A Quote by Jason Blum

Unless you're making Marvel movies, I think CGI usually suffers, especially in mid-budget-range horror movies where you see CGI. — © Jason Blum
Unless you're making Marvel movies, I think CGI usually suffers, especially in mid-budget-range horror movies where you see CGI.
Sometimes big budget means explosions! CGI! CGI, the possibilities are so limitless that it begins to be impractical. I'm more interested in the kinds of movies where the science fiction world has a set series of rules and you operate in it because of, maybe, constraints in the budget.
I think sometimes big budget means explosions! CGI! CGI, the possibilities are so limitless that it begins to be impractical.
Our ethos for 'Now You See Me 2' was that everything in the movie at least had the potential to be done in real life, and I'd say over 90% of it was actually done in-camera with no CGI. Of course, movies like this are always going to be bound by the rules of Hollywood, being there's going to be enhancements of CGI.
People regard CGI as a gimmick; they almost blame CGI for a bad story or a bad script. They talk about CGI as if it's responsible for a drop in standards.
Large-budget movies start to lose focus on the story and the actors, and it becomes purely about the visual, or CGI, or framing with the cranes, or whatever it may be.
I have grown up reading Marvel Comics and Marvel movies with their intricately woven storylines. It is fascinating to see how Marvel has created characters and stories that resonate so well with audiences across the globe, making movies at a scale that one had never before imagined.
I'm not a big fan of CGI. When I look at it, I go: 'Wait a minute. That's not possible.' And I think other people see the same thing. The movies I worked on, we did stunts for real. And I think it shows.
We tried to do Yoda in CGI in Episode I, but we just couldn't get it done in time. We couldn't get the technology to work, so we had to use the puppet, but the puppet really wasn't as good as the CGI. So when we did the reissue, we had to put the CGI back in, which was what it was meant to be.
Mid-range to low-budget movies have to have a name in the lead to get financing for it.
The quality of CGI, audiences are now so used to it. They don't know what is CGI and what is real.
I think one of my favorite things about making low budget movies is that when you get into expensive moviemaking territory, it's almost impossible not to reverse engineer the movies. It's irresponsible not to think about the result and the financial result. But when you make low budget movies, you can put that out of your head.
Even today, a lot of the CGI you see in movies is so clean and crisp that it just looks fake. It's weird: the more advanced they get, the faker it looks.
It seems crazy moving from making little movies to making like literally movies with Marvel, which are like the biggest movies that they make.
A lot of low-budget genre films you see are horror movies, because horror is the friendliest movie to lack of money.
I wasn't a fanboy of horror. I didn't grow up on horror movies. I grew up loving all movies. I still love all movies, but I particularly love scary movies - as much for the culture around them as the movies themselves.
I don't have a problem with green screen at all. I think children invented CGI. We invent worlds. A stick can become a sword. Or a bowl of stones can become a bowl of tomatoes. That's what children do, and that's what CGI enables us to do.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!