Jackskeleton

http://www.joblo.com/index.php?id=2519


My thought on this. I'm looking forward to seeing KILL BILL, but really, how much different is using CG opposed to having a scene in your film that is hand drawn in the anime fashion? Who pissed in his morning bowl of captain crunch.

clemente

Doesn't he sound like an irrational DVD Talker going off on a rant.

I don't particularly like people who get on their high horse and exclaim theirs as better than other peoples, simply because he doesn't use CGI?

lesterlong

AMEN!!!! I LOVE YOU QT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

RichC2

He didn't say his is better, tho that is sensed in there (he's always come off as a hyperactive cocky bastard) but to be honest he has a point.

And for that point, I'll, I dunno, refer to The One. So much CG in that movie, that I coulda taken Jet Li's place (a fat college student with no flexibility) and made it just as believable, just without the accent (aka - wasted talent), not to mention the fact that the ending fight was perhaps the worst "person playing both people" bit ever filmed. It's pretty much pointless.


As for The Matrix reference, when the characters turn to CG (reloaded) and are fighting, he again is right - get a damn human to do those "impossible" moves, or not at all. Otherwise The Matrix doesn't really do too much CG-fu, I mean, wirework is wirework.

But then again, I've never been impressed with The Matrix's slow as hell fights (the music helps conpensate for their slowness, but watch it on mute and you too can be amazed ).

I bet he doesn't even own a Nintendo though, that lying bastard

and I can't wait for KB.

Jackskeleton

I agree with Clemente, to just get on a high horse is something else. the guy may not like CGI, but it is both benefit and bane to the film industry. Jurrassic Park is one example where CG benefited it.

Frankly, I see no difference between CGI and a scene in your film that is done in total anime fashion in which KILL BILL has one.

another thing I can say about the death knell in films. Splitting them in two. say take one film, cut it to two and then release it a few months apart for no other reason other then you can.

lesterlong

Ok, there's a huge difference between anime in your film and CGI. Here's why: Directors think the audience will be too dumb to realize they are watching CGI when they use it (Bad Boys 2), Anime is Anime. Nobody is fooling anyone.

Jackskeleton

Not all CGI is done with the intent that the audience being too dumb to realize they are watching CGI. many times it's done because the event or item would be to dangerious or for that matter, Not done at all unless cgi is used.

in the example of what I saw the anime in kill bill, it was done to get the certain shot that would have been pretty impossible for a camera to do and would require tarantino to use that awful horrorible death of film CGI.. in some cases it's over used yes, but in other cases you can say it helped a film and was useful.

Anime may be Anime and noticeable, but to switch from Live action to Animation in the middle of the film maybe considered the same crap as putting a CGI character in that place.

Inverse

And of course, Tarentino is using computers to erase the wires in KILL BILL.

The rant makes no sense: it's just Tarentino trying to be cool. (Sorry: ****ing cool.) Though frankly, it makes him sound more like a cranky old geezer who doesn't like those newfangled gizmos those young uns use, consarn it. Get off my lawn!

The Cow

I'm still wondering what the 5 letter "censored" word is

If QT doesn't want CGI, then good for him, just don't criticize others for using it.

trigun

But are most people too dumb to realize that all of their anime these days is also CGI? You'll be hard pressed to find a filmed animation cel these days.

xDareDevilx

I don't see it as critism. I see it as giving his opinion on something that is used and overused in film. He just stated the way he feels about an expensive overused method of filming and why it sucks anymore! And this is to explain why he doesn't use it in his films...

I CANT WAIT FOR THIS MOVIE!

Sunday Morning

99 percent of CG in non-animated films I've seen was either obvious, overdone, or plain embarrasing.

I hate it. Hate it. Hate it.

Studios overuse the form. They count on audiences to be dumb enough to accept the digital effects as a normal part of the movie going experience and they count of audiences to be dumb enough to flock to effects-laden films like the matrix and all it's cheeseball imitators.

Popular mainstream cinema is almost dead, Someone pass the potato salad.

I LOVE YOU in-camera effects, and I will always miss you.

Nice rant, QT. Just keep making films more frequently already. Jesus.

Jackskeleton

Studios overuse anything.

Say a buddy film is successful, exptect to see five more by the years end. CG isn't always used on the account that the audiance will be to stupid to realize it. for the most part it is used for smaller things and just imagen shots that could never be done without it. Say for example Lord Of the Rings. How about other battle scenes were the numbers reach to the thousands on camera? setting up shots like that without the use of CG would be time consuming and virtually impossible.

Sure in some cases it is over used, but like I said, everything in hollywood, once successful will be over used and done to death. it is the way things work.

tor_greg

For every CG effect you see, there's probably 10 that you never imagined were a CG effect.

PatrickMcCart

Some of the best uses of effects or CGI are the effects you DO NOT notice.

Troy Stiffler

There's times when you just NEED to use it (Lord of the Rings and Contact come to mind). The Matrix is CERTAINLY one of these instances. They would have never been able to pull those enemy mechs moving so freely without CG.

Then there's times that it's just flat out lazy filmmaking. In example, a lot of those Matrix Reloaded scenes and some stuff in Blade.

Then, in very rare instances, there's beautiful use of of physical effects where you could have never imagined. Dark City anyone? Total Recall?

By the way, I much prefer to see physical effects rather than GC. I repsect what Tarantino said. And Anime is hardly CG! I don't think you can even compare the two.

MasterofDVD

He has far too much anger building up and I look forward to the day he pops. Most interviews I've seen with him I feel like he's channeling Dennis Miller during one of those TV rants.

I think I prefer QT when he acts and not when he directs. Pulp Fiction was good but the rest of his films I never really felt the need to watch over and over. But I loved him in From Dusk Till Dawn. Maybe will the boom of CGI he'll give up and just act in pictures instead of trying to control them.

Jackskeleton

yeah, but the point with the comment was that he is stating that CG is killing the art of it all. If you can say that anime is art and CGI is not then I don't know what you consider art. He bashes it because it's not real or looks to fake. well to me, going from a live action film to an anime part for a sniper style shooting is the same thing. you are using a different medium then the precious art of film to capture a scene. it's all about the tools you use for the project.

trigun

If manipulating graphics with a computer isn't CG, then what is?

trigun

The CG in Forrest Gump totally ruined the movie for me.

PixyJunket

What's wrong with sticking your dick in your Nintendo?

Dr. DVD

I like QT, and agree with his points, but he really needs to chill out.

Rypro 525

i think his point is that he'd rather just use regular practical effects with the blood and gore ect, then just use some fake looking cgi in the process.

devilshalo

Quentin is old fashioned and has always been a huge fan of old school martial arts film. Sure the Wachowski's were huge fans of the genra, too, but I understand where Quentin is coming from. I mean Shaw Bros just put out Drunken Monkey (by Lau Kar Leung) to show HK Cinema that it's about skill of your actors and not making the latest pop idol able to do amazing martial arts on screen with the use of computers. I think that's the art that Tarantino is talking about.

DRG

IMO,

Using CGI to create something that would be impossible to create with other FX methods (or horribly unconvincing) is good.

Using CGI to replicate something that could be done with traditional stunts/makeup/etc. simply because CGI is available is lazy.