MovieChat Forums > Geostorm (2017) Discussion > Seriously, can we not stop making these ...

Seriously, can we not stop making these movies that look like a video game cut scene?

posted 8 years ago by PrimeMinisterX (8857)
7 replies | jump to latest

I LIKE disaster movies! I think they're a lot of fun and they're the definition of the word "spectacle". But it seems that any modern disaster movie is guaranteed to be almost nothing but a bunch of CGI that ends up looking like a cut scene from a video game!

Just watch this trailer for Geostorm to get what I'm talking about:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5JWcbfhuz60

Last night I rewatched Dante's Peak and it still looks FANTASTIC, largely because as many of the effects as possible were done practically. I wish filmmakers would realize that disaster movies are far more effective when actual physical shit gets destroyed (even if that physical shit is 1/8 the scale of the real thing).

The concept for this movie is intriguing, and like I said I am always down for a good disaster film, but I really wish filmmakers would give it a rest with this over-reliance on CGI. It's not that digital imagery has no place in modern filmmaking, but it needs to only be used when appropriate.

[–] Apis (1624) 8 years ago

The trailer has a feel of a movie 2012. I can't predict if the movie will be any good, but the trailer looks really attractive. Ed Harris is in the movie, so that's one more plus.

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8857) 8 years ago

Hmm, you see, I thought 2012 was one of the worst movies made in this decade. It has precisely the problem I was talking about, where the whole thing looks like a cartoon. I just can't take it seriously.

Studios need to learn when CGI is appropriate to use and when it's more appropriate to use more traditional effects methods using miniatures and the like.

[–] Apis (1624) 8 years ago

Based on the trailer, I can only say that visually, it resembles 2012. Plot is a different story.

I noticed a few interesting actors are in this movie. Ed Harris, Andy Garcia (unless they give him a treatment he had in Passengers when he was on screen for 30 seconds), and of course Butler.

The title of the movie does sound cheap, like some D grade movie from Sci-fi channel.

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8857) 8 years ago

I actually have no problem with the plot or the actors. I mean, it may be a fun movie. I intend to watch it.

I just wish studios would stop using CGI for EVERYTHING. When I watch a disaster movie, I want to see actual physical stuff get destroyed, even if those physical things are miniatures. It's just much more satisfying.

[–] Apis (1624) 8 years ago

Oh man, I totally missed the point of your first post. I saw a trailer for a new disaster movie and started rambling about the movie instead of properly reading the topic. lol

Yeah, I agree with you that destroying physical objects looks better than CGI, unless the CGI is really good (which is not the case in this movie, just look at the falling plane in one of the scenes of the trailer, very unnatural)

When CGI is good, I don't even notice the difference. Unfortunately, it's not always the case. CGI in this movie is average at best, so one can't help but notice the imperfections, and that takes away from the whole movie experience.

[–] PrimeMinisterX (8857) 8 years ago

Ha, I was wondering why you were going on about the plot and the actors when I hadn't mention that at all.

I think the two best (natural) disaster movies I've seen are Twister and Dante's Peak. Twister had a lot of CGI, sure, but it used practical effects whenever possible and so that movie holds up very well today.

The same goes for Dante's Peak. It was a great fusion of digital and practical effects, and the result is a movie that still looks good today. I mean, just watch this clip of the volcano exploding and destroying the town. It looks great!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfIUYDjo8WM

Or watch the big destruction scene in Independence Day:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjFG-4Ge668

Why is it great? Because it does a great job of blending practical effects and CGI, and when those buildings explode, you're seeing an actual physical object get blown up.

I really hope that we're going to see the pendulum swing back in the direction of practical effects being used more in big movies, but the forecast is not good.

[–] actionkamen (23176) 7 years ago

CGI in Armageddon is pretty good though. However, this movie really feels like 2012 which is bad.