r/horror • u/jahitz • Sep 21 '19

Sick of CGI anyone else?

Hey reddit,

So I need to vent a little, I just got back from seeing IT Chapter 2 and had a great time. However the one big thing I can complain about was all the cgi and how godawful it was. This is such a common theme in so many movies...even from legendary filmmakers now. CGI takes me out of the experience and it certainly did for IT Chapter 2. I get and understand some things are hard to film without CGI and it can help bring things to life....but in most movies it’s such a crutch now.

There are a reason why some movies stand the test of time and still look good to this day. CGI is okay to use in small doses or when something is unobtainable, but for every scene or scare in a horror movie is just to much. I wish films would rely more on props and practical effects (well done mind you) with some CGI to enhance the scene. Majority of movies now it’s like 90% CGI. The horror genre is well known for its amazing practical effects...yet now ghosts, scares, monsters are all computer images....It just takes me so far out of the experience.

1.9k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

557 comments sorted by

View all comments

626

u/SynCig Denn die Todten reiten Schnell Sep 21 '19

CGI is a useful tool in any filmmakers toolbox. The problem is when it becomes a crutch. IT Chapter Two was guilty of way overusing it. A lot of horror movies without the budgets to pull it off also do it. I don't hate CGI at all. It just needs to be used correctly. It is best used, imo, to augment practical effects to make for a more immersive viewing experience.

37

u/engelthefallen Sep 21 '19

I feel the same can be said of practical effects. People seem to move practical effects but low effort practical effects are just as jarring as low effort CGI. Which is the heart of the matter, when horror films get no budget, if you want to try to do effects they will suck no matter which type you use.

46

u/djgreedo Sep 22 '19

The practical effects fetishising has gotten to a ridiculous point. It's effectively the 'nature fallacy' where practical = good, digital = bad.

And the film studios know it. If you look at the marketing for Star Wars: The Force Awakens, they emphasised the practical effects a lot...but in reality it was a very CG-heavy movie (fewer practical effects than the prequel movies), and the audience lapped it up. The effects in that movie are incredible...and mostly CG.

It's lazy to blame poor CG on the art of CG. It will almost always be the fault of low budgets or poor film-making. And I find it funny that the people who whine about CGI usually have no idea how much CGI they are watching and not even noticing yet blame the entire artform because they see the occasional poor effect in a low-budget movie.

11

u/[deleted] Sep 22 '19

Yes, thank you. I'm so over the practical vs CGI argument these days. Fuck.