tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3797386216465468233.post7492917534354760408..comments2023-04-22T15:15:21.275-07:00Comments on Hitchcock's World: Models Are Not Always The AnswerJohn Hitchcockhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13373653979400552490noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3797386216465468233.post-5299220505162291342014-08-25T19:56:36.125-07:002014-08-25T19:56:36.125-07:00To be fair, Jurassic Park had its share of CGI. In...To be fair, Jurassic Park had its share of CGI. In fact if I'm not mistaken it was one of the first live action movies to really use it effectively to bring the dinosaurs to life.John Hitchcockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13373653979400552490noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3797386216465468233.post-33044420644473172652014-08-25T18:53:05.439-07:002014-08-25T18:53:05.439-07:00I think a happy medium is the ultimate goal, but C...I think a happy medium is the ultimate goal, but CGI is much faster from a studio perspective. Personally, I prefer practical effects more as they tend to have a longer shelf life. Take Jurassic Park for example, the practical work in that film still sensational all these years later. <br /><br />Gravity is an excellent example of CGI done right, but part of me wonders how it will look in ten years when technology advances? Heck even the Matrix, while fun and innovated, is starting to show its age now.Courtney Smallhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00045575858464121137noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3797386216465468233.post-50646287419970964442014-08-23T09:21:17.136-07:002014-08-23T09:21:17.136-07:00You write a great article about CGI vs orginal spe...You write a great article about CGI vs orginal special effects sort of speak. I still love the original War of the Worlds and the special effects from that (that's George Pal right??). The cheesy effects of Japanese monster movies are, well, cheesy and I would look for the strings and bad movements. It's interesting to discuss 2001 which had the old special effects (best way for me to say) and one buys into it because the story is excellent and it all works well together. Gravity has superb effects and when one looks at the basic pictures from the film, one can see why it won so many awards in this field but I still can't get past the fact the story and acting, in my humble opinion, sucks:) For all the great effects I still need a great story and Sandra Bullock huffing and puffing in a little outfit, knowing Chinese and crash landing to become the Attack of the 50ft woman took away from the great effects. Lord of the Rings, I believe, has the best of both-CGI plus models great acting, great writing. You can't ask for more.Birgithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09439720285857050428noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3797386216465468233.post-42586209243239545762014-08-22T05:00:30.052-07:002014-08-22T05:00:30.052-07:00It would be, provided you're referring to the ...It would be, provided you're referring to the original trilogy as it was initially released, and not the versions where George Lucas went back and smothered all his great practical effects with CGI. That would be a time when CGI is not such a great idea.John Hitchcockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13373653979400552490noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3797386216465468233.post-12261996597783598372014-08-22T04:58:33.228-07:002014-08-22T04:58:33.228-07:00I see where you're coming from, and in my defe...I see where you're coming from, and in my defense I was trying to find movies where the effects would have seemed cheesy even at the time of the movie's release (hey, even in the 1950's, there were plenty of flying saucer films with better special effects than Plan 9 From Outer Space). <br /><br />I was hoping to avoid bringing up cases where the effects only seem unconvincing by modern standards, because that does happen. The stop motion used in King Kong looks a bit choppy when seen today but it was groundbreaking when the movie first came out.John Hitchcockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13373653979400552490noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3797386216465468233.post-72858602160403037882014-08-21T20:59:42.571-07:002014-08-21T20:59:42.571-07:00You have a good point. I see a lot of older movie ...You have a good point. I see a lot of older movie fans lamenting CGI, and I see where they are coming from. But I really feel the LOTR films show how CGI and practical effects can and should be used together. It creates an amazing final product and gives us the best of both worlds. <br /><br />These days, budget conscious film makers often turn to CGI because it can take less time and cost less than practical effects. But if done correctly CGI can actually be just as time consuming and expensive as practical effects. You really get what you pay for when comes to effects of any type.<br /><br />It reminds me of what a young George Lucas said back in 1983, "Special effects are just a tool. A special effect without a story is a pretty dull thing." It seems like recently many Hollywood blockbuster are forgetting this (and you could accuse Lucas of forgetting this too if you feel like it). <br /><br />I will say, in defense of films like the Gamera movies and old 1950 saucer movies, is that aesthetics of the time come into play. Audiences seeing Gamera and Godzilla films knew what to expect and enjoyed the model work (still impressive in my opinion), men in suits and rear projection - because that is just how those types of movies were made. Judging those films by current standards isn't always fair. The same goes for the saucer films and the stop motion animation of masters like Harryhausen. Roman J. Martelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09545497713474664555noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3797386216465468233.post-12761124804038655162014-08-21T19:06:37.190-07:002014-08-21T19:06:37.190-07:00Very cool article...and very true. I thought Jacks...Very cool article...and very true. I thought Jackson's King Kong provided both extremely well done CGI (Kong himself) and poorly executed CGI (the dinosaur stampede). It was noticeable in the theater, to me at least. The original Star Wars trilogy vs. the prequels makes for an interesting contrast between practical fx and CGI.Dellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05634519605152190304noreply@blogger.com