theprequelsrule said:
Gollum always looked fake to me. For the time it was great CGI, but it still looked fake.
Gollum didn't look fake to me. Maybe once or twice? Maybe? He looked really real, other than the fact that I know in my head that there's no one who looks like that.
A plastic mask is real. It may be poorly crafted and look like crap, but it will still look real because it is real and not just data on some computer.
No. The Gammorean Guards do not look real. They look like real rubber, yes, but they do not look like real living creatures. Looking like a physical object is not enough - Creatures need to look like creatures, not rubber.
Jabba looked great in ROTJ in 1983, in 2003, and will still look great in 2033.
Most of the time. Occasionally I think he looks a little stiff.
Gollum will be considered a joke in 2033.
At worst he'll be considered a great example of the best that could be done at the time.
THIS IS WHY CGI IS BAD FOR FILMS UNTIL THEY HAVE 100% PHOTO-REALISTIC TECHNOLOGY.
Define 100% photorealistic. How will you know when we've reached it? You can't make this kind of demand without a satisfiable goal defined.
Filmmakers stop using FX in the proper manner; as slight-of-hand (as another poster put it), and instead put it front and centre where we can see how fake it looks.
So you want filmmakers to intentionally display the shortcomings of available technologies instead of using what they have to create the illusions they think are best suited for their stories? Why would they do that?