The (DIS)ILLUSION of CGI effects
May 15th 2008 00:22
Now before I launch into my tirade, let me make it clear that CGI effects in movies frequently look incredibly impressive and justifiably need to be used because there would be no other way to realistically achieve the look the director desires. Movies such as Steven Spielberg’s Jurassic Park (1993) and The Lost World (1997), and Peter Jackson’s The Lord of the Rings trilogy (2001-03) and King Kong (2005) are perfect examples.
What frustrates and, ultimately, disappoints me is the use (and there seems to be more and more of it) of CGI effects being employed in horror movies in place of the “old school” prosthetic, mechanical and animatronic effects. Call me old fashioned but I just don’t buy it. They don’t have nearly the same visceral power or palpable impact as effects which are engineered and executed in front of the camera and filmed!
Take for example the “re-imagining” (Hmph! Re-imagine my arse!) of Day of the Dead (2008). It has some token prosthetic make-up on the zombie faces adding wounds and lacerations, but the camera never lingers long enough to appreciate the effects work (probably because the make-up wasn’t that good in the first place). But virtually all the gore and blood effects have been CGI-ed. It’s abysmal.
You never really feel that horrified, even though zombie heads are being lopped off left right and centre. And the actually colour and consistency of the blood is not realistic enough, it’s this weird hue and looks like kinda gloopy. Okay, okay, so there are dozens of horror movies that don’t get the blood the right colour and consistency and aren’t using CGI. But at least they’re mixing a batch up every day and preparing squibs!
Damn, I could tell you a few things about fake blood. I worked on Peter Jackson's Braindead (1991) and there was more blood being pumped on set than any other horror movie up to that point, possibly still holds a record. The zombie massacre finale (which took around two weeks to film) left the interior house set stinking something chronic; a sickly sweet smell that if you were unlucky to be hungover on set (and crew frequently were) you were in for a rough day at work.
The blood was made up of a special formula that included corn syrup, starch, and red food colouring. It was quite brilliant actually. It looked damn realistic! But it was a nightmare to clean off anything it came into contact with, apart from skin. Sounds like real blood to me.
One day I was hanging around with the special effects boys and they were setting up one of the pressurised gallons of blood in preparation to pump blood on set. Several of us were close by when the technician fiddling with the gauge uttered a very ominous “Uh-oh!” quickly followed by a, “Everybody get back! Now!” Suddenly the top of the vessel burst and a gallon of blood jetted everywhere. Thankfully I avoided being doused in the red sauce, but boy, what a sight to behold that was; a huge geyser of fake blood exploding like a scarlet volcano!
Movies such as Ridley Scott’s Alien (1979), John Carpenter’s The Thing (1982), Sam Raimi’s The Evil Dead (1982), George Romero’s Day of the Dead (1985), and Stuart Gordon’s Re-Animator (1985) could not be the brilliantly and viscerally powerful horror movies they are if their special effects make-up work had been digitally generated by a computer. It’s a simple fact. By having the effects work actually there with the actors in three dimensions being caught on film (or on digital video as will be the case more and more) the end result is so much more resonant.
It should be that when an effect is simply too difficult to achieve convincingly through the use of prosthetics or mechanics, that’s when you employ the digital artists, and only then. But of course, it’s a cost cutting measure these days. It’s actually cheaper to have a couple of people sitting in front of a computer punching numbers and letters into a keyboard and fiddling with a mouse than it is to have a crew of technicians armed with an array of hardware and soft and hard materials, stanind by on-set. It’s software vs. hardware. And the soft option wins.
I’ll finish with a fine example of when CGI effects are used intelligently: the dinner dénouement in Hannibal (2003). There was no way Ridley Scott could’ve shown in the same wide shot the real Ray Liotta talking and moving whilst Anthony Hopkins sliced slivers of Ray’s brain from his exposed cranium and popped them into a little sauté pan. Bon appetite!
Here's an example of old school effects and just how brilliant they are. They don't make 'em like this anymore:
Peter Jackson's King Kong embraces CGI superbly
For a director who says he loves his old school, Rob Zombie used too much CGI for my liking
You never really feel that horrified, even though zombie heads are being lopped off left right and centre. And the actually colour and consistency of the blood is not realistic enough, it’s this weird hue and looks like kinda gloopy. Okay, okay, so there are dozens of horror movies that don’t get the blood the right colour and consistency and aren’t using CGI. But at least they’re mixing a batch up every day and preparing squibs!
Nothin' like a zombie mum slidin' her fingers through a nurse's cheeks!
Nothin' like a zombie nurse chewin' the lips off a priest!
One day I was hanging around with the special effects boys and they were setting up one of the pressurised gallons of blood in preparation to pump blood on set. Several of us were close by when the technician fiddling with the gauge uttered a very ominous “Uh-oh!” quickly followed by a, “Everybody get back! Now!” Suddenly the top of the vessel burst and a gallon of blood jetted everywhere. Thankfully I avoided being doused in the red sauce, but boy, what a sight to behold that was; a huge geyser of fake blood exploding like a scarlet volcano!
The chestburster from Alien ... 'nuff said
The Thing ... You gotta be fucking kidding!
It's what's under Ray Liotta's cap that really counts
Here's an example of old school effects and just how brilliant they are. They don't make 'em like this anymore:
| 106 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by Damo
For the Sake of Argument
My Apologetics
Love that scene.
As much as we love the old steam engine days they are passing. Sooner or later the CGI will catch up or the old school will develop a new break through.
Some movies from the eighties did have dodgy monsters.
It gets down to dollars per inch of film verses quality per inch.
A lot of CGI fails because the technology is trying to go beyond its design limits and produce something that cannot be done in your own bedroom. Others fail because of budget. You need a render farm to make most things these days. Up to 1000 PC's, or Power Macs, or even Suns. It is not cheap to do. So short cuts are made and the monster misses out.
Also we have people who are fascinated by technology but know nothing about story or atmosphere. They have a list of mind blowing effects that they want but don't know why.
Then there are those who break the golden rule of scaring someone shitless. They show the entire monster in scene one so we get used to it. Whatever happened to letting peoples imagination play on their fears.
Nup.
Act one Scene One: Here is the monster. Isn't scary boys and girls?
Scene two: Here it is again.
Scene Three: Have a better look at it. It took hours to render and we are very proud of it.
Scene four: And again...Hey why are you asleep? Don't you know how proud we are to show this monster to the point that you cease to be afraid of it?
Comment by Mountain Fog
Infognito
Also, the problems with blue screen accentuate the eye line match etc, as production cannot see what the total enviroment is like until way after principle photography has ended, often too late to do anything about it.
However, some clever versions are about, like the guys who developed "Intravision", which was a system that allowed all cgi effects and the total enviroment in a lot of cases to be pre-produced, then at principle photography, it was melded together as the actors were shot, resulting in rushes showing the complete enviroment. This meant it was virtually impossble to tell what was there and what was not.
In fact, to prove to us how effective their system was compared to the blue screen system, they showed us a show reel, at Colourfilm, (the processing laboratory all film companies here use..well..in my time it was), and after each short, movies like "Stand By Me", we were asked to say what was not there.
We got it wrong every time! That train, chasing the kids, it wasn't there! However, they were trying to overcome an entrenched system, blue screen, and its owners and users were highly resistant to Intravision's incredible develpoment.
Blood is notoriously difficult, for theatre I was taught an old English recipe, but it still did not look right, but it was a toss up between washable, or buying a new shirt, for instance, every night.
Blood, of course, has many hues, depending on where it came from (to the heart is dark, from the heart is bright) and how long it has been exposed to light, to recreate that realistically is a huge fiddly problem, particularly in regards to continuity. As you would know, the SFX people usually adjust it to look more bright red, no matter the source, such is the world of 'entertainment'.
That blood pump situaltion was funny...you wouldn't remember the name of who was in charge of SFX for that film?
cheers
fog
Comment by Bryn
Horrorphile
Damo, love your monster example. A great example of doing it right is Spielberg's slow reveal of the shark in Jaws. For the first half all you really see is a giant fin, which is why the first half of the movie is so fucking scary! I guess Jaws is a good example also of where a well CGI-ed shark would probably looked more convincing than ol' Brucey, which we see more and more of during the second half and who doesn't hold up very well when watched today ...
Fog, yeah, blood be difficult alright. I also remember being shown a pictorial forensic book on violent crime scenes which was the special effects team's bible. But Richard Taylor, the main man, genius actually, like Jackson, quickly pointed out that if they tried to duplicate the kinds of wounds and injuries sustained to the victims in the photographs most audiences wouldn't be able to comprehend the extremities of them. Basically, the injuries are so ghastly they actually don't look physically possible or realistic. So the team only used the book as a guide.
Comment by Morgan Bell
Deep Pencil
Current Business News
Movie Train
Artist Quirk
also, i could be wrong, but did it seem like the most recent Star Wars films (the ones starring Natalie Portman) were hinging their storylines on CGI action sequences, like the plot would actually pause and lose momentum to include unnecessarily long and elaborate graphics sequences?
Comment by Bryn
Horrorphile
And yes, I'm a huge fan of the first two Star Wars movies (episodes IV & V), but found the recent trilogy (episodes I - III) very disappointing, for precisely that reason, too much reliance on CGI ... Also the acting was dodgy, the dialogue dreadful, and the whole tone of the movies seemed to aimed at ten-year-olds, where, correct me if I'm wrong, but part of the charm of episodes IV & V were that there were levels that worked well for adults and others that worked well for kids. As you can see I'm passionate about areas of sf as well as horror ...
Comment by Morgan Bell
Deep Pencil
Current Business News
Movie Train
Artist Quirk
maybe they saved on scriptwriters and just re-produced the same storyboard? lol
i love good sci-fi too . . . i dont care if its nerdy!
Comment by Mountain Fog
Infognito
about Star Wars, and I totally agree, the later episodes were mercilessly directed at the ten year old market, and the appearance of...shudder..YA YA Binks...god I wanted to storm the projection booth and destroy the reel right there and then!
That character, as well as being a bad cgi, was sooo nauseatingly infuriating I wanted to scream! I was angry at Lucas for ages after that.
He sold out to the money people of course, and I wonder what he actually thinks of that episode particularly.
I am also a great scifi enthusiast, and I really hate it when they stuff up the 'suspension of disbelief', by doing things that do not work, or are logically improbable, stupid or impossible.
soo loved 2001...nothing has come close since, that I have seen, although my film watching has well and truly dropped off, there maybe good ones out there. (oh yes, Alien 1 was terrific)
cheers
fog
Comment by James Rickard
unlucky_ fishermen.com
Angling Fish
Speaking of WWII, I watched The Longest Day for the umpteenth time a couple of weeks ago. A view of a beach landing from a German plane was incredible! Will we ever see something like that again? AND it was interesting seeing actual parachute landings in the movie compared to the HBO production Band of Brothers. I realize the comparison isn't all that fair because we're comparing a major motion picture to a TV production and technology from the 60's to modern techniques, but the use of CGI by Band of Brothers took something away and ruined an otherwise great production.
Comment by Ayda
Phantasmelodia
The Star Wars prequels, as you mentioned as an example, seem to center around special effects way more than they do on a decent plot. Like any other Star Wars fan, I had high hopes from the prequels but they failed to impress me.
These movies look amazing but lack feeling.
I'll have Carpenter's Halloween or Cunningham's Friday the 13th any day to today's horror movies... Unfortunately they keep remaking them and ending up with nothing more than flattering the original.
Comment by Cibbuano
20/20 Filmsight
Science News
Hunt Famous
Orble Post of the Day
Fat Cult
Techbreak
Bryn, you know I'm not a fan of CGI, especially in horror. Just because you CAN use CGI to realize the most disturbing thing you can think of, doesn't mean you should. I think more sci-fi and horror movies should go back to basics: prosthetics and clever implementation.
Comment by Bryn
Horrorphile
Morgan, so what are some of your sf faves then?
Fog, have you seen Solaris? THX-1138? Dark Star? La Jetee?
James, pretty soon no longer will you hear the party line "Yeah, I was an extra in that huge crowd scene in ..."
Ayda, welcome! I'll champion Halloween til the day I die! Why can't they just re-release fresh new prints of the classics instead of plundering them with lame, over-produced remakes ... ?
Cibby, word.
Comment by Wayne F
Bucket Movies
I hate movies that overuse the CGI effects (look at the new Star Wars Trilogy). I HATED I Am Legend's CGI bullshit zombies/vampire mutant things. It was the worst thing that I've ever seen and took away from the movie's suspense and horror. Had they went with the awesome zombies from the Dawn of the Dead remake it would have added a better feel to it.
I like Rob Zombie's movies (Bryn's gonna kill me
Nice article Bryn!
Comment by Damo
For the Sake of Argument
My Apologetics
This sort of reminds me of the debates that occurred when synthesizers were introduced into modern music.
So said that they were not real instruments other claimed that they were.
CGI verses Puppets. Hmmm?
Comment by Morgan Bell
Deep Pencil
Current Business News
Movie Train
Artist Quirk
ooo a nerdy book to make me even nerdier! haha
i laugh but im actually googling it as we speak!
Bryn,
on TV im just obsessed with Battlestar Gallactica and loved Star Trek Next Gen and Voyager
i actually count some of the more recent Star Trek films as some of my all time favourite movies: Nemesis and First Contact
i mostly like films with androids or clones or genetic engineering or some kind of technology challenging ethics
Alien, Terminator, Blade Runner, A.I., Soldier, The Matrix, Aeon Flux, The Island, Gattaca, The Final Cut, Serenity etc
generally not a big fan of badly explained time travel or random alien invasions . . . more the lofty questioning of what it is to be human? and the "nature vs nuture" debate
what are some of your sci-fi faves?
Comment by Bryn
Horrorphile
Blade Runner (also my all-time fave film as well)
Alien
Solaris
The Thing
THX-1138
Dark Star
The Matrix
The Terminator
Planet of the Apes
Tetsuo: Iron Man & Tetsuo II: Body Hammer
La Jetee (The Jetty)
Star Wars: A New Hope
Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back
The Time Machine
Starship Troopers
RoboCop
Brazil
... there that's a few.
Comment by Morgan Bell
Deep Pencil
Current Business News
Movie Train
Artist Quirk
Comment by Mountain Fog
Infognito
Bryn,
yes Solaris, THX-1138, and Dark Star were fabulous!!
And Blade Runner too, loved that madly.
It makes the selection so much harder doesn't it?
I liked the original The Thing and The Time Machine, but have not seen their remakes.
Actually, while we are on the 50's and 60's era, "Them" was great, and there was a whole series of silly ones that were fun too, The 50 Foot Woman, etc (you had to be in the right frame of mind, or out of it!) and both The War of the Worlds were fab. even with mister Scientology in the remake, I still thought it a good movie.
Iron man I have not seen. I have seen the $30 million art work some con man did, it is Iron Man, a manequin version, and he got paid 30 mill for it...go figure!
I also liked The Matrix (hated the last one though) I liked RoboCop and Terminator was great of course, I want Arnie to do another one actually, I hear they are making another Terminator, but no word on who plays Arnie's part, have you heard anything?
The Hitcher, which I cannot remember properly...must of been a bit "tired" when I saw it, but Rutger Hauger is great in some films, like Blade Runner of course. I've worked with Hauger, on a terrible flop, bu that's another story!
cheers
fog
Comment by Mountain Fog
Infognito
have you seen an oldie (not the remake which I heard was crap), The Bad Seed....now that film was amazing becasue of the child star lead, and the incredible character acotrs in support. One hell of an evil kid!!
Oh, and I loved Pet Cemetary....well....I know...but I loved it when the little dude says to "gramps", "I've played with mommy, I've played with Uncle Jedd, now I wanna play with yeeeewwww!!!!" or words to that effect...a fun moment anyway! the gramps guy was played by Fred Gwynne, wonderful old character he was too.
cheers
fog
Comment by Damo
For the Sake of Argument
My Apologetics
Darks Star killed me with laughter from the terrible beach ball monster.
Comment by Bryn
Horrorphile
The remake of The Thing is a classic. The remake of The Time Machine is terrible. I really enjoyed Spielberg's War of the Worlds too, but didn't like the ending. I loved The Matrix, but didn't like the sequels nearly as much, yeah Revolutions was absurd. I reviewed The Bad Seed, read it here
Damo, yeah the ball monster is a hoot!
Comment by Morgan Bell
Deep Pencil
Current Business News
Movie Train
Artist Quirk
Comment by Bryn
Horrorphile
Speaking of Guy Pearce, I so admire him as an actor! Memento is one of my favourite films, which is kinda sf-ish. I interviewed him years ago when Priscilla came out. Lovely guy.
Comment by Morgan Bell
Deep Pencil
Current Business News
Movie Train
Artist Quirk
Momento was brilliant and unique, i really enjoyed it, but i think my favourite character role of his was as Andy Warhol in Factory Girl . . . i was blown away, he really nailed it CLICKHERE for "Factory Girl" review