I never understood this view. I think there's so much wonderful CGI its unfair to group the good with the bad. CGI has the same problem AI has - when its unnoticed people don't realize its CGI, the same way people don't consider expert systems, personal assistants, etc AI.
I watched the original Star Wars movies recently. I love the set design and costumes, but my god, the aliens and effects were laughable. I literally laughed at Yoda, who looks like a second hand muppet. There's just no way to think any of that looks remotely realistic or good. The scale models look like... well models. The stop motion animation just looks terrible. It was a fine effort for its time, but today its like watching a horse try to outrun a Ferrari.
I also rewatched Alien, and my god, when they show the whole Alien's body it looks like a guy in a rubber suit. Without CGI, that's the best you can do. A guy in a suit or a crappy puppet.
>Likewise, CGI seems to encourage special effects artists to "overload" movie frames
This seems questionable at best. Art direction is either good or bad. A poor craftsman blames his tools.
>Further, CGI characters are forgettable.
Goto to Disney and watch kids completely lose their shit over CGI characters. Not only are these characters not forgotten, they will be this generation's Luke and Leia. Even an old man like me loves CGI characters like General Grevious.
>protracted dark age in filmmaking.
Ah yes, the traditionalist approach. People said the same thing about talkies and color film. Curmudgeonly old men are rarely good judges of the future or the arts.
> "I also rewatched Alien, and my god, when they show the whole Alien's body it looks like a guy in a rubber suit. Without CGI, that's the best you can do. A guy in a suit or a crappy puppet."
You should compare Alien to its sequel Aliens. It too used people in suits and puppets to portray the xenomorphs, however due to improved creature design I think it looks miles better.
I recommend watching the entire movie instead of clips of the effects, but even on their own I think Aliens's hold up very well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jp7SNoYOQmY
I think there's just more clever camera work in Aliens. There aren't as many full bodied shots and they spent more time working with puppets than people in suits.
The last scene with Ripley fighting off the Alien in the airlock looks especially terrible. The alien just looks like a pile of latex. Its laughably bad by today's standards.
I watched the original Star Wars movies recently. I love the set design and costumes, but my god, the aliens and effects were laughable. I literally laughed at Yoda, who looks like a second hand muppet. There's just no way to think any of that looks remotely realistic or good. The scale models look like... well models. The stop motion animation just looks terrible. It was a fine effort for its time, but today its like watching a horse try to outrun a Ferrari.
I also rewatched Alien, and my god, when they show the whole Alien's body it looks like a guy in a rubber suit. Without CGI, that's the best you can do. A guy in a suit or a crappy puppet.
>Likewise, CGI seems to encourage special effects artists to "overload" movie frames
This seems questionable at best. Art direction is either good or bad. A poor craftsman blames his tools.
>Further, CGI characters are forgettable.
Goto to Disney and watch kids completely lose their shit over CGI characters. Not only are these characters not forgotten, they will be this generation's Luke and Leia. Even an old man like me loves CGI characters like General Grevious.
>protracted dark age in filmmaking.
Ah yes, the traditionalist approach. People said the same thing about talkies and color film. Curmudgeonly old men are rarely good judges of the future or the arts.