Matrix gone too far?

[Banky]

I am big Matrix fan and i just hope the brothers dont get a hard on with the CGI stuff and put out a nearly completley CG movie like Attack of The Clones.

Any thoughts?

[Cecil]

yeah, im sure they WONT make it a competely cg movie. what was the budget again?

[russiasusha]

yeah, the whole them saying more cgi is my only fear of this film.

on another note, i dreamed that i saw it last night.  Don't you hate when that happens?

[Ghostboy]

I know I hate it when I dream something cool. I dreamed I saw Star Wars Episode III two week after Episode II opened. At the same time, I love things like that, because good dreams leave you feeling happy when you wake up.

Anyway...I use this handy gauge when wondering if a movie has too much CGI. Just compare the trailer to any of the Star Wars prequels. I think the Matrix is safe.

[MacGuffin]

There's no such term as 'too much CGI' if the story and screenplay are great.

[Duck Sauce]

There's no such term as 'too much CGI' if the story and screenplay are great.

I disagree. I am prett worried about the CGI because I dont want it looking like a videogame. There is a shot ive seen in the trailers already where neo is swinging around on a pole or something and he is clearly CGI and looks awful. Im not saying the movie is going to be bad or hurt by it, I just like things to look real. I just wish theyd try to do it as real as possible and not just do CGI for the sake of doing a lot of CGI. We will see

[Raikus]

The way they did CGI in this movie is completely opposite of the way Star Wars Episode II did there's. I read a Wired article on it and it was very intriguing. They film the actors doing as much as they can (action wise) as well as Reeve's and Weaving's faces in a multitude of grimaces and expressions and then compose it onto the action actors. While some scenes absolutely had to be fully CGI (the bo scene and the dogpile) they tried to keep it at a minimum. So that gives me hope. Plus, from the trailer, is it really the lack of quality in the CGI that brings out its fakeness, or your mind telling you that's not physically possible? I think it's a combination of the two, but more the improbability than bad CGI.

Now Hulk. That's some bad CGI.

[Ghostboy]

Yeah, Mummy Returns gave me a headache, it was so bad.

That shot of Neo on the pole is TOTALLY your mind messing with you. I thought it looked kinda CG-ish at first, but after seeing the trailer about a dozen time, and paying really close attention to that shot...I realized that IF you could actually shoot a shot of someone doing that, that's what it would really look like. If you look closely you can see the reactions and subtle movements on everyone's faces, including Neo's. Its perfect.

[Duck Sauce]

That's some bad CGI.

Would you say bad CGI or just that CGI isnt good enough yet to to be anywhere near realistic.

10 years from now, the CGI in movies are going to be something to laugh at.

[RegularKarate]

10 years from now, the CGI in movies are going to be something to laugh at.

10 years from now, CG will be so good, they'll have to think of something else to impress people with.

[Gold Trumpet]

The stunts Buster Keaton did in the 20s are more impressive than anything I've seen done by CGI.

I'm really anxious for The Matrix. Even though I have reservations after seeing some bad effects in the commerical, especially the part where Neo throws all the guys in black off of him, I am still very optimistic. The worst thing this movie can do is go into over load and be a 2 hour exercise in special effects brilliance only for the purpose of beating the ones in the first Matrix. That will just take away from the effect of the effects and be numbing. Still, I'm hopeful.

~rougerum

[Victor]

The worst thing this movie can do is go into over load and be a 2 hour exercise in special effects brilliance only for the purpose of beating the ones in the first Matrix.

~rougerum

what was the best part about the first matrix? the kick-ass, take no prisoners slam-bang action of the last 50 mins. I like the story, i think its a great one, theyve created a whole world. but now that it exists, theyre gonna want to play in it. make no mistake about it, this is a videogame movie in the truest sense of the word. I mean, it takes place inside a videogame. Just sit back and enjoy the ride. Of course theyre gonna try and kick the shit out of the first matrix, otherwise whats the point? They used special effects correctly in the first one, they looked pretty real, on a budget of only $60m. now that theyve got $300m of course theyre gonna push the effects barrier. i think this movie will have the best effects, cgi and practical, of any movie so far. i trust them, after all, this took four years. its gotta be good. George Lucas just cranks scripts out in a weekend, and hands it over to the cartoonists-I MEAN, effects technichians. The wachowskis are different. Expect this thing to kick up some serious shit.

[Gold Trumpet]

I actually didn't like the first one. Not for its identification as a video game action movie, but because there was another very similiar movie out that was light years beyond it and I couldn't enjoy The Matrix because of seeing how similiar both movies were. Way too distracting, and in that distraction, made The Matrix look pretty bad.

I do understand what you are saying in it being a pure action movie, but just going all out in effects over and over again is not the best way to utilize them at all. All that does is bring the effects to a level of normal and not special. When you spread them out and dictate the movie on a low level, you can make the effects completely special and much more effective.

4 years isn't that long in producing special effects for a movie. The longest I know of is A.I., which was under production since 1977 and not completed til 2001. They really waited til they felt everything was right.

Even with what I said, I still will likely find enjoyment out of the next one because I will see it as a ride and nothing else. It won't necessarily be a great movie, but maybe an enjoyable one though. I really am excited to see more of the effects of Neo flying. Those were great in the trailers.

~rougerum

[cowboykurtis]

I actually didn't like the first one. Not for its identification as a video game action movie, but because there was another very similiar movie out that was light years beyond it and I couldn't enjoy The Matrix because of seeing how similiar both movies were. Way too distracting, and in that distraction, made The Matrix look pretty bad.

I do understand what you are saying in it being a pure action movie, but just going all out in effects over and over again is not the best way to utilize them at all. All that does is bring the effects to a level of normal and not special. When you spread them out and dictate the movie on a low level, you can make the effects completely special and much more effective.

4 years isn't that long in producing special effects for a movie. The longest I know of is A.I., which was under production since 1977 and not completed til 2001. They really waited til they felt everything was right.

Even with what I said, I still will likely find enjoyment out of the next one because I will see it as a ride and nothing else. It won't necessarily be a great movie, but maybe an enjoyable one though. I really am excited to see more of the effects of Neo flying. Those were great in the trailers.

~rougerum

what is the movie you speak of that was so similar?

[Sleuth]

Dark City?