Connect with us


Attn Studio Execs: You’re Delusional, and Your CGI SUCKS.

Dear Hollywood Executive,

Your CGI sucks. You’re delusional to think that it doesn’t. And don’t deny it, because I know damn well that most of you use it because it’s “easier”.

Nowadays, video game graphics look better than the crap you use in your movies. Just to put it in perspective for you, most game graphics even look better than James Cameron’s $500 million Avatar. Your average movie rarely tops $50 million. Think about that.

Using CGI to clean up “problematic” practical effects or for very miner touch-ups is acceptable, maybe even applicable, but should only be used in the case of an emergency. (Don’t break that glass unless you have to.)

The use of CGI has hit an all time low this summer, especially after witnessing DreamWorks cover up KNB’s work in Fright Night 3D. Not only does it look like absolute sh*t, but it’s already dated. Have you guys heard the public wisecracking about how the Phantom Menace and the other two Star Wars prequels are already more dated than the original trilogy? They’re right, and it’s true, which is the most bold piece of evidence to your CGI sucking. Also, see the theatrical ending to Paranormal Activity, I Am Legend, Van Helsing, A Nightmare on Elm Street, The Final Destination, Super 8, Season of the Witch, Skyline, Case 39, the attack scene in Let Me In and much, much more.

Look at the past 50 years of film. Practical effects look real, while the majority of CGI work looks like a video game. The fact that practical work is physical also gives the actors something to react to on set and looks way better on screen. It affects nearly all facets of a production. Foreign filmmakers apparently “get it” as they’ve delivered some of the only new horror masterpieces that range from Inside to Martyrs, Frontier(s), [REC], [REC]2 and High Tension.

I’ve just about had it with this crap. The blatant and lazy approach to filmmaking is a disgrace to everyone who put their hearts and souls into making a movie. It’s time to dial it back, it’s time to stop trying to make everything “epic” and “over the top.” If you and your production crew can’t figure out how to do something as simple as vampire teeth, with physical products, I think you shouldn’t even waste your time.

But I digress. CGI can be cool (see Jurassic Park), but it’s being overused. Calm the f*ck down, take a look in the mirror and reflect on what you’re doing. You’re creating a product and what you’re selling is cheap garbage that’s going to leave the buyer feeling ripped off. At least pretend that you give a hoot about what we think…

Love, Sincerely, Your BFF, XOXO,

Mr. Disgusting



  • kyle

    The CGI from Jurrassic park is superior to the CGI from Avatar. These movies were made 20 years apart, and Aatar was supposed to be ground breaking.
    The T-rex is a real creature. Breaking down the fence, rain beading off it’s skin. Or in the end, where it is standing under the banner, it looks real, It’s skin looks leathery, dry, crocodile like, the lighting is perfect, it’s movements are perfect, realistic. You can see the bone structure as it walks, you can see how the leathery skin stretches over the skeleton, and you can see it stretch, wave, and hang realistically. Even looking into it’s eyes, looks like an animal is staring back at you.
    Compare the t-rex to that 8 legged rhino thing from avatar.
    The rhinos skin is shiny and plastiky. When it walks, it’s whole body seems to stretch and wiggle as if there is no internal structure holding it together. It moves so quickly that it seems to break the laws of physics. Looking closely at the skin, there is no detail, there are no scales, there are no flakes of dry skin, it just looks like wet plastic. It’s eyes don’t look like an animal, they look like a cartoon. It’s eye seem to grow and pop out of their sockets with surprise, that is not realistic, it is cartoonish.
    In 20 years, GCI hasn’t gotten better. In fact, It’s gotten worse. People often mistake faster processors in computers with better computing power, this is not the case. Sure the Jurassic Park animators had slower processors, but all that means is that it took longer to render the CGI. They still had the same artistic knowledge, and the same coding ability to create realistic computer images.
    So why is CGI today generally inferior to the CGI from Jurassic Park?
    There are many reasons.
    In JP, every dinosaur had a corresponding animatronic model. The computer graphics artists were able to look at the lighting, coloring, and shading of the animatronic models on film, in every lighting condition, and in every scene, and were able to copy those aspects exactly in their moving CGI dinosaurs.
    Contemporary CGI artists start and end in the virtual world. They never create real life models of their creatures in order to compare and choose what the right lighting shading and coloring should be. Thus the skin of the t-rex looks dry and scaly, just like it would in real life. This skin of the 8 legged rhino looks “cool” with its plastic sheen, not at all how it would look in real life.
    The Dinos in JP were all modeled with skeletal structures underneath of their skin. the movements of the skeletons were actually controlled by physical models of the skeletons. Stop motion experts would actually move the joints of this physical model, and the motion data was input into the CGI that way.
    Nowadays most computer generated creatures have no skeleton structure that constrains their motions to realistic levels. Even if they do, I can guarantee that their motion data is not mapped out in the real world with physical models controlled by stop motion experts. The movement data is probably input by some fat computer nerd who has no knowledge of biology, input directly through computer commands instead of physical models. And there are no stop motion experts anymore, it’s a dead industry. This is why the creatures in avatar are so cartoonish, they bend and move, stretch squish and flatten just like a cartoon. There is no skeleton, there is no constraint on reality, there is no gravity, there are no laws of physics at play.
    Jurassic park also uses clever tricks to hide any imperfections in their CGI, Pounding rain, animatronics for close up shots, dark settings, mist.
    Avatar arrogantly believes it’s cgi is so advanced, that it doesn’t need to use any movie magic.
    All in all, the CGI in avatar could be far superior to the cgi in Jurassic park, with their modern advanced computer processors. But the avatar computer artists suffer from laziness. There are no real life models to use as templates to base the lighting, shading, and coloring off of. Everything is done virtually. There are no skeletal models, and there are no stop motion artists to input the creature motions. Everything is done virtually.

    • Nagy Bertalan

      ” the lighting is perfect”

      1. Lighting is to film what music is to opera.
      2. You put a light up and turn it on. If you like it, you leave it. If you don’t, you move it. 😉

      “They still had the same artistic knowledge, and the same coding ability to create realistic computer images. ”


      “This is why the creatures in avatar are so cartoonish”

      I wasn’t wowed in any regard (and it looks so dated now)

      “There are no real life models to use as templates to base the lighting, shading, and coloring off of.”

      totally agree

More in Editorials