CGI is, in my view, one of the most important components to consider in the way of contemporary film-making. After all, it is able to bring life to special features that might not have that degree of life otherwise. There are so many ways in which it can be used, whether it is the creation of characters that cannot be seen in reality or bringing life to landscapes that are able to prove aesthetically pleasing. With that said, is it possible that CGI can be argued to be one of the most overused features in film?
CGI is definitely being used to tremendous extents, some examples of its application being better than others. To say the least, CGI is vital, not only in movies but television shows and other forms of visual media as well. For example, I am sure that just about everyone was captivated by the sight of Iron Man saving civilians by coming down from the sky in his third movie. It wasn't a time where we questioned the realism of CGI but rather enjoyed what we were seeing in front of us.
Think of CGI as almost like the whipped cream atop an ice cream sundae. Of course you will want whipped cream because it adds something special to the overall dish. However, what happens when it seems as though there is too much whipped cream? That particular experience winds up leaving something to be desired. CGI is the same way; too little and the product becomes cheap. If there is too much CGI, though, it stops looking less like an authentic piece of art and more like a synthetically manufactured entity.
As you can probably imagine, CGI can be used poorly and there are a few examples of this. The first "Twilight" film is a great example of this, as its visuals in terms of the CGI werewolves were not exactly the most convincing. While I understand that werewolves are not real and that no film can change that fact, the goal of special effects is to make you believe that what is being shown can be believed. Unfortunately, "Twilight" was a case of me having difficulty as far as suspending my disbelief was concerned.
Unless "Twilight" was supposed to be self-aware - which was not the case - its usage of CGI was underwhelming, to put it mildly. CGI, depending on the party utilizing it, can vary in terms of genuine nature. You may not even realize that you are seeing something that was rendered by computers while you may be able to spot where exactly special features appear phony. In time, one can only hope that movies are able to develop to such a degree that they will be looked at as entirely genuine.
CGI is definitely being used to tremendous extents, some examples of its application being better than others. To say the least, CGI is vital, not only in movies but television shows and other forms of visual media as well. For example, I am sure that just about everyone was captivated by the sight of Iron Man saving civilians by coming down from the sky in his third movie. It wasn't a time where we questioned the realism of CGI but rather enjoyed what we were seeing in front of us.
Think of CGI as almost like the whipped cream atop an ice cream sundae. Of course you will want whipped cream because it adds something special to the overall dish. However, what happens when it seems as though there is too much whipped cream? That particular experience winds up leaving something to be desired. CGI is the same way; too little and the product becomes cheap. If there is too much CGI, though, it stops looking less like an authentic piece of art and more like a synthetically manufactured entity.
As you can probably imagine, CGI can be used poorly and there are a few examples of this. The first "Twilight" film is a great example of this, as its visuals in terms of the CGI werewolves were not exactly the most convincing. While I understand that werewolves are not real and that no film can change that fact, the goal of special effects is to make you believe that what is being shown can be believed. Unfortunately, "Twilight" was a case of me having difficulty as far as suspending my disbelief was concerned.
Unless "Twilight" was supposed to be self-aware - which was not the case - its usage of CGI was underwhelming, to put it mildly. CGI, depending on the party utilizing it, can vary in terms of genuine nature. You may not even realize that you are seeing something that was rendered by computers while you may be able to spot where exactly special features appear phony. In time, one can only hope that movies are able to develop to such a degree that they will be looked at as entirely genuine.
About the Author:
If you are interested in film design and other such fields, please look at art schools in Seattle for further information.. Also published at Can CGI Prove To Be Overexposed?.
No comments:
Post a Comment