Discuss the history of CGI, it’s greatest accomplishments, as well as comparing this method of filmmaking to more realistic props that were used in the older age, as well as today (Nolan films being a huge point of reference). As well as cosmetics (LOTR v The Hobbit Trilogy) and shooting on location or on set (The Revenant) and how each of these mediums have their ups and downs, and which one produces the better film for select genres. For example, could we even produce an Avengers film solely using real props and make-up? Or are big blockbuster films like that doomed to be plagued by CGI?
A good topic and there are some really interesting discussions undergone throughout the development of CGI and the pros and cons from different directors. – SaraiMW2 months ago
One cannot mention CGI without Jurassic Park and how it can be used in conjunction with animatronics. – platinummad2 months ago
I believe a good path for this topic would be to focus on a certain genre, such as action or horror, etc. And compare the effect of CGI vs traditional stunts or props/make up. I think a narrower focus would allow for a more in-depth analysis – Sery8012 months ago
I think when a film uses real props, it adds more of an imaginative feel to a movie. For example, a lot of 80s movies like the Goonies, The Lost Boys and so on, have a different kind of feel to them because of the hand made touches. I think it makes things feel more realistic even though that is the whole purpose of CGI. It also makes viewers feel that a lot of personal time and effort went into the movie. Not that CGI doesn't take an extreme amount of time an effort, I just mean that it adds more of a personalized effort. It seems as time goes on the industry, it is relying on CGI more and more. Realistically, I think CGI is going to be the way the industry goes whether we like it or not. – Melissa1 week ago
CGI is an inevitable and unavoidable part of the big budget film making experience, especially in sci fi and fantasy films. I think what is more important is how filmmakers are using CGI in ways that doesn't detract from the film. George Lucas, one of the founding father of digital cinema (Look up the Star Wars prequels and you will see how many technique ILM helped pioneer for better or worse), talked about how CGI should is used to tell a story and how it really isn't different from practical effects, because they have the same goal: to help tell your story. – Sean Gadus5 days ago
Terminator 2: Judgement Day (1991) and Jurassic Park (1993) are considered landmark films in regards to their special effects; the T-1000 and the dinosaurs were considered ambitious projects modeled around still-new computer generated imagery. Two decades later, it feels that the modern summer blockbuster uses these effects to a fault rather than to intimately inform the narratives as was the case in those two films. Have filmmakers taken CGI for granted?
I think this a fascinating topic! These two films (T2 and J Park) were on the forefront of the technological cutting edge for their time (they still look and feel amazing today) and have informed how CGI and other special effects are used within movies. Very relevant and important topic for the current film landscape and movie making process. – SeanGadus2 years ago
I would say that yes in many cases it has but in the case of Dr. Strange for example it was cgi done right and allowed a movie about a comic some worried would fail when put on the big screen to actually succeed. Since its depictions of magic through cgi was impressive and allowed the narrative to be told without being wacky. – NickC2 years ago
This is a great topic, because after learning how much movies today use a green screen, it just makes me sad. In some cases, like NickC referencing Doctor Strange, CGI really makes a movie great, but honestly, it's not needed one hundred percent of the time. – Leweasel2 years ago