are CGI effects becoming more 'obvious' the more we see them? (1 Viewer)

[Richard WWW]

My problem with the CGI in phantom menace:

It is scientific fact that humans have the most expressive faces of any animal on the planet. But Watto's and Jar-Jar's features are so much larger proportionately than any human's, that it makes them look like charicatures. Their features are also much more elastic. Take Jar Jar in a wide angle shot where he leads Qui Gon and Obi Wan to the swamp at the beginning. You compare the expressions on Jar Jar's face with the humans, and you can hardly detect what the expressions on the human's faces are. Jar Jar's however, are preposterously apparent. This, in my opinion, is a fault with Watto, as well, though I thought a lot better job was done with Watto than with Jar Jar overall.

I also was not convinced by the way the clothing lay and wrinkled on the CGI characters. It was obviously not real clothing (or at least clothing made of completely different materials that are not available here on earth).

I know other people were delighted with the CGI of PM, but I hope that the clothing issue will be addressed in the CGI of episode II, though they can't hardly change Jar Jar's expressiveness to come more in line with humans on earth. Oh, well. Nonetheless, I become a bigger fan of Episode I the more I see it. It's faults, IMO, are glaring, while its victories are far more subtle.

 

[Geoffrey_A]

You guys are truly gonna despise the CGI in AOTC, if you feel this strongly towards TPM.

Oh trust me, I'm not enamoured with AOTC's cg thus far. I'm impressed with the yoda shots I've seen, much better than the yoda of TPM (They did a crappy job on that muppet) but for the most part, the clone army, the big ships taking off, the walkers and battle droids, they all look fake. CG dust is rarely convincing, and they've used a lot of it here. I'll wait and see, but I get the distinct impression that they've fallen prey once more to the limitations of making virtual sets.
I probably won't wait in line for a couple of days for this one like I did with TPM

 

[Brian Kaz]

A fact of life is that Special FX are constantly evolving. The only way to perfect it (if that ever happens) is to have filmakers keep pushing the envelope. It's also like any type of technology, the more you build on it, the faster and better it becomes. Over the next decade, these FX engineers will write awesome simulation routines and shaders that will be capable of reproducing any type of effect and real world physics with much better accuracy than today.

The shots people mostly complain about in AOTC are ones you simply CANNOT do without cgi. The movies that people think the FX look real are almost always on a much smaller scale, where they are mixing real sets, etc. And it works, for that. However...

Virtual sets are a no no unless it's an addition to the expansiveness of the set as opposed to the enitrety of the set.

That's fine for most movies, but some films will have sets on such a large scale it would simply be cost prohibitive to make. And as far as using a physical model to make this set, well that's just the same as using cgi as far as I'm concerned (think of the establishing stadium shot of the Boonta Eve race in TPM). Doesn't look any more real to me either way.

 

[Carlo_M]

Actually, there were quite a few models built for Coruscant in TPM. It was a mix.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wow, I never would have guessed watching the film. I'll give it this, they certainly made it look consistent.

That's because they ran everything through a computer to make it look consistent. Sure there were models as basis for TPM, but most everything you see onscreen is touched by CGI in many ways.

Overall, watching TPM and the fuzziness of everything (and yes, I saw two pristine prints in the theaters as well as the two digital screenings), as an overall look it looks like a CGI-fest. Hardly anything in it seems organic, except maybe the on-location shots for Tatooine.

I agree w/ what you've said Geoffrey about AOTC based on trailers. I hope that the final product is more refined and more realistic looking.

 

[Terrell]

Well, all I can say is nobody ever can answer my question about how Lucas can do AOTC without a lot of CGI. There are literally six or seven dozen live sets in AOTC, in addition to 5 or 6 real landscapes and thousands of extras. So not everything is CGI. But nobody can ever tell me how he is supposed to make this film without a lot of CGI. They just say he shouldn't use a lot of CGI. Then when I say what's he supposed to do, spend 300 million on live sets, they change the subject. I understand some people don't care for CGI. But this is Star Wars in the year 2002. There is absolutely no way this film cannot have a lot of CGI.
As for AOTC, so far all you've seen is the Clone War trailers. Many of the effects shot were not even complete when that came out. The clone battle, many of the arena shots, and shots of the jedi temple were not even finished. In fact, they just completed these effects about a week ago. So just remember that the trailer shots weren't finished, not that it gonna make a difference.
As for TPM, most of Coruscant was CGI, but there were also quite a few models. Personally, I hope you guys can enjoy AOTC without letting the CGI bother you. If CGI ruins a movie for you, then there are gonna be a ton of films you don't like. AOTC is not gonna ride on the effects. The success of the movie is gonna ride on the story, the characters, and the quality of the movie. The effects won't even factor into whether it's a good movie.
Okay, good debate guys. But I'm pooped out. You guys have beaten me up pretty good.

as an overall look it looks like a CGI-fest.

Well, I've asked three questions in my post above. Nobody that I debate this issue with ever seems to want to answer it. If you can tell me how Lucas can make this film without a lot of CGI, and without sacrificing his vision or without having to make a 300 million dollar film, I'd love to hear it.

 

[Carlo_M]

Well, it's all about creative use of the camera, Terrell. I always thought the Empire was huge and powerful based on the Original Trilogy. No CGI there for the stormtroopers.
Have you forgotten how huge and imposing the Empire felt in the OT?
It's not HOW MUCH you show, but HOW you show it. That's good moviemaking, and the OT is a great example of how you can create a REALISTIC imaginary place, and populate it with real characters, and have a REAL STORY, and not use CGI.
--- EDIT ---
I am not against the use of CGI, but rather the overuse of it. To the point where it distracts from the film and feeling that "you are somewhere else." There are judicious ways to use the technology (as with any other traditional special effects shots) that will not detract from the experience by drawing attention to itself

 

[Terrell]

No CGI there for the stormtroopers.

Carlo, you're comparing apples to oranges. For one, CGI didn't exist. In the OT, the most stormtroopers you see onscreen numbers in the dozens, except for one shot when Vader and the Emperor enter the Death Star. In AOTC, Lucas has to depict a clone war with 4000 clonetroopers, 3000 genosians, and 3000 droids. Do you honestly expect him to show a gigantic clone war with a couple hundred people? Or do you expect him to hire 10,000 extras and outfit each one with a clontrooper, genosian, and droid costumes? Neither suggestion makes any sense. The scale of the prequel trilogy dwarfs the original.

The originals are still my favorites, but the scope and scale pales to what he has to create here. Uh, I give up. We're going around in circles. I hope you guys can look past the CGI in AOTC and concentrate on the characters and story. CGI doesn't decided whether this is a good movie or not, the story and characters do. If you guys can't get past the CGI to enjoy it, you might as well look for another movie to watch. Cause you won't like this one.

 

[Carlo_M]

Terrell, that's the problem, you seem to think that he needs to SHOW every single one of them. Remember that The Empire was HUGE in the OT, but he didn't need to show them all, did he? He created this huge thing, the death star (a model) and the IMPLICATION was that it was populated.

Again, if you feel he has to put every single one onscreen to get his point across, fine. But there are other ways to do it. Like TRUSTING the intelligence of the audience to get your point even if you don't show everything.

So I don't think this is apples to oranges.

Now let's stop debating Star Wars so that the "Is CGI too obvious" debate can go on - which I think has been answered a resounding YES.

 

[Terrell]

So, what you're really saying is he needs to limit his vision. Ok, I understand now.

 

[Carlo_M]

No Terrell you do NOT understand.

Ever hear of Hollywood films of HUGE scope, like Ben Hur, Cleopatra, Patton, and Braveheart? Those were not limited in vision at all and yet, look at the CGI usage.

Terrell, it's unfortunate that you seem to think you can only have "big vision" if you have "big CGI" and that is unfortunate.

 

[Terrell]

Again Carlo, that is a weak comparison. Do you even realize how much it would cost to make those films as they were back then? Obviously you don't. They could be made back then because actors salaries and construction wasn't nearly what it is today. Today they'd caost probably 400 million dollars. If that's what you're saying, then Lucas should spend insane amounts to get his film made. And there was no CGI because it didn't exist. So again, I'm not getting your point.

As for Braveheart, you're comparing apples to ornages. You're comparing a film that takes place on earth more than 500 years ago, where no technology even existed, with a film that takes place in space, in worlds that don't even exist. Their is incredible technology in this universe, and for the most part, no natural landscapes that can pass for these worlds, other than a few here and there. So that comparison doesn't work either.

It is of no use to compare an epic made 40 or 50 years ago, with an epic made in 2002. If you really are so turned off by the CGI in AOTC, then you're gonna hate it. Which is your perogative. But I will say this as my last comment. AOTC as a film isn't riding on ht effects. The effects don't even factor in all that much. This film will ride on the story, and the quality of it.It will also ride on the characters and their performances.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

Hey gents, I think you both are misinterpreting the other's words. I agree with Terrell in that a lot of CGI is necessary for AOTC. It does not change the fact that the end result is less organic, but at the very least, it is overuse of VERY GOOD CGI
Let's be friends here,
Chuck

 

[Terrell]

I would agree with Chuck's statement. I agree that actual, living, breathing things are more organic. But Chuck summed it up in words betterthan either of us did.

 

[Geoffrey_A]

Wow, I hope no one thought my criticisms of the quality of the effects work in TPM had any bearing on the film itself or my susbequent enjoyment of it. My criticisms are purely critical, and have no bearing on anything beyond their subject. As for the big question, how does Lucas make the film without a lot of CGI? Simple answer is, he doesn't. That said though, there are other effects avenues open to him which he chooses to pass by in favour of CG. Crowd scenes for instance. In Jedi we had a legion of Stormtroopers, and that was merely clever matte paintings and a cast of some 25 to 50 extras filmed repeatedly in different positions. A clone army could be done just as easily. That shot we get in the trailer of the clone army with the ships taking off in the background, a perfect example of where they could have just used Some extras and cloned them in the computer.

On a completely personal note here, am I the only one that thinks the design for the clone troopers is just really really weak? They look really dorky to me, combining Mandalorians with storm troopers, blah. Anyways, back to the debate...

Large scale fight sequences with thousands of clone troopers could be accomplished with 50 extras, filmed at different locations doing different things. Combined in the computer, cloned and moved around, you'll end up with a much more convincing mob than CG is currently capable of. Giant landscapes, definitely achievable with a combination of locations enhanced with CG, CG alone and models. CG alone whould be used sparingly.

So, what it comes to is not the amount of CGI but how it is used. There are a lot of tried and true effects techniques which could achieve the same results while looking better. That's just IMHO of course. I don't have access to the budgetary breakdowns, so it's not really for me to say that Lucas is wrong in going the route he does. From a strictly visual point of view, the effects would look better done one way over another, but money is an issue afterall. For some time I thought Jar Jar would have been more successful had they just mapped Jar Jar's head onto ahmed best. Watching the DVD I discovered that that option was considered, but the cost of doing that versus the cost of going totally cg tipped the scales. The CG looked just as good in their estimation, for considerably less.

None of this is going to limit my enjoyment of the film of course. Hell, when TPM came out I was dazzled by it at first. 13 viewings later I found that it didn't hold up to repeated viewings nearly as well as the OT did. Still, I have hope that this film will bring the saga back on track.

 

[Carlo_M]

Great analysis of the techniques I was alluding to as effective replacements for CGI (in truth not replacements, but WHAT WAS DONE before CGI). Film has been around nearly a century before CGI was used, and there are very inventive and effective techniques that look more realistic than CGI.

 

[Terrell]

I give up. You guys barraged me senseless. Plus, we keep making the same arguments over and over. So to spare us from going round and round, I give up. I do hope you enjoy it, and aren't put off by the CGI aspect.

 

[Geoffrey_A]

We Won! We Won! Whooop whoooop whooop! *spikes his keyboard and does a victory shuffle*
Just Kidding Terrell, good debate

 

[Terrell]

We Won! We Won! Whooop whoooop whooop! *spikes his keyboard and does a victory shuffle*

:p)