Quote:
Originally Posted by HOZ
Well you are talking to someone who really enjoys CGI when it enhances the movie and has a good friend who does the CGI on movies like Ironman. But there is a point when it becomes too much. CGI is a great enhancer. Once it becomes THE movie then were are back to cartoons. Nothing wrong with cartoons, I like them. But how about a story to go with it.
Beowulf was the first and it was painful to watch. I am sure this will be much the same. The WOW factor of CGI has rubbed off. A story about big, bad humans try to take over the world and blue (and bigger) ewoks (who are one with Gaia  ) fight back and win story is really zzzzzzzzzzz. Time for a real story. |
So can you please list the movies that you like and don't like? I'd like to be able to see what you think is the right amount of CGI and what exactly a good story is.
Take Iron Man for example. Sure it was an ok fun movie but it certainly wasn't an amazing film. Well compared to Transformers it was amazing and had a great story but compared to a movie like LOTR the story was seriously lacking.
I'm just not sure why you equate CGI with no story. Sure some movies have relied on excessive CGI and had no story but there are dozens of movies that don't have CGI and are still bad.
CGI and story may be correlated but as we all know that does not equal causation. There is no reason for anyone to believe, as you seem to, that lots of CGI equals bad story. CGI has nothing to do with it. Are you telling me Made of Honor and The Proposal were good movies just because they had no CGI?
Your viewpoint seems to suggest that. Since CGI automatically makes a movie bad then it follows that no CGI should make the story good. However we all know that isn't true.