How can I tell? It's in fog and semi-darkness, and so it's easy to hide the shortcomings of the rendering that way. It's an easy enough trick to implement. As I recall, the Tom Cruise Mummy movie utilised awful CGI for the zombies and got away with it cos the scenes took place in the dark or at night, and even underwater. So this movie will be just as crap.
Besides, where's the SATIRE?
(slow clapping) Way to go, moron. Hate something unseen. Idiot.
shareI've seen the trailer, that's good enough for me. Idiot.
You think the CGI in the trailers looks shoddy? It looks to be the best such CGI to date. Please point to a specific moment in a specific trailer and explain what it is about the CGI that doesn't meet your standards.
shareThe problem is it's CGI to begin with. What's wrong with a man in a monster costume? The old, original Godzilla movies made millions in box office even though the effects were all practical with miniatures to represent Tokyo. I am getting sick of bad CGI taking the place of practical effects, it just goes on and on and it turns out to be more expensive than practical effects would be. Look at the LOTR movies vs the Hobbit movies: Sparingly using CGI for certain creatures and practical effects, not to mention optical perspective tricks, miniatures and prosthetic-clad actors for everything else in LOTR, vs almost EVERYTHING being 100% CGI in the Hobbit simply because it was more modern and Jackson insisted on 3D which meant that all of those fancy optical tricks no longer worked. Same stupid reason goes to Cameron for his Avatar stuff.
I saw the Godzilla movie from a few years ago, and from what I remember, the movement of such a massive creature was realistically slow and lumbering, but I've heard that in this new movie, the monsters whip and move around quickly despite their massive mass, and this is one reason why the movie is being badly reviewed. Bad CGI is bad enough, but bad LAZY CGI is worse. Not to mention that the human characters are not memorable, they're just there to gawk at the monsters. Look at Jurassic Park (the original) to see the right mixture of CGI, practical effects and memorable characters done RIGHT.
So you prefer man-in-costume over CGI but complain that the CGI doesnt realistically depict the way a creature of that size would move? The speed of movement and more humanoid characteristics are both a nod to the the man-in-costume stuff.
shareThen HAVE a man in costume instead of CGI! It didn't do the Alien franchise any harm at all for the first two movies. Hell, it all went to shit when Alien 3 did early CGI, and it didn't mesh up at all wiith the surrounding scenes!
then why complain about lack of realistic depiction like you just did? And from the negative reviews I've read, that's hardly a key reason behind the complaints. Most dont mention it at all.
shareIn case anybody ever notices this comment again: Alien 3 used rod puppets for the shots that you are probably thinking of and since they were shot separately, they had to be composited with the live action, which caused the occasional crappy looking shot.
shareMore than anyone I know, I'm able to take films for what they are. I grew up watching Ray Harryhausen's Dynamation special effects, Universal's horror films, anything on Creature Features. Godzilla was my absolute favorite. To this day, if I'm watching something pre-CGI, even when no one else can help but laugh at the campy, primitive effects, I do my best to accept the film on its own turf. But I don't pretend the effects look good. To my 8-year-old self, Godzilla and Jet Jaguar battling Megalon was as good as it got, but there's simply no way an honest adult can watch any Godzilla film, outside of the original, and not admit that they're terrible films. Even the first one's effects look comical by today's standards, and one can only appreciate it as a great film by taking into account that at the time that was as the best that could be done.
One of my favorite recent films was Fury Road, primarily due to the remarkably gripping action, but largely, too, because the lack of CGI for the majority of the effects made it feel so much more real. However, one can't do that with Godzilla, as, thankfully, there are no kaiju running amok to film.
To cut to the chase-- what's wrong with a man in a monster costume is that it looks silly. If the movie is being aimed at kids, go for it. The 2014 Godzilla was a masterful film primarily because it was aimed at adults. It looked real. This new film looks even better. CGI has advanced to the point where I believe I'm seeing Rodan flying around. Perhaps the monsters move faster than they should for their size, but if we're nitpicking, nothing that size could exist. Even the largest dinosaurs never reached Godzilla-level sizes. Don't get me started on animals breathing radioactive fire or shooting laser beams. One suspends one's disbelief to enjoy a kaiju film, and I, for one, prefer that it look real even when it is presenting the utterly fantastic.
Fair enough. I guess I don't like CGI kaiju movies, then. I saw Pacific Rim years ago and I disliked it so much, I didn't bother with the sequel. Looks like Godzilla will be the same.
I'm with you there. I saw Pacific Rim and disliked it, and didn't watch the second film. It wasn't so much the CGI for me as much as it was that I wasn't interested in the story, and I felt a huge opportunity had been wasted when it came to the robots and monsters. They all looked alike! I went into it hoping for something akin to the Shogun Warriors battling Godzilla and his friends, and instead saw the same Rhinoceros-like monster over and over, only a bit bigger each time, fighting generic robots.
shareI think Kong may be the best CGI creature out of this monsterverse franchise. He looked amazing.
shareThe trailer? There are three!
On youtube? I just watched the 720p #2 again. It's only 8MB with obvious compression artifacts.
Next time you go to the theater, do some drugs first!
Godzilla vs Kong will be even worse, no doubt
shareIt's not that the CGI was bad. It's just too generic. There is no art direction, no vision, no innovation.
Even the sound design is boring. All the monsters sound the same, move the same, all has the same glowing effects.
I mean, how about be more creative? What if the butterfly moves faster, it's not realistic for a creature that huge to flapping wings so fast, but everything is not realistic anyway... why not go crazy and invent new ideas.
How about instead of glowing, other monster would emit smokes, or vibrate, or move in stacatto like chicken or something? Why everything is always samey?
Also not all monster fights has to be in near darkness with lightning and rain all the time. Why not in a desert in the morning, or in a jungle at dawn, etc.?
What a missed opportunity.
Don't be stupid.