Twitter strag is defending the state of CGI these days 
No, CGI was always like this, you only remember the good movies 
Everyone talks about how CGI was "so much better back then" while mainly using only one example.
— Matthew Donald (@MatthewDonald64) October 30, 2024
No, CGI wasn't better back then. Davy Jones was just exceptionally good. You just don't remember all the crap that got released back then too. https://t.co/ZWXoQJRUGz
MODOK is actually very technically impressive, like the skin textures and metal arms and everything. It's the design itself people found iffy. Watch Corrider Crew's video on it.
— Matthew Donald (@MatthewDonald64) October 31, 2024
Actually, Marvel movies are peak CGI you pleb 
And of course he starts grifting as soon as he gets a shred of attention 
Wow, this blew up. Uhhhh, check out my books and podcasts? They have dinosaurs and lasers and steampunk alt histories and such. You'll probably like them a bit. https://t.co/6sywKpgt7q
— Matthew Donald (@MatthewDonald64) October 31, 2024
Wowzers! 
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
The cgi in the t-rex breakout scene in the original Jurassic Park is better than the cgi in jurassic world !kino !dinochads
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Marvel has had bad CGI for ever and is no indication of the general state of it. They peaked with Iron Man 1, their literal first film.
I think the general level of CGI was fairly poor since the popularization of the technology and that has not changed much. There is a seeming lack of progression since the 2000s though. I do agree that most big films today are nowhere as good with it as big films in the past, like the aforementioned Pirates of Caribbean or the first Transformers film were.
I think the problem is that CGI is neglected and treated as a cheap replacement for practical effects, when good CGI is not really that cheap, and not that fast.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
The lack of progression is the problem
Sure, shitty CGI existed in the past too, but if Davy Jones was possible then, even as the peak, it should be possible and common now after the technology evolved. And yet CGI is just as shitty. There's no excuse for that 
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Yeah beyond the obvious budget/time constraints, and lack of at the very least practical reference, the biggest issue is the nature of today's movies, their lack of clear direction and film making by committee.
When you're filming 2 actors on a greenscreen with nondescript lighting, where eventually everything apart from actors faces has to be reconstructed from scratch, and probably reworked once or twice, getting good results is hard.
If you are actually decided what the scene should look like, do some or a lot of things practically, both to reduce work and add reference, are decided on lighting - position, intensity, color temp etc., and work with VFX director before any filming starts to make the CG process easier (low light scene, lack of motion, quicker cuts, different framing etc. can hide imperfections), you might get better looking results than a theoretically better CG from more skilled team.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
I don't think he's necessarily wrong - there's like 15 years separating Davy Jones and MODOK so I could believe that the latter is more sophisticated technically thanks to the slew of advancements that came during that period of time. He's wrong about the design only being iffy. It's fricking hideous.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
That looks like something from a youtube video
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
He looks like he's about to recruit some teenagers with attitude.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
I legit thought the pirate version of this I watched was a leak with unfinished fx. That dude looked like complete shit.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
CGI almost certainly has gotten a lot better over the last 20 years.
The difference is that back then, because it was obviously flawed, directors tried to shoot around it and mixed it in with practical effects.
Modern studio directors are hacks and lazy, as are the rest involved in movie production, and CGI has become normalised as being ubiquitous and out in the open.
So they dont even try to hide any part of it or mixing it with practical effects, and with how ubiquitous in movies it is theres also much more chance for bad effects to slip through.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Common sense
you have little real-life environment visible to contrast against the CGI, especially not humans, and you have constant motion and movement of both the effect and the camera so you dont have time to focus on any single aspect of it long enough to notice the imperfections.
Its also combined with a practical prop in the beginning which is made just as unrealistically shiny as the effect to trick your mind.
Im definitely not arguing that it's worse than disneyslop effects, either. They can take a lot more time on these scenes because they dont have to animate 90% of the entire movie.
I cant believe I'm actually praising the quality of bayslop tbqh
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
for older pics, you werent sure if it was an effect or a stuntman. nowadays you cent percent know even the muzzle flashes are cgi
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
trump should outlaw CGI. practical effects need to be a thing again. movies need to be filmed on actual sets and not green rooms.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Its because of the Jeets undercutting mayo CGI artists.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Likes on tweets are meaningless imo. Two wildly contrasting opinions get the same amount of likes and retweets and @ZombieWolf think they just get upmarseyd anyways because people on twitter just live too argue
That said @ZombieWolf don't care how good modern chi is so long as it's insanely expensive and the movie flops.
@ZombieWolf love sucking peepee
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Same, but with games and their graphics too
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
I'd have to guess old CGI stuff was done in a more frame by frame way akin to older animation but on a computer. The newer stuff probably relies on a 3d model design with more automated extrapolation.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Snapshots:
https://x.com/MatthewDonald64/status/1851453429194829843:
ghostarchive.org
archive.org
archive.ph (click to archive)
October 31, 2024:
ghostarchive.org
archive.org
archive.ph (click to archive)
https://t.co/6sywKpgt7q:
ghostarchive.org
archive.org
archive.ph (click to archive)
October 31, 2024:
ghostarchive.org
archive.org
archive.ph (click to archive)
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Snappy kneels to the !zombiechads
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Yes
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context