Star Wars: Episode VIII Director Says Episode VII is Ditching CGI

SecondPrize

New member
Mar 12, 2012
1,436
0
0
I can tell you where it happened for me. That rolling ball of brontasauri, or whatever they're called now that bronto has been ditched (also there'r FOUR food groups), in King Kong. I'm all for good CGI, but bad or unnecessary CGI is just the worst. Rehire all your effects guys and model makers and give them explosives to play with rather than fake blowing up fake stuff. It should be fine for lightsabers and blaster effects though.
 

Olas

Hello!
Dec 24, 2011
3,226
0
0
People only complain about CGI when CGI is bad or poorly used. When CGI is convincing and effective people forget they're looking at CGI and just enjoy the movie. If this means we're going to have more ridiculous looking puppets like in the original films, call me disappointed.
 

DeaDRabbiT

New member
Sep 25, 2010
139
0
0
What is the point of being owned by Disney if you aren't going to front load the films with hand build sets/props.

Real things in my opinion lead to real acting, and real acting is what makes a film/s transcend generations.

Looking forward to these movies.
 
Jul 31, 2013
181
0
0
Nimcha said:
Does this guy really think people want to see puppets and tiny models after seeing Avatar? .
One of the biggest problems that a lot of people had with the Prequel Trilogy was that it was absolutely filled with horrible CGI, CGI that could be easily replaced and improved by practical effects. So yes, people want to see "puppets and tiny models" (yeah, that's not how all practical effects work, mate).
 

Ruisu

Enjoy the Silence
Jul 11, 2013
190
0
0
Uuugh...

I really don't mind either CGI or Pratical so long it looks good. I mean, Dark Knight and Man of Steel are both great looking for me, and both are completely focused on those two mindsets. (Nolan is a big pratical effects supporter, Snyder loves it's CGI heavy scenes.)

I mean, I really don't care about this "right use" of CGI bs, hell, I loved Captain Sky and The World of Tomorrow when it came out, and that movie is 90% green screen.
 

immortalfrieza

Elite Member
Legacy
May 2, 2020
2,046
74
53
Country
USA
Trishbot said:
CGI is not the devil. OVERUSE of CGI is the devil.
Addendum: Use of crappy CGI is the devil.

I've seen CGI that has looked more fluid and realistic than anything practical effects have ever pulled off or could pull off, especially with settings that aren't supposed to be realistic to begin with. CGI, even very heavy CGI movies are not bad, it's the fact that so many that use it don't seem to give enough of a damn to do it well that is bad.
 

Haru17

New member
Mar 1, 2014
190
0
0
As someone who plays video games I have no problem with CGI, it's the natural evolution of storytelling. That and the 1980s films aren't exactly visually stunning by modern standards. I really liked the huge battles in the prequel trilogy, even if those movies weren't good. The space fight at the beginning of episode 3 is just awesome to watch. Though, they should probably use physical sets for the characters to act in, like the Hobbit does.
 

Haru17

New member
Mar 1, 2014
190
0
0
DeaDRabbiT said:
What is the point of being owned by Disney if you aren't going to front load the films with hand build sets/props.

Real things in my opinion lead to real acting, and real acting is what makes a film/s transcend generations.

Looking forward to these movies.
The sets do need to be physical for the benefit of the acting, especially in action scenes. But it'll be pretty lame if they have to tell us about the huge space battle happening in orbit or have a dinky little orb represent the death star. GCI is really necessary for the sky boxes and to touch up things like, you know, lightsabers.
 

Nowhere Man

New member
Mar 10, 2013
422
0
0
Haru17 said:
As someone who plays video games I have no problem with CGI, it's the natural evolution of storytelling. That and the 1980s films aren't exactly visually stunning by modern standards. I really liked the huge battles in the prequel trilogy, even if those movies weren't good. The space fight at the beginning of episode 3 is just awesome to watch. Though, they should probably use physical sets for the characters to act in, like the Hobbit does.
The Episode 3 opening battle was definitely cool. The Gungan battle at the end of Episode 1.. not so cool. That hurt my soul even the first time watching it.
 

Zen Bard

Eats, Shoots and Leaves
Sep 16, 2012
704
0
0
This would be so cool if it were actually true.

But I have serious trust issues from anything coming from Abrams and company (and all those associated...)
 

RandV80

New member
Oct 1, 2009
1,507
0
0
There's no critical mass being reached with CGI, rather some people have always complained about CGI. Personally I don't really notice it in the manner that the latter people do. Only complaint about the sequels is that it's use made some of the scenes/aliens a little too busy. Especially in Phantom Menace all of a sudden many of the aliens/droids are way too crazy.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
canadamus_prime said:
Of all the things wrong with the prequels, I think the overuse of CGI was the least of them.
I'm inclined to agree. I'm not in love with CG, but I'd watch an all-CG Star Wars if it was good.
 

Callate

New member
Dec 5, 2008
5,118
0
0
Wait. They're employing Andy Serkis, and they're ditching CGI?

...Does not compute! Does not compute! Does not compute!!!

More seriously, if this is true, I'm inclined to see it as a positive step. If the Red Letter Media Star Wars reviews succeeded in convincing me of one thing, it was that the use of greenscreen sound-stages was crippling what could be done in terms of framing conversations and shots even as it was enabling the worst excesses of Lucas' imagination.

Admittedly, film-makers have gotten better at using CGI in more dynamic ways in the intervening decade-plus, but I still can't help but feel that working within such constraints might be a positive for the new film.
 

Phuctifyno

New member
Jul 6, 2010
418
0
0
*sarcasm = off* Also, they're canon. Get over it.
Nope. The wonderful thing about fiction is nobody gets to truly own it, not even the creators. Canon itself is a bullshit concept and only bought-into by choice. Midichlorians alone are enough of a contradiction from everything Yoda explains about the Force in ESB to short the canon-fuse for me, so fuck them, they're out. If Disney's really as smart as the choices they've been flaunting make them out to be, they'll eventually remake and replace them anyway - there's more than enough demand for the $$$$.

CrazyBlaze said:
Decent? Yeah if you remove the rose tinted glasses. Sure they are a bit of a mess but I still find them fun to watch.
Come-aaahn, if you're taking your rose tinted glasses off to watch Star Wars, you're having fun wrong. Star Wars IS rose tinted glasses, man.

OP: This is obvious but good news. Hope it's true. Opinions on CGI aside, I feel that the grit that came from the sets, locations, and costumes were something integral to the original trilogy's appeal.
 

Killerologist

New member
Jan 31, 2013
9
0
0
Nimcha said:
What a horribly written article.

And what a completely stupid thing to say. Does this guy really think people want to see puppets and tiny models after seeing Avatar? Such crap.
Harsh but funny....and probably true
 

Littaly

New member
Jun 26, 2008
1,810
0
0
Sarge034 said:
We're not reaching CGI critical mass, we just don't like shit films. I mean Guardians of the Galaxy had a metric fuck ton of CGI and it seems to have been received rather well...
Yeah, my thought too. For all the spectacle in that movie, the most mind blowing thing was watching the giant wall of text that was the animation credits ^^

Also, boy I wish I had the job of marketing Star Wars Episode VII to geeks, that has got to be the easiest job in the universe. "You know that thing you hated, yeah, we're not doing that", and then just stand there taking the applause :p

Oh well, most things can be done good, anything can be done bad. It remains to be seen how this one ends up.
 

XDSkyFreak

New member
Mar 2, 2013
154
0
0
Oh. Yey? Honest to god perspective people. Fucking perspective. CGI, overabundent, crap or underused or anything NEVER ruined a movie. The shit writing, inept directing and horrible acting ruined a movie. The prequels were crap BECAUSE the story was moronic, the directing was amateurish crap and the actors were planks of wood with faces drawn on, not because of the way they did their special effects. Jeesus, sometimes I'm concerned for the intelligence of the movie going public (then again the new TMNT was 1st at the box office, so why the fuck do I even bother).

Oh, they are not using so much CGI, big fucking deal. Call me when you ditch that fucktard Abrams who has no place near Star Wars after what he did to Star Trek, and when money grubbing Disney isn't involved anymore.
 

alj

Master of Unlocking
Nov 20, 2009
335
0
0
CGI is not a bad thing you just need to use it correctly , use it to enhance shots not create everything in the film.

Look at lord of the rings they used loads of CGI but for most shots it was in addition to a miniature or to enhance a location and so on, sure there where fully digital shots but only when it was not possible or practical to build something.

That'a now to use CGI, what you should not do it place all your actors on a green screen 100% of the time.
 

Sutter Cane

New member
Jun 27, 2010
534
0
0
aying that the Star Wars prequels were bad is easy. Anyone with eyes, ears and the ability to experience nausea (an inevitable side effect of using said eyes and ears) can tell you that the films are garbage.
Welp glad to see that as someone who enjoys the prequels that I apparently am not welcome as part of the community, or at the very least that I am to be regarded as someone without working eyes or ears. Way to make me feel at home in your community.
 

YodaUnleashed

New member
Jun 11, 2010
221
0
0
Hmmm a click-bait headline that is inaccurate; and I thought the Escapist had good journalists. 'Cutting back' on CGI and 'ditching' CGI are two very different things, and Rian Johnson nowhere in these excerpts or in the full interview ever says they're 'ditching' it outright. Also, way to go in alienating any readers from the onset that actually like and enjoy the prequels and don't consider them 'garbage'. Nothing wrong with expressing your opinion but using less inflammatory language goes a long way to keeping things even-handed for your readers, if you even care about that of course.