Redpill me on CGI

It only works when you don't notice it

never seen any cgi that made me feel grossed out.

LOTR wouldnt have worked as well with CGI Orcs. Its the practical elements that made them so fucking disgusting to look at.

>>79583545
t. george lucas

There's literally no excuse why the one on the left should look worse when it's made ten years later. Goddammit Jackson, it's not like he doesn't KNOW that the way the orcs were made in Lotr was superior. So why the fuck did they get so lazy?

>>79583583
I will have to agree with him, since cgi felt less realistic to me and as a result didnt cause any strong emotions

>>79583591
He had little time to make the movies
the hacks at the studio are at fault.

and he managed to make the hobbit movies pretty decent.
with the studio giving him no time.

They spent a whole year doing all the props and shit
before filming. that's why the LOTR movies are that good he actually had time to piece them together

File: 3925823.jpg (28KB, 479x437px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 479x437px

>Orc makeup one of the best elements of LOTR
>Completely disregard it for the hobbit because it's too much work and you just want to go home

>>79583499
In that image you can see how the CG artist was able to go too far with the character by making half of their skull appear to be made of metal and it looks ridiculous.

The Orc on the right had to be done by hand and it was a laborious process so they only do what is necessary to convey the message. It ends up being more convincing.

>>79583499
watch the hobbit making offs and you'll know why the cgi looks like everything's made out of oil

>>79583499
Yo to be fair the final fight with the pale Orc vs dwarf king would've been basically impossible with practice makeup and effects. The scale would've been a nightmare

>>79583785
Practical makeup*

>>79583711
>and he managed to make the hobbit movies pretty decent.
>movies

The fact that it has to be movies already makes this horrible, The Hobbit could have been covered by a single movie, 2 if you really want to stretch it out with stupid subplots with no relevance.

serious question, is cgi cheaper than hiring makeup artists?
I read somewhere that some cgi firms get assraped by studios financially

>>79583785
They could have been filmed with Cg at a distance and practicals for the closeups. The problem with having practical effects now is studios want these wide, uncut shots with a zillion effects all over the place. Practical effects are only, well, practical if you have enough close up shots to hide the seams.

The one on the left looks like a computer game, the one on the right looks like a puppet. Both take you out of the movie if you are an adult and know that orcs don't exist.

>>79583754
This is something I've been thinking about. CGI got no rules or limits, and I think that ends up being a problem.

File: 9832523.jpg (68KB, 850x478px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 850x478px

The Hobbit movies are the biggest fucking waste of potential. I get mad just thinking about it.

>>79583816
Yeah true
but what I am saying they would've been wayyyy better if actually had time to do everything

I liked the first 2 hobbits but the 3rd one
was pretty bad

>>79583816
It still baffles me how they turn this little story into three movies with all this useless shut added in but on the other hand brush over important characters and scenes. O'm a big fan of Beorn, but for some reason they apparently didn't care about him, his design was lame, his scene wasn't memorable and even in the final battle, where I was SURE they'd at least show his berserker rage - nope, nothing. Gotta shove in more bullshit instead.

File: f91.png (94KB, 469x469px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 469x469px

>>79583874
If the 3rd movie was the last one, he'd have more time to work on it than the first two movie, how come the 3rd one is the worst one.

>>79583944
No not really they filmed all the movies at the same time then put them together

>>79583902
Mirkwood also had a lot of wasted potential

>>79583944
Also the 3rd one is barley a fucking movie just a 3 hour battle really

File: lotr11.jpg (140KB, 650x441px) Image search: [Google]

140KB, 650x441px

I have a weak spot for miniatures desu

>>79584025
is that the rivendell miniature for the movie or is just a replica made by those autists? it looks dope tho

>>79583512
This is true, and I think HD is the problem to be honest. It's been heavily used in TV for a long time and wasn't noticeable until they started putting everything out in HD and you could see the cheap tier CGI that passes in 420p but not 1080p.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKZio1NA15I

>>79584054
those autists are the ones that made it for the movie. richard taylor is a genius

>>79583713
he was being rushed by studios

just watch the behind the scenes footage

the prop department would be so worked over that they would sometimes make armor and weapons that had to be used THAT DAY

this was not like LOTR where they had months and years to prepare sets and props and costumes

>>79584133
fucking indeed, lord of the rings is just a beautiful made film, also, credit to alan lee, he designed almost all of the architecture of the movie, dude is a genius and john howe is a hack lmao

Ok, millenials and hipsters hate it because it makes them feel like their taste is superior. There is bad cgi like there is bad practical effects. CGI has done more for film than most people realize when they say
>HURR CG SUCKS
the point is you don't even notice it if its used well. I've seen people here call actual things "shitty cgi" so sorry if I dont trust anons judgment on the subject.

>>79584324
>There is bad cgi like there is bad practical effects. CGI has done more for film than most people realize when they say
elaborate faggot, give me at least 5 good examples of this

>>79583902
My beornbro, I know your pain.

>>79583711
hey are not decent, anon. The first, maybe, and has lots of tone problem.
Second is very bad and third is SW prequel tier.

I would argue that RotS is waaay better than Bo5A, at least because Revenge has an actual resolution.
(example: where the fuck the stone did go? In the theatrical, we don't know).

>>79583834
Well the budget for Battle Of The Five Armies was $250m whereas Return Of The King was $94m. I mean you've gotta factor in inflation, and those figures aren't going to be purely reflective of the costs of practical effects vs CGI. However based on those figures, it's a safe bet that extensive CGI is more expensive than practical effects and makeup

It's fine when it's for like establishing shots or small things in the background / added to a set, but yeah when you straight up make CGI characters that are modeled on or mocapped by humans you end up tumbling down the uncanny valley.

>>79583902
This is why the "he had no time" argument falls short. He did choose the wrong fillers anyway.
Why don't fill more with Beorn instead of yet more Legolas?

File: stan.gif (908KB, 245x200px) Image search: [Google]

908KB, 245x200px

Get the fuck over it.. Bunch of fucking nerds who actually get triggered over this shit. No imagination having neckbeards in this shit its insane. LMAO

>>79583583
t. didn't read the comment

>>79584841

It is less time consuming though. LOTR had like 3-4 years of physical pre-production.

Also factor in the fact probably the majority of sets, armor, physical props ect were covered in the first two films budget.

>>79584897
woah we got a cool guy over here posting on fucking 4chan

>>79583864
CG doesn't have to follow the laws of physics so it can end up looking unrealistic when it becomes too complicated. You can make things in CG that would just fall apart in real life.

CGI work great for inanimate objects, landscapes etc. but it still fails for living creatures. There is still something just unnatural that makes it hard to connect

File: Air Force One.webm (3MB, 1920x800px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x800px

CGI is great for creating environments or designs that are impractical any other way, iIf you want to use CGI then use it but no half measures otherwise what's the point?

>>79583545
>never seen any cgi that made me feel grossed out.
Watch the hobbit part 3.

>>79585046
>There is still something just unnatural that makes it hard to connect
A lot more: bad lightning, design, framing, exposition, sound and interaction with real people, a lot less: animation, realistic proportions/textures

Who doesn't love Dragonheart?

>>79583591
Because you can have a team of computer animators working at the same time as the film crew and trust that it will all get done at the same time.

Makeup and practicals require preproduction time he didn't have.

>>79583499
well CGI is the more tax-friendly option in terms of grants and credits

>>79585236
tax-friendly option heh
in The Hobbit, LotR universe hehe
Tax in LotR heh

File: 1450846932817.jpg (30KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 400x400px

>>79583512
here's a great example I think
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDGqKyNV-HU

>>79583499
everyone was praising the CGI of gollum in LOTR so they felt like they needed to one-up themselves. fucking idiots

>>79583499
Never mind the CGI, but what were their respective tax plans?

G E T A F I R E G O I N G

>>79583499
Pretty nifty thing if you don't over use it.
If it looks realistic it's good, if it looks like StarWars 1-3 then it's bad

The Hobbit had a couple months pre-production compared to Lord of the Rings' four years

There was no way we were getting good movies out of that kind of rushjob

Especially where effects were concerned. They had no idea about their schedule so they were building up the sets, shooting on them, and then dismantling them the next day because they didn't know if they'd need them again. They were making the props on the same day they were needed for filming

It was an utter mess and a good example of how not to make a big budget movie

>>79584280
Pretty much this, its pretty fucking sad he looks terrible in the behind the scenes stuff.

After LOTR how the fuck do you not give him the fucking cheque and let him do his work.

>>79583785
You k ow the fight vetween aragorn and the uruk hai in fellowship of the ring? How was that fight in comparison to the one with Thorin?

>>79585092
STOP. I always turn off air force one the precise moment it zooms in on him at the door of the plane.

Everytime i see this i get a stomach ache

>>79583499

>comparing pictures of different resolutions
>comparing cgi vs makeup when not seeing them in the cinema.

Some of us actually saw the films in the cinema and the CGI was breathtaking in HFR. Looked better than the originals.

That has obviously nothing to do with the story and the characters, but CGI alone is amazing in the Hobbit.

Dont forget, Gollum was CGI and noone bitched about it.

>>79590701
>Gollum was CGI and noone bitched about it.
Gollum looks like complete shit in most close-ups though. Also that CG was passable for the time, whereas the Hobbit effects were absolutely not.

>>79583944
Third one suffered the most from the three movie split. It had like an hour worth of plot that they had to stretch out in re-shoots to fill it out. All because the studio got greedy

Just imagine how much better this world would be if everyone who ever began a post with "redpill me on" suddenly dropped dead. I'm using my birthday wish for this.

>>79591037
Damn, they couldn't even get other actors? what the fuck is wrong with them.

File: The.Lord.of.the.Rings.The.Return.of.the.King.2003.EXTENDED.720p.BluRay.H264.AAC-RARBG.mp4_snapshot_00.06.00_[2017.02.19_18.26.14].png (1MB, 1280x534px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1280x534px

>>79590701
>Gollum was CGI and noone bitched about it.
Could have done him with makeup desu

CGI only works when mixed with practical effects like giant puppets or robots.

Jurassic park looks better than Jurassic world.

File: c3416a4dc2d483b9a473d2ecbfdc76a6.jpg (35KB, 736x487px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 736x487px

>>79583711
>>79583816
>>79583944
>>79584280
>>79589526
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQkygZdZ_Vk
Here's why it failed. The director was supposed to be Guillermo Del Toro (pic related is his concept for Smaug) with Jackson producing. The original plan was for it to be two movies, the first one being more original, and the second being more in the style of Jackson's LotR movies. However, MGM came into some financial troubles at the time (2010) and had to keep delaying the movie (which technically hadn't been greenlit). Del Toro either got fed up, disillusioned, or wanted to move on to other projects, but regardless, he quit.

Labor disputes meant production couldn't start until March 2011. Jackson made the choice to extend the series to three movies, likely to buy himself more time for shooting (which ended August 2013). It's important to remember that everything from Del Toro's version was scrapped, although it's unclear whether this was due to him holding the creative rights to those concepts, or Jackson wanting the films to be entirely his own.

The other anons already explained the rest: because there wasn't enough time in pre-production, everything was cg. The story was padded partly because Jackson wanted to explore parts not mentioned in the book (like Gandalf meeting the White Council), and partly because of studio demands (inventing Tauriel to offset the male-female ratio). There's probably a good movie hidden in there, but we'll never see it.

>>79592110
tl;dr: The Hobbit failed because MGM got $4 Billion in debt during the recession.
Feels bad man.

>>79592110
I know Del Toro is basically a meme at that point, but I would've loved to see his version of the Hobbit

Reminder that new Dune will be done entirely in AfterEffects

>>79583499
CGI is getting better and better, but when it fails, it fails miserably.

When the movie maker knows the limit of CGI they can craft something good that holds up (see LOTR), on the other hand when CGI is used because the film maker is lazy, you get shit (see Hobbit)

>>79593130
Del Toro is a meme at this point
Because he actually has integraty and passion for what he does?