this post was submitted on 14 Jul 2026
396 points (94.6% liked)

Technology

86364 readers
3860 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NewNewAugustEast@lemmy.zip 18 points 17 hours ago (4 children)

Its weird that he really was on the forefront once because he did physical effects with interesting camera shots. it felt new and different.

AI is not going to give you that, it will suck. CGI sucks already too.

Oh well not like he is relevant. A new hope was at least interesting, but its been nothing after that anyways.

[–] GoatSynagogue@lemmy.world -1 points 6 hours ago

If he’s embracing AI then he is once again on the forefront. AI has the ability to revolutionise the industry in a way that it needs in order to survive - greatly reduce costs and greatly reduce production times.

Movie studios are quickly moving to the same situation that video game developers are in now thanks to ballooning costs and long development times - a situation where if every single game they release isn’t an absolute smash hit seeking 20 million copies at full price, they’re going to go under.

The movie industry is in free fall. AI adoption is one of the only realistic paths forward.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 6 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

He used what was available at the time. For the original trilogy, that was practical effects.

The prequel trilogy was a bit more... Dodgy thanks to eagerly embraced CGI that wasn't fully baked yet.

People famously critiqued the reworked original trilogy due to various dubious creative tweaks. Like waking on Jabba and Jabba just having a funny reaction instead of how you would expect him to react.

Nothing he added was pointful. All of the CGI retouches of the original trilogy were pointless CGI effects for the sake of having pointless CGI effects. At one point in the Mos Eisley sequence a huge pack animal walks through the frame, obscuring almost all of it. Why? Because it was some computer generated shit to throw in!

[–] cheat700000007@lemmy.world 9 points 16 hours ago

Only because he had to. As soon as it was possible he went cg and blue screens.

[–] kaotic@lemmy.world 9 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (2 children)

Not going to get into the AI debate; I will agree that BAD CGI sucks; there’s so much CGI you never even notice and without it the scenes would be horrible. The main reason “CGI sucks” is because of the shift to go with the lowest bidder who’s then forced to work under horrific timelines and unable to actually do good work. CGI itself doesn’t suck, but it absolutely can when done by a low bidder in 1/4 of the time it needs.

https://youtu.be/bL6hp8BKB24

[–] NewNewAugustEast@lemmy.zip 4 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

Funny he uses Michael bay as an example in that video. Nothing will put me to sleep faster than a Michael bay movies effects.

I get your point though, it's a tool when used artistically and with skill can be fine.

[–] yessikg@fedia.io -2 points 12 hours ago

The only good CGI is one that holds up well after decades, and that's basically only the CGI in the POTC 2 and 3 movies