I was just talking about that last night!!!!

Posted by Indydawg from pool-63.52.6.52.atln.grid.net on May 06, 2001 at 11:36:12:

In Reply to: entire movies that use CGI are coming out -- they look fairly realistic, but disturbing posted by Bennett on May 06, 2001 at 10:10:36:

I made one of the hugest mistakes of my life and allowed myself to be talked into watching Charlie's Angels-quite possibly the stupidest movie I have ever seen! I told Mrs. Indydawg that one day the MST3K guys will be doing a show on that ridiculous piece of nothing. Anyway, there was a preview for an entire CGI movie on the tape-I thought it was fairly disturbing myself. It is a truly revolutionary practice, and as with all revolutionary practices, there is a danger of misuse and overkill. Maybe I am just old fashioned, but I would much rather see an actual human being. I guess that is why I don't really like any action movies after about 1995-too many CGI effects in the movie make the action sequences seem so impossible. One of the reasons I think action movies appeal is the audiences' ability to put themselves in the main character's place. As with our hero, he never really did any action sequences that were humanly IMPOSSIBLE! However, movies like the Mission Impossible films, the latest Bond flicks, and that worthless pile of cinematic excrement I watched last night, are filled with action sequences that rival the feats of Superman-and let's face it....no one could ever really BE Superman!

Ok-enough, self-centered, idealistic rambling....I'll get off my soapbox now.....

Later, ya'll!
Indydawg

: I've seen a couple of previews of movies that are entirely computer generated and are in the same style as the Rock/scorpion character in the Mummy returns -- they look pretty realistic, but just unrealistic enough to be disturbing (to a 35 year old like me, at least) --

: But it seems that the ability to create realistic CGI characters has come along so fast that in a few years they may be able to do it virtually unnoticeable -- that may be great, on one hand, but could result in a disturbing trend on the other. Much of the charisma of Indy, for instance, comes from Harrison Ford, not from the vision of the screenwriter or director/producer -- just look at the original scripts or storyboards to see how Harrison Ford saved Raiders from being just another action movie -- if CGI became easier/cheaper to use than actors for period action flicks, it could be a real loss --

: Of course, that seems unlikely -- and CGI will probably become a good thing and comments like mine here will be a source of amusement -- like somebody who thought color film would ruin movies --

: At any rate, at this point CGI needs to be used strategically --

: Bennett

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup:

Name:    
E-Mail:  
Subject: 
Comments:

: I made one of the hugest mistakes of my life and allowed myself to be talked into watching Charlie's Angels-quite possibly the stupidest movie I have ever seen!  I told Mrs. Indydawg that one day the MST3K guys will be doing a show on that ridiculous piece of nothing.  Anyway, there was a preview for an entire CGI movie on the tape-I thought it was fairly disturbing myself.  It is a truly revolutionary practice, and as with all revolutionary practices, there is a danger of misuse and overkill.  Maybe I am just old fashioned, but I would much rather see an actual human being.  I guess that is why I don't really like any action movies after about 1995-too many CGI effects in the movie make the action sequences seem so impossible.  One of the reasons I think action movies appeal is the audiences' ability to put themselves in the main character's place.  As with our hero, he never really did any action sequences that were humanly IMPOSSIBLE!  However, movies like the Mission Impossible films, the latest Bond flicks, and that worthless pile of cinematic excrement I watched last night, are filled with action sequences that rival the feats of Superman-and let's face it....no one could ever really BE Superman!

: Ok-enough, self-centered, idealistic rambling....I'll get off my soapbox now.....

: Later, ya'll!
: Indydawg

: : I've seen a couple of previews of movies that are entirely computer generated and are in the same style as the Rock/scorpion character in the Mummy returns -- they look pretty realistic, but just unrealistic enough to be disturbing (to a 35 year old like me, at least) --

: : But it seems that the ability to create realistic CGI characters has come along so fast that in a few years they may be able to do it virtually unnoticeable -- that may be great, on one hand, but could result in a disturbing trend on the other.  Much of the charisma of Indy, for instance, comes from Harrison Ford, not from the vision of the screenwriter or director/producer -- just look at the original scripts or storyboards to see how Harrison Ford saved Raiders from being just another action movie -- if CGI became easier/cheaper to use than actors for period action flicks, it could be a real loss --

: : Of course, that seems unlikely -- and CGI will probably become a good thing and comments like mine here will be a source of amusement -- like somebody who thought color film would ruin movies --

: : At any rate, at this point CGI needs to be used strategically --

: : Bennett

Optional:

Link URL:   
Link Title: 
Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Indyfan Forum ] [ FAQ ]