StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Andy Wylde wrote:

Purple wrote:

Andy Wylde wrote:I have always wondered when people make claims of "overuse of CGI" mean?

It's simple. A good artist needs to know not only what he wants to represent and how but when to stop. With real models each and every item is expensive and thus each and every one need to be calculated. This forces the artist to think carefully about what they are doing and makes sure that he usually stops in time. CGI, especially bad CGI is far cheaper. Thus a movie maker can far ore easily go beyond that line and into bad taste.

What is "bad CGI" in this context? So you are saying a movie maker can easily go beyond that line and into bad taste? Isn't this all subjective? If the filmmaker feels whatever method the choose best represents their vision, isn't that all that matters?

Galvatron wrote:

Andy Wylde wrote:

Purple wrote: It's simple. A good artist needs to know not only what he wants to represent and how but when to stop. With real models each and every item is expensive and thus each and every one need to be calculated. This forces the artist to think carefully about what they are doing and makes sure that he usually stops in time. CGI, especially bad CGI is far cheaper. Thus a movie maker can far ore easily go beyond that line and into bad taste.

What is "bad CGI" in this context? So you are saying a movie maker can easily go beyond that line and into bad taste? Isn't this all subjective? If the filmmaker feels whatever method the choose best represents their vision, isn't that all that matters?

Yes, of course it's subjective. You can make the same argument to defend any given Michael Bay movie though, so what matters more: Michael Bay's vision or the subjective quality of the final product?

Prometheus Unbound wrote:

Crazedwraith wrote: You mean the little robot Anakin rides a few seconds later?

No.

Lord Revan wrote:at this point finn is probably not that much more powerful then the average Stormtrooper (as he starts out as esentially an average stormtrooper) seeing how the First Order probaganda seems to focus on Luke Skywalker I wouldn't be surpriced if First Order Stormtroopers are trained with anti-jedi tactics, though I suspect that those tactics wouldn't be that effective against someone like Kanaan or Luke, but would effective against someone who knows the basics of lightsabre combat at best, like Finn.

Adam Reynolds wrote:

Lord Revan wrote:at this point finn is probably not that much more powerful then the average Stormtrooper (as he starts out as esentially an average stormtrooper) seeing how the First Order probaganda seems to focus on Luke Skywalker I wouldn't be surpriced if First Order Stormtroopers are trained with anti-jedi tactics, though I suspect that those tactics wouldn't be that effective against someone like Kanaan or Luke, but would effective against someone who knows the basics of lightsabre combat at best, like Finn.

Given that Finn, presumably unlike Rey, is a completely untrained Force sensitive, he would be even less effective. It's the same reason Jedi in RPGs are crap until they level up because they waste skills on Force abilites that aren't very useful yet. It's also like the progression of Han and Luke in the OT. Han really didn't increase his skills through the course of the films. Luke on the other hand massively did. I suspect that will also be the case with Finn and to a lesser extent Rey in the new movies. Rey already seems more skilled overall. Possibly on the same level as Kylo even.

Lord Revan wrote: possibly but I'd be careful about saying "the OT did this there this film will do this".

It would be nice if in the end just as Kylo Ren is about to finish off our heroes his lightsabre is torn of from him and we see Luke appear with Kylo's sabre in hand making it clear that Luke took it from Kylo using the force, making it clear while Kylo Ren might be more powerful then our new heroes he still has much to learn before he is as powerful as Luke.

Andy Wylde wrote:What is "bad CGI" in this context?

So you are saying a movie maker can easily go beyond that line and into bad taste? Isn't this all subjective?

If the filmmaker feels whatever method the choose best represents their vision, isn't that all that matters?

Purple wrote:

Andy Wylde wrote:What is "bad CGI" in this context?

Low quality CGI. Stuff like that CGI Beowolf movie where everyone skin seems to be oiled all the time or inserting a CGI image into a real scene without bothering to make sure the lighting fits or to add shadows. Basically the CGI equivalent of bad special effects.

Well that sounds more like the people in charge of the CGI aren't doing their job correctly. Without making sure the lighting is fixed or adding shadows. It isn't the CGI that is bad, the person doing it isn't doing it right.

So you are saying a movie maker can easily go beyond that line and into bad taste? Isn't this all subjective?

Not really. We aren't talking about the artistic part here so much as the practical part. There are basic rules on how to compose a scene and such in order for it to make both visual and narrative sense. Stuff like perspective, focusing the viewer visually on the thing you want him to focus on instead of driving his eyes to jump all over the place, making sure you don't have elements that don't fit in the theme and purpose of the scene, keeping the background lights and such thematic in order to convey the right emotions etc.

As you stated with "bad taste" nothing of what you just said here answers that. Taste is subjective and I don't debate subjective opinions. The technical aspects of it could be done in an incorrect way. But regarding SW, to me I haven't had any issues with the CGI in SW. If that is considered "bad taste", well I don't know or care if it is. It doesn't bother me when watching the films. I also have virtually no experience in the field of special effects. So perhaps I don't pick up on the small details.

If the filmmaker feels whatever method the choose best represents their vision, isn't that all that matters?

There needs to be more than just vision taken directly to screen. A good movie, or hell good anything also involves careful planing and examination to get things just right. Either way though physical models are superior here too because unlike CGI that's added in later physical models allow the director to see and tweak his scenes in real time.

Andy Wylde wrote:Well for the most part, all the SW films utilized models. The PT even more so.

Terralthra wrote: Err, yes, it actually is. The hovering robot that comes into frame is the same model (if not the actual same droid) as Anakin jumps onto above the lava a minute or two later.

And why does it take one look at the Jedi and look scared?

Borgholio wrote:

And why does it take one look at the Jedi and look scared?

Because they're having a lightsaber duel?

Galvatron wrote:My only guess is that it was a supposed to be riff on the mouse droid from ANH that Chewie growled at. I don't know. I never really noticed it so it never really bothered me. The whole duel was overlong and what was admittedly the best movie of the PT had already lost any chance of redemption before then anyway.

Galvatron wrote: