1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

[star wars] How Much Better Movies Look WITHOUT CGI and Green Screen!

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout' started by what, Aug 15, 2010.

  1. JunkyardDwg

    JunkyardDwg Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2000
    Messages:
    8,703
    Likes Received:
    841
    I think it all depends on how much money, how much emphasis and how much talent you got behind the camera when using cgi and green screens.

    The Gungan/Droid battle in Phantom menace was impressive but soulless ...and it was all completely cgi. At the same time, the Pod Racer seem was pretty damn awesome (could you imagine them trying to do that with the speeder they used in A New Hope?!). And I think the Anakin/Obi Wan fight in Ep III was epic.

    Look at any one of the battle scenes in LOTR which had so much depth to them and used a mixture of techniques. Golum's animation in Two Towers: unbelievable.

    Transformers....no way you could achieve what they did using just models.

    And then there's Avatar...I pretty much never once thought I was looking at a CGI character when watching it. The level of detail they achieved on the Na'vi characters was incredible. And the environments were absolutely breathtaking.


    There's just so many things you can do today with current technology that would be virtually impossible in the past.... Gary Sinise's amputated legs in Forrest Gump, "bullet time" in the first Matrix, a free-swinging Spidey....the list can go on and on.
     
  2. what

    what Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    14,618
    Likes Received:
    2,584
    Old techniques just look plain better. Period. It doesn't even compare. You could name one, I could name 10. And you could make transformers better with stop motion and authentic modeling. Compare Short Circuit to Wall*e, compare original terminator, compare Back to the Future. You can't get authentic lighting or detail with a computer generated scene. It will never look as authentic as the same thing done with TRUE lighting and real models and stuff.
     
  3. worzel gummidge

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2008
    Messages:
    6,533
    Likes Received:
    150
    I'm not sure if this is blue/greenscreen but the backgrounds are paintings.
    <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/i6iiJk-LHOE?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/i6iiJk-LHOE?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
     
  4. DaDakota

    DaDakota Balance wins
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 1999
    Messages:
    128,826
    Likes Received:
    39,211
    Avatar was fricken amazing using a green screen.

    Movies are better because of it...not worse.

    If you want to watch the original star trek with hand held models zipping across the screen then you better have a full bong for believability.

    DD
     
  5. Brando2101

    Brando2101 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2005
    Messages:
    6,428
    Likes Received:
    945

    Dude, weren't you going to admit defeat when given an example of green screen work in the original series? Read your own thread.
     
  6. BetterThanI

    BetterThanI Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    4,181
    Likes Received:
    381
    Opinion =/= fact. Many people who didn't grow up with the "better" effects you laud look back at them and find them old-fashioned and cheesy.

    Wow, you mean the live-action movie was more realistic than the cartoon movie?!? Say it ain't so! ;)

    Short Circuit was a terrible movie. Just awful. Wall*e was a fantastic bit of film-making. If I have to sacrifice even a hint of "realism" to avoid Steve Guttenberg, it's well worth it.

    To what? Terminator II? Because that was a MUCH better movie, and used a heckuva lot more CGI.

    Again, to what? The Matrix? LOTR? Make no mistake: Back to the Future used plenty of blue screen effects. Just look at the trails of fire that "appear" under Marty's feet when the DeLorean first disappears. It looks very, very fake:

    <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/3BdtpUVTdxk?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/3BdtpUVTdxk?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

    CGI is just like any other tool: the quality of the product produced using it will largely depend on who is producing it. There are plenty of examples of terrible, unrealistic, and even cheesy usage of miniatures and models throughout the history of Hollywood. There are also some real gems. The same can be said with CGI.
     
  7. Jontro

    Jontro Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2010
    Messages:
    36,314
    Likes Received:
    25,427
    Transformers is the downside of CGI. and Shia Lebuffy didn't help either (but that's for another discussion, another day)
     
  8. Hayden_SFC

    Hayden_SFC Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Messages:
    2,365
    Likes Received:
    41
    Hey!!!!!!!!!!
    Say what you will about Transformers....but you don't say shat about Shia Labeouf. :grin:
     
  9. RedRedemption

    RedRedemption Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2009
    Messages:
    32,542
    Likes Received:
    7,752
    I don't like full CGI movies. Until CGI gets to the point where it is photo-realistic... No movie should be full CGI (except the family flicks).
     
  10. Coach AI

    Coach AI Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 1999
    Messages:
    7,981
    Likes Received:
    840
    The Transformers movies aren't very good, but I can't knock the CGI. Those 'bots are impressive.
     
  11. what

    what Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    14,618
    Likes Received:
    2,584

    The most inauthentic looking part of Star Wars was the land speeder effects. Even as a kid I thought it looked stupid. The rest of the movie though (with the old techniques) look amazingly better than anything cgi has ever done including transformers. And, maybe you should read the title of the thread again, cause that was my point, so why would I accept defeat as you call it.
     
  12. what

    what Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    14,618
    Likes Received:
    2,584
    cgi is never going to come close to the old techniques. Hollywood knows it and most everybody here and elsewhere knows it too. The tool sucks. And the only reason anybody even uses it is because they are looking for cheap way out. Why spend millions to make it look right when you can spend a fraction of the cost with less time and effort.
     
  13. what

    what Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    14,618
    Likes Received:
    2,584
    Also, we are not looking at the instances were cgi was simply used as an effect: i.e. making the DeLorean disappear. We are looking at the moments just before the effect was done. Maybe you don't understand the thread. What makes the DeLorean scene believable is everything that surrounded THAT effect. The actors, the actual car (not a computer modeled car but an actual one), the mall in the background, the real fire on the ground as the tires heat up, and the true lightning showing a realistic nighttime scene.

    If the same scene would have been done with full cgi and actors in front of a green screen, it would have looked terrible and not even close to the original finished product.
     
  14. Jontro

    Jontro Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2010
    Messages:
    36,314
    Likes Received:
    25,427
    IMO the movies weren't very good because Bay basically focused on the CGI and nothing else. What good are they when you barely know what's happening more than half the time. All I saw was a bunch of metallic objects bumping each other.

    Shia is teh suxs :p
     
  15. MadMax

    MadMax Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 1999
    Messages:
    76,683
    Likes Received:
    25,924
    worst name ever. seriously. may be a great guy but it sounds like like a line of cosmetics.
     
  16. v3.0

    v3.0 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Messages:
    16,203
    Likes Received:
    931
    IMO the movies weren't any good because Michael Bay directed them.
     
  17. professorjay

    professorjay Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2006
    Messages:
    9,676
    Likes Received:
    388
    You only say CGI/green screen is bad because they are the noticeable cases.

    When it's well done you can barely tell, if at all.
     
  18. Steve_Francis_rules

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 1999
    Messages:
    8,467
    Likes Received:
    300
    Take that back, you b*stard! I love Short Circuit.
     
  19. BetterThanI

    BetterThanI Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    4,181
    Likes Received:
    381
    Sorry, man. Can't do it. It was so very, very bad. Plus...Steve Guttenberg. *shudder*
     
  20. Rocket River

    Rocket River Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 1999
    Messages:
    65,101
    Likes Received:
    32,806
    Sounds like you just have a bias my friend

    Rocket River
     

Share This Page