> CGI now somehow looks worse than VFX 10-30 years ago despite the insanely better tech "Toupees always look so fake. I can spot them instantly. I can't imagin

> CGI now somehow looks worse than VFX 10-30 years ago despite the insanely better tech "Toupees always look so fake. I can spot them instantly. I can't imagine why anyone wears them." Maybe that example is less pointed now that baldness seems more socially acceptable, but the point stands: Of course you see bad CGI, in that you notice that the CGI you're intended to notice is sometimes flawed. You don't see CGI the moviemaker doesn't want you to see, CGI used to clean up shots, CGI used to replace what would have been matte shots decades ago, and whatever else CGI is used for these days. You see a scene and it registers as a scene, not a shot with some obvious CGI composited in. Recursing, some matte shots were horrible and obvious, whereas others, like Dana Barret's apartment building in Ghostbusters, were pretty seamless.