Write about the last movie you watched (2006-2010)

[Melvil]

Not all, most. CG was used in certain cases where models were too restrictive, and to tie things together, and do set extensions and the like. I'm all for traditional model work, but it's very ignorant to say all CG looks bad, especially when you're being fooled by it all the time.

[Clovis8]

Not all, most. CG was used in certain cases where models were too restrictive, and to tie things together, and do set extensions and the like. I'm all for traditional model work, but it's very ignorant to say all CG looks bad, especially when you're being fooled by it all the time.

Ignorant or not CGI looks bad more often than not and the more there is the worse the movie looks. You may love it, but I hate it. I am fine with it being a minor addition but when it is the main tool it makes for a terrible looking movie.

[ferris]

Not all, most. CG was used in certain cases where models were too restrictive, and to tie things together, and do set extensions and the like. I'm all for traditional model work, but it's very ignorant to say all CG looks bad, especially when you're being fooled by it all the time.

Ignorant or not CGI looks bad more often than not and the more there is the worse the movie looks. You may love it, but I hate it. I am fine with it being a minor addition but when it is the main tool it makes for a terrible looking movie.

KUCI Filmschool had a great interview with Duncan Jones over the summer where he talked about the models and how his movie benefitted from the writers stike .  Interesting stuff if you haven't heard it yet
http://www.kuci.org/podcasts/?ShowID=683

[Melvil]

Not all, most. CG was used in certain cases where models were too restrictive, and to tie things together, and do set extensions and the like. I'm all for traditional model work, but it's very ignorant to say all CG looks bad, especially when you're being fooled by it all the time.

Ignorant or not CGI looks bad more often than not and the more there is the worse the movie looks. You may love it, but I hate it. I am fine with it being a minor addition but when it is the main tool it makes for a terrible looking movie.

And when you say "more often than not", you're basing that on what? When the very point of good CG is that you don't notice it, how can you claim to be able to make that judgment? There is very often CG used flawlessly in the least likely places you would suspect it. Or when it's effectively used to serve the story and couldn't have been done any other way. That's the CG I love. I love it as a tool, that doesn't mean I love bad CG or when CG is abused by the filmmaker. There's a lot of big stupid movies that use it in horrible ways, but they're big stupid movies, that shouldn't carry over to movies that use it so well you don't even know it's being used.

So I guess it makes me sad that even in the case of one of those movies, like Moon, you still take the opportunity to crap all over CG when the filmmakers themselves employed it to fulfill their vision.

[Sam the Cinema Snob]

Moon
A rare film about ideas that never bores. I am sure I am going to get flamed for this, but this movie succeeds where Blade Runner failed.

Moon is further evidence that CGI sucks and traditional effects are far superior.

Shakespeare in Love

Wow, this is actually good. 8/10.

I really likes this movie and have no idea why it has a growing bad reputation.

And you think FLY is crazy. 

[Bill Thompson]

Duncan Jones probably doesn't think Moon is better than Blade Runner.

And he would be wrong to not think that.

[chardy999]

The Graduate - Mike Nichols, 1967

I had high expectations for this classic (I love Nichols' Closer and Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?). For the first half hour or so I was enthralled – Mrs. Robinson was dynamite, the dialogue was snappy and there were some great little scenes (through-the-leg shot was cool and I liked the one where the camera is in the bedroom watching Ben fumbling on the stairs, begging him to return to the bedroom). Their vapid relationship was set-up fantastically and was a great precursor to the necessary confrontation: “we’re going to have a conversation.” Angst creeps in, things are uneasy, how will this develop? Well ... it doesn’t, it just stops dead. Mrs. Robinson (the only interesting character) just disappears, the boring daughter comes in and consequently the movie just dies. With the departure of Mrs. Robinson, nobody says anything interesting and we are stuck watching a bunch of insipid fools. I don’t understand how something so good can go so bad. First 30 minutes: 9/10. The rest: 3/10.

[Bill Thompson]

The Graduate - Mike Nichols, 1967

I had high expectations for this classic (I love Nichols' Closer and Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?). For the first half hour or so I was enthralled – Mrs. Robinson was dynamite, the dialogue was snappy and there were some great little scenes (through-the-leg shot was cool and I liked the one where the camera is in the bedroom watching Ben fumbling on the stairs, begging him to return to the bedroom). Their vapid relationship was set-up fantastically and was a great precursor to the necessary confrontation: “we’re going to have a conversation.” Angst creeps in, things are uneasy, how will this develop? Well ... it doesn’t, it just stops dead. Mrs. Robinson (the only interesting character) just disappears, the boring daughter comes in and consequently the movie just dies. With the departure of Mrs. Robinson, nobody says anything interesting and we are stuck watching a bunch of insipid fools. I don’t understand how something so good can go so bad. First 30 minutes: 9/10. The rest: 3/10.

I felt the same way, couldn't stand this movie either time I watched it. I was especially irked at how the direction decides to punish Mrs. Robinson as the movie goes along, the only character in the whole movie who is really alive and willing to feel and the writing/direction treat her like she's Satan and needs to die. I also couldn't stand Hoffman's character from the get-go, just not a movie for me I guess.

[jbissell]

The Graduate - Mike Nichols, 1967

I had high expectations for this classic (I love Nichols' Closer and Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?). For the first half hour or so I was enthralled – Mrs. Robinson was dynamite, the dialogue was snappy and there were some great little scenes (through-the-leg shot was cool and I liked the one where the camera is in the bedroom watching Ben fumbling on the stairs, begging him to return to the bedroom). Their vapid relationship was set-up fantastically and was a great precursor to the necessary confrontation: “we’re going to have a conversation.” Angst creeps in, things are uneasy, how will this develop? Well ... it doesn’t, it just stops dead. Mrs. Robinson (the only interesting character) just disappears, the boring daughter comes in and consequently the movie just dies. With the departure of Mrs. Robinson, nobody says anything interesting and we are stuck watching a bunch of insipid fools. I don’t understand how something so good can go so bad. First 30 minutes: 9/10. The rest: 3/10.

I felt the same way, couldn't stand this movie either time I watched it. I was especially irked at how the direction decides to punish Mrs. Robinson as the movie goes along, the only character in the whole movie who is really alive and willing to feel and the writing/direction treat her like she's Satan and needs to die. I also couldn't stand Hoffman's character from the get-go, just not a movie for me I guess.

I'm glad that others are seeing the light.

[ferris]

The Graduate - Mike Nichols, 1967

I had high expectations for this classic (I love Nichols' Closer and Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?). For the first half hour or so I was enthralled – Mrs. Robinson was dynamite, the dialogue was snappy and there were some great little scenes (through-the-leg shot was cool and I liked the one where the camera is in the bedroom watching Ben fumbling on the stairs, begging him to return to the bedroom). Their vapid relationship was set-up fantastically and was a great precursor to the necessary confrontation: “we’re going to have a conversation.” Angst creeps in, things are uneasy, how will this develop? Well ... it doesn’t, it just stops dead. Mrs. Robinson (the only interesting character) just disappears, the boring daughter comes in and consequently the movie just dies. With the departure of Mrs. Robinson, nobody says anything interesting and we are stuck watching a bunch of insipid fools. I don’t understand how something so good can go so bad. First 30 minutes: 9/10. The rest: 3/10.

I felt the same way, couldn't stand this movie either time I watched it. I was especially irked at how the direction decides to punish Mrs. Robinson as the movie goes along, the only character in the whole movie who is really alive and willing to feel and the writing/direction treat her like she's Satan and needs to die. I also couldn't stand Hoffman's character from the get-go, just not a movie for me I guess.

I'm glad that others are seeing the light.

I found the whole thing to be a bit of a head scratcher too.  But on the good side I finally understood like three Simpsons references.  So there's something