• The forum software have been upgraded to the latest version.

    If you notice anything that looks off, or does not work, please let us know.

    For more information, click here.

The Random Thread of Random Randomness

299225793_10162503112121679_5108917676855687665_n.jpg
 
NIGHTBRINGER said:
View attachment 119091
Click to expand...

Very much like Tion Medon from Revenge of the Sith (2005):
latest

VS the painfully fake-looking live-action Grand Inquisitor in Obi-Wan Kenobi (2022):
Kenobi-The-Grand-Inquisitor.jpg

Supposedly the same species, but looking nothing alike due to the blatant fear of CGI in current filmmaking.


I certainly think there should be a point where filmmakers are criticised for not using CGI in instances where it would clearly make things better, as well as for using it too much. CGI definitely has its uses in affordably creating mass-battle scenes and creating creatures and effects that look believable. You would never have been able to create the huge battle scenes in so many titles today or strange and wonderful creatures, like the T-1000 in Terminator 2, Davy Jones from Pirates of the Caribbean or Gollum from Middle-Earth, in the pre-CGI days without either spending so much money that there is no way the film can recover what was spent to make it, or ending up with something that looks laughably fake.

There has to be a balance between using both practical and CGI effects (as the Lord of the Rings Trilogy managed to achieve so masterfully) to get the best of both worlds.
 
Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl said:
There has to be a balance between using both practical and CGI effects (as the Lord of the Rings Trilogy managed to achieve so masterfully) to get the best of both worlds.
Click to expand...


so much truth in this.
i favor main practical effects, when i look at historical movies or things grounded in the "real" world.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top