[ SECRET POST #6023 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6023 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.
[Nimona]



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.
[Formula One racing]



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.
["Idol" by Yoasobi]























Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 30 secrets from Secret Submission Post #861.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

CGI doesn’t inherently suck when in the right hands. And it’s also subjective.

How much can we convince the audience that this is (contrary to what their eyes tell them) actually good?"

A lot of people’s eyes tell them that the animation in modern Pixar and Disney movies does look good. It’s some of the best CGI has to offer, whether the stories behind them are always up to snuff or not. That doesn’t mean that every frame is perfect or objectively good. But again, none of this is objective.

I wish Disney didn’t completely shut down their 2D animation department to this day, and was very upset that they did. I still wish they would make some more 2D films along with the 3D ones, even though I know it won’t happen at this point. But a lot of the 3D animated films they’ve made since then look great to me and many others, especially in recent years. Whereas there was still some growing pains with the first couple. I like Tangled, but not Frozen. But one thing they share in my opinion is that they look good at times, and look lackluster at other times. Not to mention the same-face syndrome for the characters. Which can be arguably said to have never gone away completely, but it’s at least gotten a bit better.

I’m not saying you’re wrong or that you’re not entitled to your opinion, by the way. I might disagree, and I wanted to share why, but there’s nothing wrong with your views on this subject. I’m not actually trying to argue against anything you’re saying just because I disagree with some points. Because it’s all so subjective that there’s nothing to argue against, and your feelings are completely valid.

[(Anonymous)]

I appreciate that when you say "it's subjective" you don't mean "your preferences are worth less than mine." My complaint isn't with you. It's more that I feel like the entire industry went "oh, thank goodness. What do we have to throw money at so that we can rely on fewer people and this entirely burdensome practice of having to pay them?" and then tacked on a giant hype budget in the hopes of making the public accept CGI.

The early stages of that involved investing a lot of money in 1) equipment and 2) people who could both make art and communicate with the new machines. But I never got the impression that the animation studios thought they could make movies with computers that were even *as good* as the ones they were making by hand. The corner-cutting and doing-without was all in the service of ... future corner-cutting and doing-without. So, the visuals left me cold (and still do), but I also didn't agree with their goals. And still don't.