History of CGI

Evolution of CGI in movies

Song: The Servant - cells (instrumental version)

Category:

Entertainment

Tags:

• cgi
• history
• matrix
• fantastic
• four
• King
• Kong
• lord
• of
• the
• rings
• Abyss
• Hollow
• Man
• Spider-man

[MrProset]

CGI doesn't suck,some of it can be really beautifull ,like in videogames watch the final fantasy 13 CGI

[ReinOwader]

Toy Story, Luxo Jr?, Terminator 2? yes you really missed a lot. But still interesting.

[NonstopRam]

@Pavletic111 CGI uses computers and computers constantly update. CGI is able to update.

CGI is not going to be outdated so easily.

[DucatiSayWhat]

DICK @ 2:11 :D

[doltBmB]

@Trekiefreak777 The difference is Yoda in return of the jedi was real. The difference is the bear in AI was real. The difference is the cars in blade runner can really fly and the robot suit used in the end of aliens really works and the queen was a real monster.

Or at least they damn well look real as fuck. CG just only ever looks fake.

[doltBmB]

@danzillaman Avatar is the fakest looking CG film yet. Jurassic Park 1+2 and Star Wars Episode I managed to look completely real with many of their effects, yet the biggest most advanced CG film now looks like a bad video game. It's only been going downhill.

And it's because the early CG films had pro's working on them these days video game kids with no knowledge of real filmmaking are behind the computer screens.

[Pavletic111]

Thus therefore there must be something right in regular imagery in film, because it has been proven to stand it's own in time. Until ofcourse, Lucas totally sold out to the CGI hysteria in the 1990's, hence completely lost his touch of originality and ingenuity he had some 20 years earlier. Too Bad. But I'm not worried, because I think filmmakers are slowly starting to realize this more and more. Just as bellbottoms were cool in 1974, CGI might have been cool in 1998. but it is getting old now.

[Pavletic111]

Or, as well as the bell bottoms pants from the 1970's, they all look comic and corny today. And the outdated CGI from 1990's already looks very fake and corny today. So the question really is, should CGI REALLY TAKE OVER GOOD'OL FILM??? Or should CGI technology be something for it self, and let film be film. The (1977) Star Wars still stands out today, 35 years later, without the 3D CGI, or (1968) Odyssey in Space 2001, still stands out 44 years later.

[Pavletic111]

This CGI hysteria started as a competition among movies made between mid 1990's until now. Showing off who has better "More Expensive" Computer Equipment. However, because of this Total "Fashionable" CGI Hysteria in film, there is now as a result, Lack of Storyline, total lack of ingenuitive character development, and just very little originality in film any more, what so ever. Thus therefore, just as the futuristic hysteria visions of the 1950's and early 60's cars and architecture,

[Pavletic111]

Hence that which is subconscience is actually really the preferable.5. And probably the most important reason is. Because CGI is a Fashion. A temporary thing, yet not necessary at all, as modern feature films have been made for good 65 years before CGI took over, and they had just as much of quality and magic, without CGI. However, it was something "new" and "hip" some 20 years ago when it started, so naturally people went along with it for a while. CGI hysteria started as a competition in 90's.

[Pavletic111]

4. Although people love animation (usually as humor), however, in real life, human subconscience relates with reality of an image, not a realistic reproduction of that reality. Eventhough on the surface we might admire the progress of technology behind it, we subconsciously still prefer the realistic image of our reality. Hence we dream real images, not CGI animated reproduction of faces. No matter how weird the dream might be, it is still a realistic image, when we dream it.