Why does modern CGI look so bad?

Every time I watch an action movie now (like, say, in the past 10 years) I never really feel immersed, because the CGI is so over the top and blatant that it always pulls me right out of the movie. Marvel films, the Jurassic world films, the Star Wars films, the CGI is always just so OBVIOUS that it looks too congruous with everything else

Of course I know that special effects have ALWAYS been a sticking point for action movies and they have often always been awkward placed next to real actors and locations. But I dont understand why movie studios are so committed to using super obvious CGI for everything.

Other urls found in this thread:

fxguide.com/featured/the-techniques-used-in-the-blade-runner-2049-hologram-sex-scene/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Because you're watching a shitty web-dl instead of a BD-Remux

because hollywood has realized that only autists get upset at bad cgi. and they'll still watch a movie 50 times just to shit on it.

Oversaturation
CG is only unnoticeable and 'good' when applied surgically and sparsely.

I hate that cgi has completely taken over practical effects and costumes. Who thought a CG Yoda looked more real than Muppet Yoda?

Special effects in movies used to be fun to watch. Even if it wasn't 100% convincing, it always gave you that nice "WOW how the FUCK did they do THAT?" feel, instead of today when you always know it's just boring CGI

Porgs weren't cig.

TLJ might have been a steaming pile of dogshit but I liked the Porgs.

...

Me. Puppet yoda looks like shit

The prequels had the best CGI. Space battles in Nu Wars are so sterile, so clunky and obviously CGI that they're not even immersive. Take the opening battle of Revenge of the Sith and compare it to Rian Johnson's opening TLJ battle.

>Every time I watch an action movie now (like, say, in the past 10 years) I never really feel immersed, because the CGI is so over the top and blatant that it always pulls me right out of the movie

Yeah fucking spaceships, superpowers an lightsabers are real inmmersing factors too.
Jesus man jus enjoy a movie it's all obviously a trick.

>le CGI boogeyman meme
CGI itself is not bad, it's bad when it's used out of laziness and lack of ideas.
Even other recent movies praised for their practical effects (Fury Road, Interstellar, BR2049) have a shitload of CGI in them too, but it's used as a tool to touch up and improve the already set ideas and set pieces.

Every Fincher film has more CGI than a standard Hollywood blockbuster. Literally every interior scene is shot on a sound stage. Every time you see blood in a Fincher film you can be sure it's CGI. The Social Network has more VFX shots than the 2014 Godzilla. And no one ever notices a thing.

Full CGI sequences work only if the director knows exactly what he wants, but in most cases the director just hires an army of CGI rendering slaves from a visual effects company and tells them only general guidelines of how he wants something to look, leaving the company to be the actual creative part which is an impossible task because it's a whole army of people trying to form a singular piece.

CGI is just a tool like any other, you just need to know how and when to use it.

Are you retarded? The prequel CGI is terrible, and their space battles were a mess. Those movies sucked in every way

>The prequels had the best CGI.
yeah they sure did user, it's practically real life

I feel the same way. I haven't been WOWED by a special effect in what feels like decades.

The last movie that really blew me away in how it looked was Social Network because of how clear and beautiful it was

Beauty and the beast had absolutely terrible cgi and everybody loved it

>I haven't been WOWED by a special effect in what feels like decades.
What about Blade Runner 2049? Most people didn't even notice that Ana De Armas was completely CGI'd in the threesome scene.
fxguide.com/featured/the-techniques-used-in-the-blade-runner-2049-hologram-sex-scene/

any chance of getting hold of the 3d model?

I can respect your opinion man, but saying ''it's just boring CGI'' is so far from what the work actually is.

I think this feeling stands from the fact that people can comprehend how a pratical effect is made, because it's real and everybody has experience building shit. While CGI is ''just computer magic'' to the untrained when it can be such a fucking amazing tool.

I'm a VFX artist and I do get that ''how the FUCK did they do THAT'' from time to time nowadays, but I feel like that's because I have a lot of understanding of how CGI works.

So as an VFX Artist, what do you think about the special effects on the prequel trilogy?

I don't know what you're implying. That detail in the Boga's design is really good.

>use CGI where no other type of special effect will work
>"""amateur critics""" hate it by simply knowing it couldn't have been done any other way

>trying this hard to fit in

...

>t-t-t-hey fix it in the blurays!
You sound a lot like the faggots on Sup Forums that say the same thing about terribly animated anime

Maybe they shouldn't include the stuff in the first place then, if there is no other way to convincingly put it in the movie?

Extremely terrible compositing of green screen footage with CGI resulting in floating heads of actors on top of CGI bodies, floating Obi Wan on top of Boga, atrocious mismatch of lighting between the two footages and overall extremely terrible and immediately dated texture work across the whole frame.
Just look at that blaster in the lower left corner, it's like they forgot to even fully render it.

And this is not a special nitpick frame, it's prominant across the entire film.

Phantom Menace didn't age well at all, Attack of the Clones too, Revenge of the Sith suprisingly holds pretty well to today's standard. It's not Blade Runner good but I feel like Kingsman The Golden Circle was on part with EpIII's VFX.
I sometimes feel like VFX really peaked in the late 2000, The first Transformers, Iron Man or Davy Jones from PotC2 all still looks incredible.

Praising the prequels would be trying to fit in around here.

And enough with this revisionist history. The prequels were garbage in every aspect

>Phantom Menace didn't age well at all,
I saw the podracing yesterday, TPM was showing on cable, HD big screen the whole shebangs. These 5 minutes of podrace have aged like a millésime french wine. It's still amazing and very very well done. I really do not understand how anyone can diss on it.
The naboo battle with the clone army and the gungans has aged, no question. But the podrace? fucking hell that scene is an achievement in VFX as far as I am concerned.

Who was Stan Winston?
Who was Ray Harryhausen?

...

>that Reddit spacing
Yeah, your opinion doesn't exactly hold up here.

>The prequels had the best CGI
AAAAAHAHHAHAHAHAHAH

>Watching TLJ
>Yoda appears
>tmw a tv series on the sci-fi channel has better practical effects than a multimillion dollar film by Disney

haha yeah, actually talking about Television & Film? are you an autist lmao xDD

>that non-argument
That is't reddit spacing either, newfriend. Keep trying to fit in though

yeah let's just keep using buzzwords and criticise an over saturated promo pic someone found on google lol

Literally not a single buzzword used.