Wednesday, March 28, 2012
I am insulted by CGI in every single way. If I a know a movie relies on it, I make the decision to avoid it or to just simply see it for the genre it is, which is comedy.
No matter how good we get at CGI use, it has several issues that make it crude at best, like those old stop-motion dinosaur movies. We have yet to learn how to integrate the biologic with the computer-generated. There is no in between, the lines are cut and dry and so something as organic as Will Smith below in the same scene with something so ridiculously CGI like the robot is hilarious. Believability goes out the window.
Another issue is that by using CGI, we have the old fashioned backdrop issue. Oh, you know those delightful old movies where the characters would speak but the background was an obviously painted screen. We know the divides. We are not fooled by artistry, no matter how well it is done because it cannot truly interact with the actors, only "at" each other.
I vowed to myself that under no circumstance will I see the hot mess that is "Avatar." I am insulted by its appearance on every level. I could not suspend my imagination enough to accept CGI-designed blue creatures. I cannot stop laughing whenever I see one of them. I know it's not popular for me to say that. For some reason this ridiculous movie had a huge following and I think it's because it was smart enough to market itself as the must-see movie, no matter how absurd it seemed to be. People I know went rushing to see it, hoping that it would be a movie that shows a lot better than it seems.
So, I'm not at all a supporter of CGI unless your actors are also involved in it. In other words, animation. A fully-animated film is fine with me. Shrek was a jewel. If you're going to do special effects for a movie, please try appliances, makeup, and physical effects that actually interact with the humans.
at 9:30 AM