DeputyDave

OK, after watching the trailer for “Just Married” for the umpteenth time I finally got fed up enough to post. I swear that is a CGI cockroach running up Ashton’s neck in one scene. Now if I’m wrong, slap me down. Regardless it brings me to my point. It just seems lazy to use CGI in scenes like these. How hard would it be to find a real cockroach for god’s sake? It seems like directors are opting for this more and more. I can think of several recent examples. I’m not saying CGI should not be used, there are definitely times when it ADDS to the realism, but when the CGI becomes intrusive... that’s when I object.

al_bundy

Maybe the actors didn't want roaches on them?

kaze0

wouldn't it be kinda hard to make a roach run up someones neck with bright lights all around?

sugardaddy

If I were Kutcher, I'd opt for the CGI roach too.

But special effects were looking pretty poorly at times these past few years. I remember cringing at the ridiculously fake-looking CGI shots in Spiderman, Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone, Men In Black 2... but I feel like it was all because of the same thing: when they'd CGI a human.

I might not remember correctly but..

Spiderman: when he's leaping from building to building? or something of that sort.

Harry Potter 1/MIB2: I think they're both on top of a monster and it looks like a computer animation game.

I just feel like they haven't been trying as hard. The special effects that never made me think twice about whether it's real is Jurassic Park.

Actually, there was a spot on TV for Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers and it started with footage from the movie and then it cut to action shots...from the video game. But I had no idea. And I almost broke down. "THEY'VE GONE TOO FAR! IT LOOKS LIKE A VIDEO GAME! GOD, WHY?" before they showed familiar video game logos and the packaging and when it's available in stores.

But we don't have to tell anyone about that..

devilshalo

ok.. hmmm.. let me think. $5000 for a real trained Madagascar hissing roach and bug wrangler for one day OR $100,000 for a CG Madagascar hissing roach, 1-2 weeks of modeling, animating, match moving, texturing, lighting, and rendering.

i don't think because it was CG (i don't think it is) it should be called 'lazy'. rather it's 'convenient'. the issues always come down to time and money. say they did get the bug wrangler and it's real.. not only do they have to pay for the bug, the wrangler, but they have to pay for the crew, the sets, etc. and if they don't get the shot the first time around, they pay OT or they pay for another day. if i were director, using a real bug would probably get me the best performance from an actor. but if the director felt that they didn't or couldn't get the shot they wanted... fixing it in post is the better option that to keep trying to use the live bug.

Darren Garrison

Heck, I never noticed that it was fake.

mllefoo

I thought Ashton Kutcher was the CGI and the roach was real.

kenny79

If only ...

Numanoid

I agree with the original poster. The first time I saw that trailer, I made this face upon seeing the CGI cockroach:

There have been numerous movies with bugs, including cockroaches, crawling on people without the "benefit" of CGI. When I see something like this it immediately takes me out of the movie, which is the greatest sin a filmmaker can commit.

cooper2000

Attak of the Clones was all about CGI and people went to go see that in droves.

I am looking forward to just Married. If its as good as Dude Wheres my Car, it should be fun, CGI cockroach or not.

Krug

Cockroach actors demand ridiculous fees. I thought everyone knew that.

Get Me Coffee

The nerve....a actor who doesn't want a fat juicy cockroach running across his neck

For the person who said something about spiderman jumping from roof to roof...I totally agree with you. They could have filmed that much better. The other night I was watching the Matrix and I wondered why spiderman didn't go long those lines of jumping from roof top to roof top. Oh well

DeputyDave

You’re right, I wouldn't want a real cockroach running on me either... but I would do it if that's what the script called for. Look how much other actors have sacrificed for realism in movies (Raging Bull and CastAway come quickly to mind – very different situations but it shows the dedication acting takes).

I'm not saying that CGI shouldn't have been used. LOTR and AOTC need it in some instances, and I loved Spiderman even though I knew it was CGI I was looking at. I just don't think in this case it was necessary.

There's a funny bit in the outtakes from Jay and Silent Bob, where Kevin Smith says, "Hell, let's just CGI a sheep." Nothing against Smith but I think that attitude is becoming more and more prevalent.

Drexl

Well, looking at the scene myself (and wondering why this is even being released in theaters), Brittany Murphy's character goes nuts when she sees the roach, which just stays there on Kutcher's neck. Who knows how long this hilarity ensues? Maybe this goes on for like a minute or two, and it was just hard to get that roach to stay there for the duration of the scene.

Krug

all those worms and milipedes and goat's brain on Fear Factor? CGI!

lesterlong

And like the CGI table in A Beautiful Mind, what Crowe wasn't strong enough to pick a table up and throw in through a window?

bboisvert

I knew exactly what this was going to be about before even opening the thread. That CGI roach drives me nuts too... it looks extremely fake, mainly in the way it runs across his neck as if it were a flat surface, without any texture.

I don't have a problem with CGI. Just (as DeputyDave says) "lazy" CGI that is done quickly to save time and $$$, but looks like crap.

Darren Garrison

After seeing the commercial several more times, I STILL think that the roach is real.

Aaron Amos

That table was CGI!? Was it on the commentary on the DVD?

Jaymole

I remember the days when actors would eat live roaches!! Okay it was only one film, Vampire's Kiss, but still...

renaldow

I hate it when CGI is overused. There used to be a time when you'd watch a movie and be impressed. You'd really sit there and think, "How did they do that?!?!" Now, you know it's CGI and usually you sit there thinking, "Why did they do CGI for that, and don't they realize how awful it looks?!?!"

grunter

Yeah, but to be fair, that was back when Nicholas Cage was still acting . . . and not just collecting checks for punching in at the film lot . . .

calhoun07

On the Signs DVD, M Night talks about how he hates CGI, and tries to avoid it at all possible costs, but had to put a CGI alien in Signs, and he said it took twice as many people and twice the time to do that CGI alien than if they got an actor in a suit. So is it really "lazy" when it takes twice the work to get it done? People seem to assume it's so freaking easy to do CGI. If it's so easy, make your own movies and show us how it should be done. Until then, leave the directors alone.

Fanboy

Are you seriously comparing the acting dedication of Ashton Kutcher to Hanks and De Niro?

Anyway, methinks Kutcher is a lot more of a prima donna "beautiful actor" than someone willing to sacrifice health and body for a role. But then again, I'm not sure how much I would sacrifice for Just Married either.

slymer

I just want to see the movie. That scene is pretty funny, and no, I never thought that the roach was fake.