Children of the 80s and 90s, you may remember a time when movie special effects weren’t computer generated. They were actually practical; they existed in some tangible form or other (stop-motion models, miniatures, latex make-up effects etc.) in our reality.
So today’s question is: do you miss practical special effects? Do you think CGI is ruining the movie experience, creating a slick but artificial-looking world you just can’t believe in? Or do you think we’re just being blinded by nostalgia, and practical effects are more distracting than their summoned-from-pixels counterparts?
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Critical Hit as an organisation.
Last Updated: February 26, 2014
Alien Emperor Trevor
February 26, 2014 at 10:41
All I care about is that it’s not done poorly or distracts too much from the story.
Grant Hancock
February 26, 2014 at 10:58
I have issue not with films using too many CGI effects, but too many ‘Special Effects’ period … Too many movies use flashy action stuffs to smooth over the cracks (weak story, poor script writing, horrible acting).
I’m all for effects IF they enhance what would already be an awesome film.
TiMsTeR1033
February 26, 2014 at 11:24
If the CG is done well and adds to the world then yes, best example would be Avatar.
RinceandLeSIGH
February 26, 2014 at 11:26
If it complements the movie, and doesn’t MAKE the movie I have no issues with it.
James Francis
February 26, 2014 at 12:22
I’m in too minds. The new Thor is a great example of how it builds worlds, but on the other hand action scenes have gotten lazy by using CG animation to pull off stupid-looking stunts. Lone Ranger did that a lot and it’s slowly ruining martial arts epics.