:
I didn't mind Cars at all.
But I'm still kind of weirded out by the lack of people.
|
You know that Stephen King story "Christine" about the sentient car that kills people?
Imagine that on a global scale. Sure, the Cars characters are cute, but they don't discuss their dark history and the unspeakable things they have done to ascend to the status of master race.
:
Question, do you like entirely CG films like Wall-E/Rango compared to ones that do a mix like Harry Potter / Men in Black? I watched Men in Black 2 and to me, the CGI blended seamlessly with the story. Obviously it isn't true for all films, but for a few films it can blend to create something really great. I'm specifically thinking of District 9 and The Avengers.
|
I didn't like Wall-E. Well, that's not entirely true. I loved the first half of Wall-E. The second half had so many story problems and, like UP, became far too cartoony and absurd for me. I could rant about it, but I won't.
I loved Rango. I could gush about it, but I won't.
As for modern films, I think some CGI is necessary, but I'm still a huge fan of more traditional special FX and I admire the directors that use them whenever possible. The Men in Black films are a good example. They only used CG when the aliens had to do something they simply couldn't do otherwise. The rest of the time it was Rick Baker's magnificent puppets, bodysuits, and make-up that stole the show.
What I don't like are movies that have computer-generated sets. Not only does it very noticeably limit the actors' performances, but I always notice it and it feels cheap and silly. Alice in Wonderland and the Star Wars prequels are good examples of what I'm talking about. When you film your entire movie on a chroma key stage, it's going to suck by default.