Hello!

jjl's thread reminded me of something I've been meaning to ask.

I'm certain that I'm not the only one who's noticed that moviemakers are relying more and more on CGI for their special effects. I assume that this results in costs being lower and in the moviemakers having more direct control over what's being done.

However, I've noticed that, in many cases, moviemakers are tending more and more towards sacrificing the quality of the effects in the name of cost. The first place I noticed this was in the movie Air Force One, where many scenes were blatantly computer-animated (to the point where some scenes, notably the water scene at the very end, actually pixellated!)...

It's not just the bubblegum action movies doing this either...I've noticed this phenomena even on "good" movies such as the new Star Wars trilogy (and the scenes that George Lucas re-did for the Special Edition of the original trilogy).

However, it's been shown that CGI can be done properly and made to integrate with the rest of the movie without looking out-of-place...for instance, in Jurassic Park (the first one, not the knock-offs!), I have difficulty telling which dinosaurs are actual models and which are CGI. IIRC (it's been a while since I saw them) the Lord of the Rings movies did a similarly good job at integrating CGI.

I just wish that more people were still interested enough in the art of filmmaking to make an effort to make things look better...

Am I the only one who's noticed this? Anyone care to comment on this?

__________________
2001 VW Jetta TDI, 5 speed, daily driver
1991 Ford F-350, work in progress
1984 Ford F-250 4x4, 6.9l turbo diesel, 5 speed manual
Previous oilburners: 1980 IH Scout, 1984 E-350, 1985 M-B 300D, 1979 M-B 300SD, 1983 M-B 300D
Spark-free since 1999