#1  
Old 02-18-2010, 08:21 AM
horrorsniped's Avatar
horrorsniped horrorsniped is offline
Evil Dead
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 109
Smile CGI killing horror movies?

Reason why the 70's, 80s' and 90's produced great horror movies was because there was no CGI in the movies! All the costumes and sickening scenes were all done by the FX team. Number one movie to come to mind is John Carpenter's "The Thing" with Rob Bottin and his work creating all those monsters from his own hands. THATS WHAT HORROR IS ABOUT! Not this cheap ass crap that cuts costs and takes the "fright" out of the movies. I guess I am 1341st person to talk about this lol. I know one thing is for certain....I won't be running to see The Wolfman anytime soon :cool:

http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TevQS4qgE_Q
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-18-2010, 09:12 AM
Ferox13's Avatar
Ferox13 Ferox13 is offline
Innsmouth Swim Team Coach


 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,975
CGI/Make up was done pretty well in The Wolfman..

It wasn't over done and stuck to a design similar to Chaney's version..

CGI does really fall down when it comes to doing gore and blood..
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-18-2010, 09:39 AM
neverending's Avatar
neverending neverending is offline
Cranky

 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,416
Your time frame is a bit off. The first movie to use cgi effects was Westworld, in 1973.
__________________
Lee Widener, Author Website

Cartoon Artwork, Underground Art, Other Weird Stuff
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-18-2010, 01:29 PM
UngodlyWarlock's Avatar
UngodlyWarlock UngodlyWarlock is offline
Evil Dead
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by neverending View Post
Your time frame is a bit off. The first movie to use cgi effects was Westworld, in 1973.
Yeah, but it's pretty clear what he's talking about and he's not talking about that.

I agree with the OP, though...I don't understand how CGI blood in some of these B-movies lately is cheaper than just buying a gallon of stage blood and tossing it about. If you have a budget of 5 bucks, I'd still rather see cutaways and suggested kills than tons of CGI nonsense. It *can* be pulled off in some movies where a lot of money is dumped into it or if it's meant to be stylized like 300 or something, but most of the time it looks like bad CGI even for 1994.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-18-2010, 02:00 PM
Ferox13's Avatar
Ferox13 Ferox13 is offline
Innsmouth Swim Team Coach


 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,975
Quote:
Originally Posted by UngodlyWarlock View Post
Yeah, but it's pretty clear what he's talking about and he's not talking about that.

I agree with the OP, though...I don't understand how CGI blood in some of these B-movies lately is cheaper than just buying a gallon of stage blood and tossing it about. If you have a budget of 5 bucks, I'd still rather see cutaways and suggested kills than tons of CGI nonsense. It *can* be pulled off in some movies where a lot of money is dumped into it or if it's meant to be stylized like 300 or something, but most of the time it looks like bad CGI even for 1994.
Actually I think he was refering to CGI monsters mostly...

I think the new King Kong. District 9 and the LOTR used CGI to great effect..
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-18-2010, 02:49 PM
horrorsniped's Avatar
horrorsniped horrorsniped is offline
Evil Dead
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 109
I should have been more specific since I didn't ask when the first time CGI was used in horror movies. Nightmare on Elm Street, Friday the 13th, Exorcist, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The Thing, Halloween, Candyman, Night-Return-Dawn-Day-of the living dead, etc.. All these great horror flicks had the real "feel" to it. Someone�s brains were torn off you felt the realism in it. I was sold time and time again. You appreciate all the work put into making the movie, especially with the FX teams. To be more specific, for me I never had to analyze a movie before and say,"Gee I wonder how long it took them to create that on computer" because everything was done hands-on which is why everything felt so real. Movies now where I see a computer made monster turns me off so much, this is why I started switching to Asian horror movies. Sure they are implementing some CGI but most movies are not which is why I say CGI is ruining American released horror movies. Every horror movie for the past 10 times I've seen in theaters has REALLY turned me off. Disappointed in every way. Dead Silence was the only new movie to catch my attention because the producers themselves have a mission which is to make movies without CGI.

However, this is my view and I believe threes a generation difference. I've been raised with special FX, not CGI.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-18-2010, 03:01 PM
neverending's Avatar
neverending neverending is offline
Cranky

 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 12,416
No, you didn't ask when cgi was first used, but I thought I would provide that info because you made this statement:

Quote:
Reason why the 70's, 80s' and 90's produced great horror movies was because there was no CGI in the movies!
Which led me to velieve you were a bit confused, perhaps. Perhaps you should go see some indie low-budget films like Paranormal Activity or Home Movie, instead of mainstream product.
__________________
Lee Widener, Author Website

Cartoon Artwork, Underground Art, Other Weird Stuff
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-18-2010, 03:31 PM
mosca's Avatar
mosca mosca is offline
Scares Little Kids
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by UngodlyWarlock View Post
I don't understand how CGI blood in some of these B-movies lately is cheaper than just buying a gallon of stage blood and tossing it about.
Because working with stage blood takes longer, and the longer the shoot the more money it costs. It's a real pain in the ass to wash the set and wardrobe for each take. Also, blood effects are rather easy cgi to pull off now. It took my editor less than forty minutes to add a simple effect to a film.

But, I agree that stage blood still looks better and should be used whenever cgi isn't needed.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-18-2010, 09:00 PM
UngodlyWarlock's Avatar
UngodlyWarlock UngodlyWarlock is offline
Evil Dead
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 216
Quote:
Originally Posted by mosca View Post
Because working with stage blood takes longer, and the longer the shoot the more money it costs. It's a real pain in the ass to wash the set and wardrobe for each take. Also, blood effects are rather easy cgi to pull off now. It took my editor less than forty minutes to add a simple effect to a film.

But, I agree that stage blood still looks better and should be used whenever cgi isn't needed.
Ah, okay...that is a very good point. I hadn't thought of the clean-up aspect of it.

Still, as a fan of B-horror (I admit, I watch a lot of bad movies...intentionally at that) it's really irritating when even even the gore/kill scenes are not fun to look at. It's frustrating when the "bad" movies of the 80's often times end up being "better" than the bad movies of the present. I just figure in 20 years, they should be able to make better shitty movies than they used to, if you get my drift, haha. ;)

And it goes the same way with creatures, too. All of the movies on the Sci-Fi channel may be able to do more with CGI with having more interactivity between their creature and the actors (I'm thinking of all of these dragon/griffon/harpy/etc kinds of movies), but even something like the Overlord in Howard the Duck looks better to me than most of them and it's stop animation for crying out loud.

This isn't a hard rule, of course...there are some studios that really make their tight budgets work and I have no issue with big budget cgi, of course. I mainly have issues with the low budget movies mis-using it when they could probably make things more effective with less.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-19-2010, 05:49 PM
horrorsniped's Avatar
horrorsniped horrorsniped is offline
Evil Dead
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Canada
Posts: 109
Hmmm....thats a real valid point of making a mess on the set and then washing clothes....however...I believe that if you truly believe in what you're doing, and if you have a passion for this than it's not really a pain in the ass if you know what I mean. But then of course the whole "cost-reduction" point will be brought up over and over again.

I mean the one thing that really makes me think when I bring this topic up is the movie "The Thing". I am not sure how well everyone knows this movie but EVERYTHING was done originally. The crew had to fly to ?Alaska? and build the whole set up in the mountains. When you watch the extra footage on the blue-ray DVD you see how everything was done. It's sensational! Truly something to appreciate.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:46 PM.