I disagree, good CG is far better than the limitations of the past
But this YouTube bollocks is dogshit
Creator : @IamHappyToast
(
HappyToast Groat froth, Thu 25 Nov 2021, 20:55,
Share,
Reply)
I'll admit there's definitely a bit of the old rose tinted specs thing going on.
The Rancor scene in RotJ looks significantly jankier in 2021 than it first appeared in 1983. Could they do a comparatively more convincing job in 2021? No doubt. But a production filmed in 1983 should remain with the visual limitations that 1983 imposed on said production. Trying to 'improve' upon a movie by bastardising it with modern technology is just wanky as fuck.
And there's still something very uncanny valley about even the best CGI these days that gives it away, although as I mentioned, with good CGI that's usually based on physical impossibilities of scale/movement/etc rather than visual imperfections.
(, Thu 25 Nov 2021, 21:06, Share, Reply)
there's something nice about watching something old and thinking how the hell did they do that without CGI?
to be honest I often like CGI best when it's hiding safety harnesses etc of practical stunts/effects
(, Thu 25 Nov 2021, 22:05, Share, Reply)
There's a soul and creativity that goes into practical effects that just isn't really required for CG work.
Labyrinth is a great example. Essentially a feature length Jim Henson tech demonstration that completely draws you in to the point that you forget that you're watching inanimate objects for the most part. It's when you see all the puppeteers and rods and motors behind the scenes that you get a sense of disbelief about what you're looking at. Then you consider the amount of skill and creativity involved in creating all these sets and characters and the sheer amount of problem solving that must have gone into it. You just couldn't recreate that with CGI.
Even with modern motion capture techniques, something just seems to get lost jn translation.
(, Thu 25 Nov 2021, 22:33, Share, Reply)