"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:4b329805@news.povray.org...
> Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> > Chambers wrote:
>
> > > We're in the dark age of CGI right now.
>
> > Oh, I don't know about that. Guys like Pixar still manage to turn out
> > films which are not only gorgeous to look at, but actually enjoyable to
> > watch.
>
>   Could it be that, somewhat ironically, when a movie is CGI-only, the
> creators can and do concentrate more on the story itself because they
> don't have to be showing off photorealistic CGI (which in a CGI-only
> movie is actually more counter-productive than useful)? Maybe the
mentality
> is more like "CG all in itself does not make a 90-minute movie, so we also
> need a story to support it".

Likely. Expanding, those who do CG only movies well mostly have a solid
background in cartoons, so it's not a novelty for them to be dealing with
non-flesh-and-blood characters. And they've learned the importance of story.
Directors from conventional background who have come to rely on actors don't
seem to understand that one dimensional CG characters can not make up for a
bad script the way top notch human character actors sometimes can.

Post a reply to this message