CGY

Okay?
I am hoping there is more context to this, but I can't find it lol. 
Has anyone seen anything more about it?

The full article is here: www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/franke…

1 month ago (edited) | [YT] | 102



@johnyj2082

No CGI is just very good CGI

1 month ago | 31  

@FrostBird89

Im calling it: nearly every shot will have cgi of some kind.

1 month ago | 10

@KennyKleinComedy

I’m sure its out of context

1 month ago | 2

@YeetmanSkeetman

I think he’s onto something but missing the point? So much of modern filmmaking (and animation) is cutting corners. CGI isn’t for losers, and even bad cgi in movies isn’t necessarily the fault of the artists themselves. I sorta recall some crazy constraints being out on marvel cgi folk for their post-infinity war productions, where they were putting out like a movie or two a year, and being given no time (and less budget) at all to work on the cgi aspect. Which is bad, considering so much of the mcu is CGI. But in that case it’s not necessarily the artists who are the losers, it’s the ones dictating the artists schedules (and then throwing them to the wolves when the project fails). I do think that it’s a shame that there aren’t nearly as many true practical effects in movies anymore. Many people in the industry don’t even know how to work with them at all at this point, and a lot of younger actors are coming up on green screen (I’m outdated) acting, which is different than… I don’t know, standing in a room and watching a little worm burst out of the chest of a prop laying on a table.

1 month ago | 9

@Iamgudjoe

CGI is a tool. When used properly and given time, it can be incredibly useful

1 month ago | 7

@mohammedshawki3791

Says while being in a film whose director famously uses cgi.

1 month ago | 1

@shantanuchaudhary9712

GDT: what about Pacific Rim

1 month ago | 2

@mateosimon4237

It's about character depth and script. CGI is a tool, like set decoration

1 month ago | 0

@Emperor-Clanka69

The news site probably made it up

1 month ago | 0

@franminanicollier9431

I mean, it might be insulting to a lot of skilled, passionate, and critical people, but think of where he's coming from: he's an actor. Actors want to act around other people, in real places. Remember that clip of Ian McKellen crying on set of The Hobbit because instead of an actual Hobbit hole he was made to sit in an empty green room, acting by himself because the other actors would be added digitally in post? If you were an actor, would that make you excited? Would that feel like the job you trained for and dreamed of? If I was an actor, I think I'd stay away from major studio movies for that reason. I want to go to real locations with real people, not talk to a tennis ball on the end of a stick while being told to pretend it's the Incredible Hulk.

1 month ago | 44

@dyscotopia

Everything tha can be done well practically will always look more visceral and real than CGI. For things that would be impossible or wildly impractical practically, good CGI is necessary

1 month ago | 2

@muigogitoultrasonic3947

He definitely sparks WW3 levels of hate for this

1 month ago | 0

@nspencer7368

Maybe he shouldn’t have starred in Alita: Battle Angel then 😂. Jokes aside though, this sounds like Waltz’s sense of humour. I doubt he meant it seriously or in a bad wa

1 month ago (edited) | 1

@izzieb

He's talking about the old Perl Common Gateway Interface module. Everyone's moved on to JavaScript these days.

1 month ago | 1

@stdamonsbeard

Bad, Lazy and Poorly implemented CGI is for losers.

1 month ago | 14

@AnotherKidNamedNoah

Why was he in alita battle angel then, lol? There has to be some context behind the quote

1 month ago | 0

@Gilles17000

what about the artificial lights then on sets ? What about the makeup ? Filmmaking need all that, so why not CGI ? He can go to broadway, no CGIs there. Also, some great directors like David Finchers knows how to make great movies and to use CGIs only to enhance the scenes and considering today how CGIs are used, from removing eye blink, removing shadows, add trees, change a scene, add/remove characters, it is now completely needed and I am sure his latest film is using CGIs in some scenes.

1 month ago | 0

@jabalzy6982

CGI is terrible though… by itself, I’ve found that movies that solely rely on CGI look horrible but movies that use a mix of both practical and digital effects look amazing. CGI should be used to enhance what is already there and the actors should be able to use their talents to build off of other actors and not just talk to a blue or green wall for an hour. So Christoph isn’t entirely wrong CGI can be very detrimental to a film if not done right and usually it’s not done right.

1 month ago | 0

@isaacholzwarth

This is yet another "No CGI means invisible CGI". They keep doing this. Just acknowledge the work of the practical artists AND the CG artists. Is that so hard? You can emphasize the practical effects without ignoring the CG work.

1 month ago | 0

@jimdshea

He's an actor: it can be quite brutal for actors to have extensive makeup applied everyday - cue 20 crazy examples. He is announcing that he is tough stuff. It's a throw away comment. (to perceive it otherwise suggests you have a subconscious inclination toward whatever you are inferring: ie CG is inferior X practical; people who use/create/watch CG are pathetic and weak). He's just selling tickets yo.

1 month ago | 0