The Curse of CGI

Whilst being interviewed on BBC Breakfast this morning, Gary Oldman stated that he disliked CGI (ironic for someone who is currently doing the rounds for the new Robocop). He touted Lord Of The Rings and Thor as examples.

Lord of the Rings is one of my all-time favourite trilogy of films but I do agree with Gary Oldham to a point. The use of CGI as you move through each separate film, gets heavier and heavier until it's completely over the top by Return of the King. When you compare Fellowship and Two Towers, the special effects enhance the story and there is lavish use of expertly made up extras and to scale models. Return of the King throws all its money at CGI and it is the weakest film of the trilogy for it.

As for The Hobbit? Seriously, Peter Jackson? I love those films but you've got a fuck tonne of money to play with,more than you had for LOTR and you're wasting most of it on CGI. Not even good CGI. You couldn't even be bothered to get actors or extras to play Orcs anymore? In the audio commentary for the first Hobbit film, Peter Jackson states:

“You're going see more of it in the second and third movies, but I've kind of been using less prosthetic orcs and more digital orcs, and I'm really happy. I'm doing what I wished I could have done 12 years ago where we didn't really have the means or the technology to do it properly back then, but we do now. So I think our Orcs, certainly coming up in the next two films, are going to be pretty formidable and scary creatures compared to what we have done
in the past."

No, no, no, no. Is it he even watching his own films back any more? Lurtz was the scariest orc out there! (Or Uruk-hai to be more accurate). Look at the scary bastard. I had nightmares about him and I wasn't even a small child, I was 14!

The prosthetics made those films. It made those characters real, tangible and a hell sight more believable than the shoddy orcs we’ve seen in his later films (though props go to detail spent on Smaug). 

Personally I’m a huge fan of an early 90s films that were just getting to grips with CGI, using it sparingly (James Bond: Goldeneye) and still making good use of animatronics (Jurassic Park) or to scale models and reconstructions to minute detail interior sets to balance it out (Titanic). Those films are timeless and memorable – could we say that about some of cinema’s recent offerings? *cough* Superman Returns *cough*. 

Digital technology is moving forward and directors/producers continue to want to play with 43 fps, 3D and other emerging technologies but as a viewer, I find there are few films where this actually seems to work to effect and enhance the film experience (Avatar is a notable example of it working well). Some of the most mindboggling special effects in recent films are still done the old fashion way without the use of CGI – Inception? Yep, they really threw a gallons of water over Leonardo Dicaprio. 

The Joseph Gorden Levitt fight?

Christopher Nolan had his team build a rotating hallway.  

I’m heading to see the new Robocop film this weekend (though based on the reactions on Twitter, I’m not holding out much hope). CGI has to ability to make or break a film these days – perhaps it’s time to go back to the basics?