Jun 26 2008
Computer generated defects
CGI or the Cerebral? It’s know surprise that audiences have changed in the past decade. Moviegoers are going to see big Hollywood blockbusters just because the fact that the special computer effects in the trailer looks amazing. We’re in dark times my friends. To contradict my last statement, I do awe and drool at incredible special effects: Star Wars three, the final battle scene was incredible and the Sandman in Spiderman 3, was one of the best CGI effect ever (I am actually surprised that they didn’t win the academy award because of just that character). I do think the advancement in computer technology in film had definitely helped filmmakers solve challenges more easily and effectively, especially with the invention of blue, green, pink and red screens. But, some of this technology is also a hindrance. Instead of dealing with issues of the practical a completely Computer Generated background or situation takes away from the story. Audiences are expecting the effects that they pay less attention to the story. For example in STAR WARS ONE, there was a massive pod race scene, which really didn’t have to be there. That scene was to inject some excitement into the picture but as a whole it’s distracting and in the end forgettable. My own pleasure is to watch films that use CGI and a bit of the practical. For me using a practical model helps me believe the story more. Instead of just watching light on the screen the practical makes me believe the story more and make me participate rather than being strapped into a chair being fore fed junk (ala Clockwork Orange). Writers need to help fulfill the cerebral and stimulate the brain rather than films that just stimulate the senses. A lit match underneath someone’s foot can do the same.
