Jump to content

Eric Atreides

Spider-Man: No Way Home | December 17, 2021 | The More Fun Stuff Version (yes, that's what it's called) comes to theaters September 2nd!

Recommended Posts





3 hours ago, AJG said:


I don’t think I’ve ever heard of anyone watching a non-biopic movie for black history month in my life. It’s not a ticket sale booster.

Didn’t realize Deadpool was so rich in black cultural themes.

  • Astonished 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites



9 hours ago, TheDude391 said:

"It was really fun to watch him see how technology has advanced," Holland adds. "When he was making these films, the arms were puppets, and when we did it, they're all imaginary and CG. It was quite cool to see him relive it, but also relearn it."

 

That's not a good thing Tom.

CG hate is such a tired meme. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites







5 hours ago, Hatebox said:

God it'd be hilarious if this had to move.

Now that I've started to accept this will probably move i am seeing the funny side especially cause some hardcore fans have been obsessed with speculating every detail and cameo while not concerned about some of the lesser known MCU projects

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Last Man Standing said:

Not every opinion you disagree with is a meme.

It’s a meme on the original Dawkins sense, though not the predominant internet humor meaning nowadays.   
 

If you’d prefer: CG hate is such a tired trope.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



1 hour ago, lorddemaxus said:

Nah, as long as studios overwork CG artists to create weightless goop because it's cheaper and easier (kinda related to a topic that's been hot on this thread over the past couple days), hating on it is completely fine. 

So those who work on practical effects don't get overworked? I don't see what poor working conditions has to do with this particular debate. 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites





15 hours ago, Menor said:

CG hate is such a tired meme. 

Not when it looks bad and clearly overused. Recent movies with The Rock all look like animated features.

22 hours ago, john2000 said:

its easy to judge when you are outside of the game

It's easy to compare when you have examples.

Edited by Firepower
Link to comment
Share on other sites





4 minutes ago, Menor said:

Just like any other technique can be done badly, unless you think practical effects are always flawless. 

Sure, but here's the difference: practical stuff is the actual stuff on set, real thing will always look better than CGI (if it should be done practically of course) and it helps actors too.

Edited by Firepower
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



12 minutes ago, Menor said:

Just like any other technique can be done badly, unless you think practical effects are always flawless. 

For me, even imperfect "practical" effects have a charm, regardless, that "imperfect" CG (which is most of it) will never have...because they were conjured/opticaled by craftspeople, rather than [very smart] people punching buttons on a computer.  Just an argument, you don't have to agree.  There can be a nuance and beauty to digital effects, and certain filmmakers handle it expertly (Fincher, del Toro), but very few know when to let up and not lean into excess these days.  Agree that most ROCK-starring movies and many major blockbusters have a "muddy-wash" feeling that just doesn't communicate to me.  

Edited by Macleod
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



7 minutes ago, Firepower said:

Sure, but here's the difference: practical stuff is the actual stuff on set, real thing will always look better than CGI (if it should be done practically of course) and it helps actors too.

And comes with limitations. So it's definitely not always better. If doing something practically is gonna limit the ability to do an action scene that would be really cool, I would argue it shouldn't be done practically. Sacrificing imagination for the sake of "realism" is not a good thing. 

3 minutes ago, Macleod said:

For me, even imperfect "practical" effects have a charm, regardless, that "imperfect" CG (which is most of it) will never have...because they were conjured/opticaled by craftspeople, rather than [very smart] people punching buttons on a computer.  Just an argument, you don't have to agree.  There can be a nuance and beauty to digital effects, and certain filmmakers handle it expertly (Fincher), but very few know when to let up and not lean into excess these days.  Agree that most ROCK-starring movies and many major blockbusters have a "muddy-wash" feeling that just doesn't communicate to me.  

I guess this is why I've never felt the anti-CGI thing because to me a bad-looking effect is the same whether CGI or practical. I never felt any charm from fake-looking practical effects. Also saying digital effects are just "punching buttons on a computer" is really reductive, there's plenty of effort and craftsmanship that goes into them just like practical effects. 

Edited by Menor
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.