I don't agree about the LOTR movies. I think the effects for the most part were crap, just better than other attempts at similar fair. Those movie effects already appear crappy, and in another 20 years they will look as cheesy to you then as 80's movies do now. I think Forrest Gump's effects were far more clever and harder to spot than LOTR, Indy 4, or the SW prequel trilogy, and it's effects as far as I'm concerned to this day are unmatched. Very cleverly done, and very well designed... it's so good visually, in fact, that people simply do not know just how much of that movie IS CGI... and that was 1994.
Story. Plot. Characters. Drama.
If you got into the LOTR, then you wouldn't notice the effects as much. I just hate the story and characters, so I would notice them more. Bad effects are always forgivable when you enjoy something's plot and story and drama and characters.
As far as the Indy/SW CGI, it's far more noticeable because it's entire purpose is to be the star of the show. The Story, Plot, Characters, Drama all exist to get you to the effects, which is idiotic. It's like designing a car around it's gadgets and paint. Even in 30 years, when the effects will be unbearable, it won't hurt the movie anymore than something like The 10 Commandments effects hurt it... good story trumps everything else.
Story. Plot. Characters. Drama.
If you got into the LOTR, then you wouldn't notice the effects as much. I just hate the story and characters, so I would notice them more. Bad effects are always forgivable when you enjoy something's plot and story and drama and characters.
As far as the Indy/SW CGI, it's far more noticeable because it's entire purpose is to be the star of the show. The Story, Plot, Characters, Drama all exist to get you to the effects, which is idiotic. It's like designing a car around it's gadgets and paint. Even in 30 years, when the effects will be unbearable, it won't hurt the movie anymore than something like The 10 Commandments effects hurt it... good story trumps everything else.
Comment