- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 26,272
- Reaction Score
- 31,988
CGI is a tool. Like any tool, when its the right tool for the job it allows you to do things that were otherwise not possible. It doesn't make things safe or unsafe, it's how you use it. It a silly opinion of CGI (by a genius and one of the best film makers ever). I love practical effects, they are heck of lot more fun than CGI. But you can use practical and CGI in the same scene and the audience nevers know it.
I also think that Nolan lost a little something when he separated from Wally Pfister. They did some amazing things together and Wally is flat out the best steadycam operator on the planet. But I think that ship has sailed for whatever reason. There are a lot of very, very good cinematographers out there but their films had something special.
What he means is that the look of CGI can make a threatening thing look less threatening. I tend to agree with it.
"I think computer graphics, they’re very versatile, they can do all kinds of things, but they tend to feel a bit safe. That’s why they’re difficult to use in horror movies. Animation tends to feel a little safe for the audience. The Trinity Test, ultimately, but also these early imaginings of Oppenheimer visualizing the Quantum Realm, they had to be threatening in some way. They had to have the bite of real-world imagery. The Trinity Test, for those who were there, was the most beautiful and terrifying thing simultaneously, and that’s where we were headed with this film."
Christopher Nolan Explains Why There's No CGI in 'Oppenheimer'
"I think computer graphics, they’re very versatile, they can do all kinds of things, but they tend to feel a bit safe."
collider.com