I’ve got a peeve, and it’s as hot as my pants. I get it; I’m pretty young and am not fully informed on the wonders of ye olde movies from way before my time. So be it, I can deal with it, bro, but what I can’t stand are people who hate on new movies just because they use a lot of CGI.
What I want to do is give CGI (or “the computer stuff” as some people call it) a fair crack of the whip. There are merits to both techniques and I don’t think it’s fair that digitally-created content should get so much stick. It really irks me when people hate on stuff for no real reason; I swear to God some of my conversations have gone something similar to this:
“So why are in-camera effects better than CGI?”
“They just are.”
“Because they are.”
“No, really… why?”
“Shut up, they just are. Deal with it.”
That’s the main problem; these people are the hipsters of the film fraternity. In-camera techniques are old school and, by extent, have to be cool and therefore… better. At least, that’s the logic these people use. It’s bloody daft when you think about it.
There’s an enormous amount of talent involved. These people are artists and blowing our minds is their craft. CGI offers so much to the film industry; it can take us to worlds we’ve never visited or give us a perspective that no in-camera technique ever could. To call it a lazy, soulless endeavour is the epitome of arrogance – there’s a whole profession of hard workers surrounding it.
What Do You Think?
Do you prefer In-Camera effects?
Or do you champion for CGI?
With the advancement of technology, is one really better than the other?
Let us now in the comments