Can it really? People say the unique look of the movie “Bladerunner” is due to its use of models and real sets. There have been countless movies that imitated its look with CGI, but none of them have its special feel.
If you haven't listened to the director commentary on the Bladerunner director's cut, you owe yourself a rewatch. The only parts that I recall are regarding set design and frankly if it wasn't for the struggles and pain of a real set I'm not sure the movie would have remotely the same feel.
Where reality meets imagination is a magical place. Unbounded imagination typically results in tiring fantasy that doesn't resonate with the viewer. The realism is free when it's actually real.
When you have a massive CGI budget you are pressured to make everything as cool as possible. No restraint. That’s why you end up with tiring fantasies.
Yes it could be replicated by CGI. There is no absolutely reason it couldn't. In fact these games don't just use photos of Dioramas but heavily edited ones with CGI on top.
> “Bladerunner” is due to its use of models and real sets.
The problem with CGI in movies today is "restrain". Movies today tend to overdo 3D and color grading so it often look unreal. I never liked the heavy use of color filters in recent movies.
I really wish I could find the source, but I remember seeing a documentary done by the effects team for Star Trek DS9 and Voyager. They talked about the transition from models on DS9 to CGI for voyager. The point that stood out for me was that they said what they missed the most from doing model based effects was the serendipitous shots they would get, be it an interesting angle, lighting effect, etc. The beauty of working in reality is that reality fills in the blanks. With CGI everything has to be planned. (I get thats not 100%, there's plenty of CGI plugins that generate random noise and effects, but its still not the same).
Interesting. Physical reality is infinitely complex, and a CGI is a computational model of that reality. It’s become impressive (hair!), and I’m sure I’ve seen plenty of CGI in movies without realizing it. But it’s not the same.
Could you replicate, sure. But would you necessarily create the same thing if you start from a CGI only process, not necessarily.
It's not too say one is implicitly better than the other but part of creative intent is derived from the process itself and the constraints inherent within it. I genuinely believe that the creator is making an expressive choice here and that's cool.
