Octorox said:
I always thought that the CG in pirates is some of the best I've ever seen. It's true that CG can look very bad but so can models and matte paintings. I'll take a complex rendered CG environment over a matte painting any day. I think some of the CG in Indy 4 is poorly done (why get CG prairie dogs when you can get real prairie dogs?) but they took a lot of time in making the movie nostalgic and old looking, and fans shouldn't bash the movie for being radically different because, if anything, it is TOO much like the old movies. I'm glad Lucas didn't go that route with the Star Wars prequels. What people don't realize is that these movies are just as much for you as they are for new generation of kids (And, as I'm still in High School, I can call meyself one of them) and about half of the perceived "betterness" of the old movies and old effects are just because they are nostalgic (not to everybody but a lot of prequel bashers who grew up wih the originals).
I always thought that the CG in pirates is some of the best I've ever seen. It's true that CG can look very bad but so can models and matte paintings. I'll take a complex rendered CG environment over a matte painting any day. I think some of the CG in Indy 4 is poorly done (why get CG prairie dogs when you can get real prairie dogs?) but they took a lot of time in making the movie nostalgic and old looking, and fans shouldn't bash the movie for being radically different because, if anything, it is TOO much like the old movies. I'm glad Lucas didn't go that route with the Star Wars prequels. What people don't realize is that these movies are just as much for you as they are for new generation of kids (And, as I'm still in High School, I can call meyself one of them) and about half of the perceived "betterness" of the old movies and old effects are just because they are nostalgic (not to everybody but a lot of prequel bashers who grew up wih the originals).
Octorox, I can only speak for myself, but I have said in many posts, I liked CG, as long as it enhances the movies, not overwhelms it, and I think most feel that way. T2 is a perfect example of CGI making the movie better, as the Robert Patrick T-1000 really comes off as a much cooler character with all his CG moments after he gets shot, and reforms into his original self. The same goes for Jurassic Park, as the addition of some CGI dinosaurs really gives the movie that epic sense that models may not have done.
For me, the negatives of CGI is when the whole screen IS CGI! It just comes off as a cartoon, and for me, it is when guys like Lucas and many other directors these days, use these fake CGI environments that look like something different then we have every seen: Kamino, Utapau, Geonosis, but just don't hold up well, because....they aren't real environments.
I don't really think that age or nostalgia has anything to do with preference, as I grew up with the OOT movies, and I love T2 and Jurassic Park, and even The Abyss as they were the first CGI movies. It is when the movies rely on CGI to tell the story, that is when it gets a bit much for me, and the PT movies, especially AOTC & ROTS feel like I am watching a cartoon.