MovieChat Forums > Splinter (2009) Discussion > Congratulations on NOT using CGI

Congratulations on NOT using CGI


Finally a "movie monster" with personality, haven't seen much of those since the 80s. No stupid, badly textured, overly animated cgi, just a gritty, bloody chaos of evil. So refreshing, I was just smiling through all the monster scenes thinking "at last, someone took the time to CRAFT something".

Applause!

reply

Agreed.
I really liked this cool original monster created the old fashioned way.

reply

Yeah, maybe, unfortunately they ruined it with all the jump cuts, quick edits and super-fast shaky camera movement!! That became tedious and annoying REAL fast.

If you don't want to show the monster too much, I'm fine with that; just use a more subtle approach. I personally don't like that style of "fancy" camera work and editing. It ruined a promising, if derivative, creature movie for me.

reply

Yeah, practical effects are all but dead. That's why I love the hell out of Jack Brooks: Monster Slayer. lol

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

This movie DID use cgi, but very little. Near the end where Dennis was lying on the ground with the shotgun, we see the monster inside turning its head very fast, that was a cgi shot, i have some experience in CGI so I know what I am talking about. Please learn more about the thing that you hate so you don't come across as stupid in front of people who actually know something.

But you're right on one thing, the need for cgi in a horror movie is rare. And Jack Brooks was lame, disappointed me even with practical effects.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

Not everybody who knows something has to have a credit on the internet you dumb *beep*. I don't have a credit because I'm just a student in 3d animation. I don't know a whole lot but certainly more than a retard like you.

And me saying Jack Brooks was stupid has nothing to do with what I said about the original poster's failure to identify a cgi shot, it was an opinion on ransax's comment about the movie, and you said I blasted somebody's opinion? The only thing I blasted was the original poster's "certainty" that there is no cgi used in the movie, which is not an opinion. Ransax gave his opinion that Jack Brooks is awesome, and I hated that movie, so all I said was Jack Brooks sucks, that's it.

Let me tell you something since you clearly didn't hang yourself, you are very very very very stupid. You can't even give a smart argument on the internet which most people is capable of, which is why 80 percents of your post is for cursing me. Please don't have children, don't pass on your dumb gene and dumb the society down.

reply

[deleted]

What a dumb *beep*!!! Poster said congratulation on not using cgi, and he hates cgi.
Hates cgi (opinion), congratulation on not using cgi (not opinion). I never attack his opinion on hating cgi, I only give mine which is to *beep* know something about the subject that you hate so you don't come across as stupid, and that Jack Brooks is lame, my opinion. So you replied with all your *beep* hates telling me to hang myself when I rightfully stated my own opinion, you're the dick here retard, not me.

When I said that I know something about cgi, that is to the original poster, not you. I never have to make an argument about cgi with you, nor do I care if you think the movie has cgi or not. You're getting *beep* from me because you're a *beep* that come out of nowhere and blasted me when I give my opinion, which has nothing to you with a bitch like you.

OP: yay movie didn't use cgi, cgi sucks.

Ransax: i know, jack brooks is awesome.

Me: this movie has cgi idiot, and jack brooks is disappointing.

Retard: you *beep* *beep* go hang yourself my dad molested me so Ima go on the Internet and be a dick and give invalid argument blah blah blah <-------- retard

reply

[deleted]

omg. We're going in circle because you're too *beep* dumb to get what I'm saying.

Look at the first reply you give to me. "insults, insults, insults, bast a guy for giving his opinion, insults, insults" And as I stated and spent a almost a whole post explaining that what I blasted was not an opinion, but the OP's supposed fact that no cgi was used, I don't touch opinions, you failed to see this and blame me for your retardation.

I told you to go hang yourself, but you're still here. See what I'm trying to say? I'm not gonna go kill myself just because you told me so, just like you didn't hang yourself. Grow up, retard.

reply

Oh dear Bonthan, listen to the way you are communicating with these people! Relax man... life is too short and the internet to anonymous to garner anything out of this type of behaviour. Its actually quite disgusting.

reply

Yeah, take a chill pill, holmes. I didn't fly off the handle when you said Jack Brooks sucks. Technically, you didn't even say that, rather you said it disappointed you. Your opinion is your own, don't get your feathers ruffled. Life's too short.

reply

Amen to that! Shaky cam ruined this movie. Sorreeeeee.

reply

I enjoyed the monster as well.

A lot of people talk about how it's such a fast paced movie when it comes to the monster scenes, but they would be complaining if it focused on it for too long and it looked unrealistic. It looked realistic because it was not CGI and they did not focus on it in whole for a long time.

"The closet door is made of all kinds of wood."

reply

[deleted]