04-17-2018, 08:00 AM
The common criticism in people who don't like Gilliam's late Ĺ“uvre is that Gilliam has lost his touch since he moved from practical effects to CGI...
As we know, the criticism isn't founded too much because Gilliam don't use digital effects that much now (see the link posted by clark about the miniature effects in Parnassus : https://www.dreamsfanzine.com/chat/showt...21#pid1621 )... On the contrary, I wonder if this reputation of Gilliam has a master in practical effects and a bad user of CGI isn't wrong altogether...
And here is the thing : Gilliam used CGI animals in "12 monkeys" in 1995 (the 3 giraffes at the end), the same year as "Jumanji", but it went much less noticed. And -and here I'd be very glad if you gave me some proof I didn't dream it- I think i saw a making of somewhere proving that the constellations creatures in "Munchausen" are CGI (my google searches brought me nothing about that so if you have some lead...)... So is Gilliam really an ignored CGI pioneer ? What are your thoughts ?
As we know, the criticism isn't founded too much because Gilliam don't use digital effects that much now (see the link posted by clark about the miniature effects in Parnassus : https://www.dreamsfanzine.com/chat/showt...21#pid1621 )... On the contrary, I wonder if this reputation of Gilliam has a master in practical effects and a bad user of CGI isn't wrong altogether...
And here is the thing : Gilliam used CGI animals in "12 monkeys" in 1995 (the 3 giraffes at the end), the same year as "Jumanji", but it went much less noticed. And -and here I'd be very glad if you gave me some proof I didn't dream it- I think i saw a making of somewhere proving that the constellations creatures in "Munchausen" are CGI (my google searches brought me nothing about that so if you have some lead...)... So is Gilliam really an ignored CGI pioneer ? What are your thoughts ?