That was good--jibes with my impressions.

Pfft. The Hulk on the left looked cartoony and fake. I mean how the fuck does the speaker tell ME...what looks better? That's up to me to decide for me. ON a side note... props to them for taking on a daytime CGI scene tho... but the other Hulk looked better to me.

Nobody who's a fan of KING KONG (1933) ever went into it expecting to be "fooled into thinking that's a real giant gorilla." A real giant gorilla in such a setting would be completely dull. It would basically just sit against a tree for long hours. We go into the movie expecting to see an imaginary ape character created by magical means by a true artist (Willis O'Brien) who infused the animated character with life, soul, emotion, desire and instinct.

This desire for "realistic" effects is really what's killed these movies. I've never wanted my effects to be "realistic." A man in a dinosaur suit stomping on miniature cities thrills me to no end. The CGI versions of Godzilla don't thrill me as much. A man in a dinosaur suit moves like a living being because it's played by a living being. CGI monsters move like computer-created beings, except on those occasions, like Peter Jackson's KING KONG, where an actor provides the basis for the performance. As much as I am a fan of the original KONG, I was quite impressed with what Jackson and Sirkis did in their film. Speaking of gorillas, the men who put on ape suits in old movies were never terribly convincing but when you put actors trained in ape movements in expert gorilla makeup applications, they were magnificent, as we saw in GREYSTOKE. I believed them. I didn't love the CGI apes in LEGEND OF TARZAN because I never believed them.

CGI didn't ruin movies. But it only took a few years to figure out how to use sound. It only took a few years to figure out how to use color. It only took a few years to figure out how to use wide screen. To name just two movies from 2016, I thought the CGI in Dr Strange and Fantastic Beasts was cold and boring. The Matrix was 1999, and things aren't improving.

I can just imagine what Rampage is going to look like....

I agree. It seems like there's still a lot of hit and miss with CGI, even after all these years.

CGI killed my enjoyment of horror films. Well, that and terrible reboots.

A new video essay about how David Fincher uses digital effects in movies:

I prefer that they use practical effects whenever possible, but I have no problem enhancing practical effects as long as it is well done.

And for the things that aren't possible for practical effects, well, again - just make sure it's done well.

That was an interesting video. The original puppet Yoda is way better than CGI Yoda.

I forgot about Greystoke. That was a good movie too.

Back to the video though, I think he makes a good argument, but I'm curious to know if the generation of movie goers who grew up on CGI will feel it's more "realistic" than non-CGI special effects.

The overuse of green screen CPI is terrible. Takes me right out of the picture.