5 ms·
Bad CGI is often just bad cinematography. The ability to have a camera anywhere goes to some animators and studios heads, and so the viewer sees something diffe
by thinkingemote 4y ago
Bad CGI is often just bad cinematography. The ability to have a camera anywhere goes to some animators and studios heads, and so the viewer sees something different than normal framed shots. Avatar was really bad for this. The first Tron film had good cinematography.
- cal85 4y agoThere’s a newish David Attenborough–narrated CGI nature documentary about dinosaurs, and I think it suffers from something like this. The photorealism is top notch but it still looks fake. At first I thought it was that the dinosaurs’ movement felt off, but I now think it’s more that the the cinematography doesn’t feel enough like a nature doc. It feels more like a cinematic feature, where everything about the framing and mise en scene is intentional and beautiful, too much so. Bits of blurred foliage in front of the subject feel like a DOP’s intentional ‘dirty frame’ rather than something that accidentally got in the way of the (imaginary) camera operator while they tried to get their shot of a fleeting animal moment. It’s all just too nice and considered. Or maybe it’s just that I know it’s fake because it’s dinosaurs, making this an unsolvable problem, I’m not sure.
- InCityDreams 4y agoI see every movie in the same light. I know it's just a bunch of actors and directors and gaffers stitching together various shots and scenes, so occasionally it is a real treat to watch something and forget all that.