For years, the operating wisdom amongst fans has been that practical effects are superior whenever possible to practical effects. It is one of the many reasons so many (myself included) loved what Christopher Nolan achieved with his Batman movies, which used so many practical and analog special effects that it "hid" the CGI in almost seamlessly (like when the real motorcycle all of a sudden would do a very unreal spin-turn).
Similarly, there have long been complaints about too much CGI in Spider-Man movies, or too much CGI in Iron Man movies.
Well now, it feels like we might have turned a corner. We got our first look this week at a very practical effects Apocalypse from X-Men: Apocalypse, and the near universal reaction has been disappointment. I include myself in that camp. While it's admirable they tried to do it all with make-up, it will now rest solely on Oscar Isaac (an amazing actor) to make something that hideous work.
In its place, I am hearing fans championing motion capture and comparing it to Ultron or Thanos. Yet, Ultron and Thanos are both entirely CGI, motion-capture or not.
Have effects reached the point where fans prefer CGI? Or is it just a change in the fandom paradigm as younger fans grow up in a world where they have always had CGI in all their movies?
It is an interesting shift I noticed. And as a proponent of practical, at least in this latest fan reaction moment, I am leaning toward the CG argument. So, is there a change in expectation?
Also, please no need to flame anyone in this thread for their opinion.
Similarly, there have long been complaints about too much CGI in Spider-Man movies, or too much CGI in Iron Man movies.
Well now, it feels like we might have turned a corner. We got our first look this week at a very practical effects Apocalypse from X-Men: Apocalypse, and the near universal reaction has been disappointment. I include myself in that camp. While it's admirable they tried to do it all with make-up, it will now rest solely on Oscar Isaac (an amazing actor) to make something that hideous work.
In its place, I am hearing fans championing motion capture and comparing it to Ultron or Thanos. Yet, Ultron and Thanos are both entirely CGI, motion-capture or not.
Have effects reached the point where fans prefer CGI? Or is it just a change in the fandom paradigm as younger fans grow up in a world where they have always had CGI in all their movies?
It is an interesting shift I noticed. And as a proponent of practical, at least in this latest fan reaction moment, I am leaning toward the CG argument. So, is there a change in expectation?
Also, please no need to flame anyone in this thread for their opinion.
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire