I think I got your point just fine...

Posted by California Mike from 209-21-33-113.dialup.microweb.net on May 08, 2001 at 16:10:47:

In Reply to: Mike, I wasn't bashing CGI.... posted by Austin Powers on May 08, 2001 at 15:58:27:

This, I believe, is your main point:

[[: Years ago misused effects weren't responsible for bad movies. But thanks to the availability of CGI we're now surrounded by movies like 'Twister' and 'Volcano' that totally rely on computer graphics to carry the film. It's a sad trend that doesn't seem to wanna go away. ]]

In other words, you are saying that we now are surrounded by bad movies that overuse CGI, and these movies would never have been made before. I get your point just fine. Yes, there are many movies now made that could not have been made before, and bad directors use CGI to make bad movies.

I'm saying that your point is, for lack of a better term, pointless. yes, we now have bad movies that are bad because they overuse cgi. I don't think the ratio of bad movies to good movies in hollywood has increased one iota since the advent of CGI. There are about as many good movies verus bad ones being released as there was in ..say, 1990. Yes, years ago misused effects weren't responsible for bad movies, instead one could blame bad dialogue, bad acting, or some other bad filmmaking technique. You say "it is a filmmaking trend that doesn't want to go away". Of course not! it's not a trend, any more than color movies, optical effects, or stereo sound are a trend. CGI is just another medium for presenting a film, and it is absolutely useless to attack a medium per se. All a medium does is convey something to the viewer.

Once again, there are bad movies being made due to CGI. I understand what you're saying. I'm simply stating that all CGI has done is shift bad filmmaking into new territory: we now have the "movie that is bad because of retarded cgi" category. I don't think my previous post said anything different.

Follow Ups:

Ya know what, Mike, I give up.... Austin Powers 16:25:39 5/08/2001 (5)
- Re: Ya know what, Mike, I give up.... California Mike 16:37:10 5/08/2001 (4)
  - "Ladies and gentlemen, I implore you...." Austin Powers 16:58:17 5/08/2001 (3)
    - I agree with your post! I'm just adding new wrinkles. California Mike 17:19:31 5/08/2001 (2)
      - This was never a debate.... Austin Powers 17:40:05 5/08/2001 (1)
        
        Olive Branch. California Mike 03:04:47 5/09/2001 (0)
one more thought.. California Mike 16:13:41 5/08/2001 (1)
- Re: one more thought.. Jake 16:30:30 5/08/2001 (0)

Post a Followup:

Name:    
E-Mail:  
Subject: 
Comments:

: This, I believe, is your main point:

: [[: Years ago misused effects weren't responsible for bad movies. But thanks to the availability of CGI we're now surrounded by movies like 'Twister' and 'Volcano' that totally rely on computer graphics to carry the film. It's a sad trend that doesn't seem to wanna go away. ]]

: In other words, you are saying that we now are surrounded by bad movies that overuse CGI, and these movies would never have been made before.  I get your point just fine. Yes, there are many movies now made that could not have been made before, and bad directors use CGI to make bad movies.

: I'm saying that your point is, for lack of a better term, pointless.  yes, we now have bad movies that are bad because they overuse cgi.  I don't think the ratio of bad movies to good movies in hollywood has increased one iota since the advent of CGI.  There are about as many good movies verus bad ones being released as there was in ..say, 1990.  Yes, years ago misused effects weren't responsible for bad movies, instead one could blame bad dialogue, bad acting, or some other bad filmmaking technique.  You say "it is a filmmaking trend that doesn't want to go away".  Of course not! it's not a trend, any more than color movies, optical effects, or stereo sound are a trend.  CGI is just another medium for presenting a film, and it is absolutely useless to attack a medium per se.  All a medium does is convey something to the viewer.

: Once again, there are bad movies being made due to CGI.  I understand what you're saying.  I'm simply stating that all CGI has done is shift bad filmmaking into new territory:  we now have the "movie that is bad because of retarded cgi" category.  I don't think my previous post said anything different.

Optional:

Link URL:   
Link Title: 
Image URL:

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