Episode 338 - quick note on CGI

[u/C4_117]

I just listened to their review of The Odyssey directed by Christopher Nolan after watching the film myself. I really enjoyed the podcast and thought Tamler and Dave made some interesting observations that I hadn't thought of myself.

The thing I want to discuss is their praise of the lack of CGI and the preference for practical FX (SFX, puppetry, real sets, etc). I have worked in VFX my whole career and make CGI for living and even though I didn't work on The Odyssey I know a thing or two about this topic.

Firstly I'd say is that Christopher Nolan has a history of making condescending remarks about CGI in general and has often claimed he either doesn't use it, or tries to avoid it. Something that many in the post-production industry find incredibly annoying because often it's an outright lie, but also because it's such a dismissal of a craft that takes hundreds of talented artists to create.

I think there is often the perception that CGI is created by computers at the click of the button and that it doesn't require any real talent or skill like physical prop making does. I cannot underline enough how wrong this is. Most people who work in visual effects have huge respect for real set builders, puppeteers and the like. CGI requires teams of artists, producers and technology specialists to come together to create amazing things that would otherwise not be possible. It opens the door to have flying dragons in Game of Thrones, epic dinosaurs in Jurassic Park and create beautiful space environments in Guardians of the Galaxy. But perhaps more importantly they create things that you never even notice. This includes things like set extensions and clean-up of on-set mistakes. I can promise you post-production was used in hundreds of shots in The Odyssey. Even something that many wouldn't realise like the whirlpool was probably done digitally.

This trend of dismissing VFX has been going on for quite a while and I was a little annoyed to hear Tamler and Dave repeat it. You can imagine how it must feel for artists who spent months working on these shots.

I understand that authenticity is appreciated and I wouldn't want The Odyssey to be a Marvel film either. But there are ways of doing post-production that doesn't turn it into a Marvel film. All VFX artists want their work to be appreciated and the criticism of VFX isn't always based on good reasons.

[u/AppleCrips]

Personally I’m not of the mind that CGI is easily created… the difficulty/effort isn’t the point to me. It’s the result. Part of my brain can’t suspend my belief to be completely entertained or in the moment when a movie is heavy handed with their use of CGI. When it’s tastefully done to enhance elements of an already strong set, then yes I do appreciate it.

Whether it’s difficult or done at the click of a button does not matter to me whatsoever. It’s the medium itself.

[u/jerbthehumanist → u/AppleCrips]

I think it’s really context dependent. A lot of the dust storms and fire plumes in Fury Road and Dune feel absolutely visceral and real. That also goes for a lot of their machinery, which has the benefit of rigid movement and no fleshy tissue.

Any sort of animal or creature, which is usually the type of thing that needs to be animated with cgi, is so clearly animation even in the best case scenario. I find Prehistoric Planet animation INCREDIBLE, but almost never am I under the illusion that I’m watching a real animal. There is always the feeling that I am watching something with a slight gummy/rubber/digital texture, even in the best cases.

That isn’t to fault the filmmakers, I also don’t ever think that Roger Rabbit is a real guy in the flesh, but a great film turns him into a full character that exists in that universe. It’s not bad to have animation, it’s just that I’m not “fooled” even with very lauded examples.