CGI in Movies/TV Discussion

Discussion in 'Community Discussion' started by Huntn, Sep 27, 2018.

Tags:
  1. Tech198 macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2011
    Location:
    Australia, Perth
    #76
    If i never saw this, i would think most wouldn't be able to tell the difference. I can't tell the difference. But these days its so close to reality, it may as well "look like reality" In fact, more money is probably "wasted" this way i'd say.

    (despite it looks cool).

    Fantastic four bridge scene for instance or Passengers space scene.
     
  2. Huntn thread starter macrumors P6

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #77
    Pulled from the Movie thread, a discussion about CGI, Captain Marvel and de-aging actors:

    Although none of them are perfect, as far as ranking de-age jobs, I’d say Kurt Russel in Guardians of the Galaxy 2and Michael Douglas in Ant Man at the top, and Carrie Fisher in Rogue One was at the bottom.

    In the political arena, there are some real issues with Deep Fakes, when someone’s prominent face is pasted on to someone else, so a deceptive video can be made, but I don’t know how related these technologies are, but they are different. I created a separate thread in PRSI to discuss it. https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/deep-fakes-a-new-threat-in-politics.2185993/

    Interesting articles:
    Why Hollywood's de-aging technologies are terrifying in more ways than one
    https://nationalpost.com/entertainm...nologies-are-terrifying-in-more-ways-than-one
    Entertainment law has already started to shift to take this into account. States like California have introduced legislation granting individuals the right to say what their image can and cannot be used for up to 70 years after their death. In the future, it seems increasingly likely more of us will be faced with the question of who owns and has access to our digital likeness.
     
  3. a2jack, Jun 16, 2019
    Last edited: Jun 16, 2019

    a2jack macrumors regular

    a2jack

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2013
    #78
    IMO>CGI can be great. Remember how we were all blown away by the now classic 2001.
    Yet today, many of the new moves have become so CGI intensive that the story barely makes it through.

    Some of us folks still watch movies to experience fine acting ,and moving story lines, not jut a string of explosions and bright color flashes. LOL.

    New subject: De-ageing. Actors should have full commercial rights to their image, but not the power to prevent free public viewing. This is the legal issue now being debated over the use of Kodi.

    Added. The solution for movies is a reasonable expire date of say 5-10 years then free public viewing, but for actors, still collect royalties forever when their work is sold or used commercially.
     
  4. Huntn, Jun 17, 2019
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2019

    Huntn thread starter macrumors P6

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #79
    2001 was awesome. However when I saw it at the theater in 1968 at age 15, I was disappointed because it was not what I expected. It was later that I grew to appreciate it for what it was. :)

    The best CGI is when you can only tell it’s CGI when you know what you are seeing is not possible.
    Some CGI is just too much. Some of the Transformers movies suffered from this. Alita, Battle Angel in contrast is quite crisp and clean.

    As far as de-aging, I wonder if Shawn Young got any compensation for using her image in Bladerunner 2049? I thinking no.
     
  5. a2jack macrumors regular

    a2jack

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2013
    #80
    First thing that popped into our minds when we saw the bit.
    Wife carried a SAG card for years. a2
     
  6. Huntn thread starter macrumors P6

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #81
    It would not be unlike royalties for songs, maybe. ;)
     
  7. a2jack, Jun 17, 2019
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2019

    a2jack macrumors regular

    a2jack

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2013
    #82
    Yes, and the battles over Mickey Mouse, and Felix The Cat that long ago set image precedence.

    Now we are in all new territory with CG aging.

    Hope it doesn't effect my favorite actor, Kirk Douglas. LOL. a2
     
  8. hawkeye_a macrumors 65816

    hawkeye_a

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2016
    #83
    Behind the scenes at Laika's wildly imaginative new stop motion movie, Missing Link(Tech Crunch)


    I always thought that CGI was the "answer", and I still remember being astonished when I first watched Toy Story, Jurassic Park, etc. However, I think I prefer CGI being complimentary to the process rather than the main course.

    Over the years I've come to adore Laika's movies because there's a certain "weight" to imagery; it just looks tangible and the way the light/shading behaves on a physical object just seems "better". Then there's the craftmanship of the entire process.

    I remember when Steve Jobs talked about Pixar and Toy Story, he said it reduced the cost of production over traditional animation, and that it allowed for rapid prototyping of ideas making the movie-making process a lot more flexible for directors. It seems like Laika went in the opposite direction.

    Of course, irrespective of medium, nothing can replace/substitute the fundamentals; writing, story and performances.
     
  9. ejb190 macrumors 65816

    ejb190

    #84
    When I was in grad school, one of my neighbors was an English Lit major who was writing his thesis on a manual typewriter. (It sounded like the machine gun from DOOM echoing down the hall at 2 am...) He said the typewriter forced him to think and develop his ideas in his head before they hit the paper.

    CGI is awesome when it pushes the story forward. But sometimes I think film makers become so invested in a scene, an image, or an idea that they can't scrap it, even if the story has changed enough that the scene no longer serves any purpose.
     
  10. hawkeye_a macrumors 65816

    hawkeye_a

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2016
    #85
    Similar to the whole film vs digital debate. The former requiring a lot more prep and planning on account of being more expensive.
     
  11. Huntn thread starter macrumors P6

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #86
    This sounds like just being used to typewriters. :) The same mental process takes placed except a word processor adds convenience to editing.

    CGI has a whole spectrum of expenses that pure physical does not. It is estimated that Alita Battle Angel, a film made in a warehouse/backlot cost $350-500M which seems astonishing as compared to Titanic, where huge mechanical sets were built, the original budget was $200M, but I think cost overruns pushed it up to $300M. Avatar cost about $450 including promotion. A big gamble, but it made $2.7B! I consider Avatar to be one of the cutting edge achievements in CGI. It is spectacular! :)
    --- Post Merged, Jun 20, 2019 ---
    I hated early CGI in the cases where the film maker decided to make it stylized, a primary example would be Sin City. I also did not care for 300 because it was easy to see the artificiality of the setting. I really disliked the idea of making movies in a warehouse. The mental leap for me was when it was hard to tell I was seeing artificial, although I knew it was. Avatar is an example. The scene where they are flying in a gunship and push the nose down over the edge of a waterfall is amazing. The physical world of Avatar while not quite for the animals, is for most intents and purposes, photo realistic.

     
  12. ejb190 macrumors 65816

    ejb190

    #87
    You probably didn't care for Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow either.

    It's amazing how far we have come. I found several sites detailing the history of CGI including this one. There's a few films in there that I either didn't realize relied on CGI or I had forgotten about.
     
  13. Huntn thread starter macrumors P6

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #88
    I was impressed in your link that Vertigo (1958) was the first movie to use computer animation and I had no clue. I thought it was old fashioned animation. What I remember from this movie was the dream sequence.

    This video includes both the title animation and the dream sequence:
     
  14. Lone Deranger macrumors 68000

    Lone Deranger

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Location:
    Tokyo, Japan
    #89
    Young was involved with BR 2049 to the degree that they shot some footage of her face to aid in the creation of her digi-double. So I assume she was paid accordingly.
     
  15. Huntn thread starter macrumors P6

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #90
    All I can say, regarding aging, life is cruel...a personal opinion. ;)

    0714F360-B1DF-49A9-B2B7-73254071C0CA.jpeg
     

Share This Page