution was horrible. horrible.



the cgi in button was good but no where near 100% believable.



if its bad work why shouldnt people complain? bad effects can take you completely out of a movie. and (imo of course) bad cgi animation is worse than a bad puppet. at least the puppet is physically real.

furthermore there is no excuse for bad effects in a big budget movie in this day and age. thats why the effects in i am legend, spidey 3, or wolverine are so dissapointing. jurassic park and t2 were made nearly a generation ago and the effects still look pretty great. we know the technology is there today so when a shot looks shoddy it can only be blamed on poor craftsmanship.

-i just explained to you why they were CGI in I AM LEGEND
-CGI in Button was groundbreaking.

-of course people can complain if they dont like something. but i dont see any threads for bad puppets,bad special make up effects. so to me this looks like a trend.

i also dont agree that bad puppets are better then bad CGI. IMO its the same. if its bad its bad. it can not be better just because it was a real physical prop on a real set. that makes no sense to me.

 

[victor hugo]

-i just explained to you why they were CGI in I AM LEGEND
-CGI in Button was groundbreaking.

-of course people can complain if they dont like something. but i dont see any threads for bad puppets,bad special make up effects. so to me this looks like a trend.

i also dont agree that bad puppets are better then bad CGI. IMO its the same. if its bad its bad. it can not be better just because it was a real physical prop on a real set. that makes no sense to me.

yes. you did explain why they were cgi in i am legend. i told you i dont care. can you tell me why it was horrid?

and the cgi in button may have been groundbreaking (in your opinion) but it was far from prefect. you said it was a fact that they can make believable humans. if button is your evidence then you have failed to prove your point.

furthermore they have been using fx makeup and puppets for decades. they used foam latex on frankenstien. cgi is relatively new. i think that is why it is a more common complaint.

and my point about real props vs cgi is this: if its bad cgi it reminds you that it is entirely fabricated, that whatever you are looking at exists only in a computer. a bad puppet is still physically real and therefore less glaringly fake. imo.

 

[dark_b]

yes. you did explain why they were cgi in i am legend. i told you i dont care. can you tell me why it was horrid?

i think it was horrid to peopel because they took the wrong aproach for their movement and for strecthing of the mouth.
they wanted to make them look like they are fast.strong and acrobatic. but you need to nail this movement down to perfection if you dont want to make it look like rubber. they should used more normal movement and i think people wouldnt complain so much.
the streching of their mouth was also a problem. people dont like this.

i think shading,lighting and composition was very good with real sets and real actors. with CGI you can make SSS on the skin. with a thick mask you can not.

but animation and movement is a big problem at Sony Imageworks.

 

[WeaponXProject]

i think it was horrid to peopel because they took the wrong aproach for their movement and for strecthing of the mouth.
they wanted to make them look like they are fast.strong and acrobatic. but you need to nail this movement down to perfection if you dont want to make it look like rubber. they should used more normal movement and i think people wouldnt complain so much.
the streching of their mouth was also a problem. people dont like this.

i think shading,lighting and composition was very good with real sets and real actors. with CGI you can make SSS on the skin. with a thick mask you can not.

but animation and movement is a big problem at Sony Imageworks.

I agree completely with your view on the CGI but why was that even an idea?

My major problem was is that creatures weren't anything like the book. Mindless beasts, that didn't speak or have much to show they had a mind process. It's like once Will Smith signed on they had to make his movie because I had heard the original script followed the book a little better. That whole movie was rubbish but the way the CGI looked and how almost all the vamp-zombs wore similar to the same clothes that are torn or ripped at the same spot was annoying. That movie was one giant advertisement...

 

[Jager X]

Wtf? Opinion fail....its not even about TDK....but seriously, that CGI was so damn crazy. Make up couldnt achieve anything like that. :dry

looks like you failed to comprehend the post. he said that the cgi for two-face was not needed and that prostetics should have been used to create scarring the likes of mel gibson in TMWAF.

 

[Jager X]

i felt the cgi in I AM LEGEND was unnecessary crap as well. like a previous poster said, they could have used very acrobatic stuntmen for the creatures. i dont care what was intended for the creatures, all that matters is that it turned out ******.

 

[victor hugo]

i felt the cgi in I AM LEGEND was unnecessary crap as well. like a previous poster said, they could have used very acrobatic stuntmen for the creatures. i dont care what was intended for the creatures, all that matters is that it turned out ******.

 

[UltimateJustin]

The CGI in Benjamin Button was actualy pedestrian and poorly recieved. I was perfectly disappointed by the lackluster performance of the unskilled digital effects artists who worked on that film.

 

[Octoberist]

Two face in TDK.

It just wasnt needed, looked far to fake and just didnt work. the extent of the scarring isnt the reason he goes crazy just that it was bad enough to cause disfigurement the film The man without a face showed how decent makeup can be done. Todays prosthetic techniques are so good it would be lightyears ahead of TMWAF and still look real, with the amount of money spent on the TDK they should have just got an ace artist to create the makeup.

they used make with CGI. the CGI for the jawline and eyes in which they do in real life. Honestly, there's no way around it unless they down play the scars, in tern will make faboys cry.

it was fine.

 

[dark_b]

The CGI in Benjamin Button was actualy pedestrian and poorly recieved. I was perfectly disappointed by the lackluster performance of the unskilled digital effects artists who worked on that film.

really? i didnt know this.

 

[Octoberist]

The CGI in Benjamin Button was actualy pedestrian and poorly recieved. I was perfectly disappointed by the lackluster performance of the unskilled digital effects artists who worked on that film.

This is a thread for CGI being used when it's needed. So I think in this case, again, there's not a way around it (Brad Pitt's head on a boy's body..). And it didn't look bad either.

AND Please, don't say stuff like 'unskilled digital effects artists'. If you don't like the CGI then I don't care, but don't directly insult the people who worked on it like that. Seriously.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Two face in TDK.

It just wasnt needed, looked far to fake and just didnt work. the extent of the scarring isnt the reason he goes crazy just that it was bad enough to cause disfigurement the film The man without a face showed how decent makeup can be done. Todays prosthetic techniques are so good it would be lightyears ahead of TMWAF and still look real, with the amount of money spent on the TDK they should have just got an ace artist to create the makeup.

no offense, but you talk wet. Two Face's...face was brilliant CGI