Magician Films with CGI

[Scowling Dragon]

There is a special layer of hell for heist, or magician films that have to use CGI or movie cuts in order to show their "Magic".

Nothing gets me as mad as those films, which can't bother to get a solid writer, or a real good magician, and instead just slather on thick piles of CGI goo to allow their characters to do their "Clever Stunts".

Now You See Me deserves extra salt in their eyes for having a hypnotist character who may as well have been a super soldier from another dimension as his "Hypnotism" may as well have been mind control/ mind reading.

[Razade]

YEAH! Screw movies for not being realistic and not training their actors to do real magic! A skill that takes years and years to master and instead using cheap CGI to get that effect!

[Morph Bark]

YEAH! Screw movies for not being realistic and not training their actors to do real magic! A skill that takes years and years to master and instead using cheap CGI to get that effect!

You said it, brother. It's like they think pure editing can't make a movie more interesting.

[Nerd-o-rama]

Well I mean, if the movie is about stage magic, is it really so much to ask that they reproduce the tricks in at least an authentic manner?

Granted, the only film on this subject I know off the top of my head is The Prestige, which kinda stops being about stage magic and starts being about spoilers instead.

[Ravian]

YEAH! Screw movies for not being realistic and not training their actors to do real magic! A skill that takes years and years to master and instead using cheap CGI to get that effect!

Eh, he has a point. (at least as far as CGI goes)

Stage magic is definitely something that can be accomplished without CGI, seeing as how magicians do it that way just fine.

Granted, it is relevant that most movies can't really expect their actors to learn real stage magic. But the thing with stage magic in a movie is that you only have all the time in the world till you get a cut where the trick looks real. This is especially true for a lot of tricks where a cut can just be used.

Cuts I'd say are pretty necessary for a movie to use, CGI is pretty lazy though.

[Razade]

You said it, brother. It's like they think pure editing can't make a movie more interesting.

I know right? Those hacks!

[huttj509]

Well I mean, if the movie is about stage magic, is it really so much to ask that they reproduce the tricks in at least an authentic manner?

Granted, the only film on this subject I know off the top of my head is The Prestige, which kinda stops being about stage magic and starts being about spoilers instead.

At the same time, the stuff that is stage magic is plausible, including the stage magic part of the spoiler.

[Scowling Dragon]

If you want an example of what bugs me, at a certain point in time to show how "Good" its escape artists are Now you See Me has an escape artist dumped tied up into a tank of Pirañas. CGI piranhas. Who CGI swirl all across the actor, blocking your sight allowing for his "Magical" escape.

I personally felt INSULTED. If the point of the film is to convince me that these stunts are possible by mundane people, then don't use technology that proves its impossible!

[random11]

It depends more on the movies than on the stunts themselves.

Take "The illusionist" as an example.
It was a decent movie even if the magic tricks were no less ridicules than the ones on "Now you see me" (and it's especially weird because of the decade it's supposed to take place at).
As I see it, the major difference between the two is that "The Illusionist" had a story around magic, while "Now you see me" focused on the magic and the story was secondary.
Since the magic is the focus, it's harder to ignore impossible things or bad effects, and much easier to hate it if it's something you understand about.

As for generally hating the combination of stage magic and CGI, I guess everyone has his pet peeve.
Some computer guys are annoyed every time they see a "hacker" in a movie using a 3D interface to hack into the pentagon and then click the famous "upload virus" linux command.
History fans might cringe every time they see a "historical" movie with warriors fighting weapons that will only be invented in 200 years.
Archeologists might hate Indiana Jones (and not just the Crystal skull) for misrepresenting what they do.

So if you hate these movies because of your love of stage magic, it's your right of course.
Just know that there is no good way to represent magic without CGI or other kinds of special effects, but there can still be good movies about it.

[GloatingSwine]

If you want an example of what bugs me, at a certain point in time to show how "Good" its escape artists are Now you See Me has an escape artist dumped tied up into a tank of Pirañas. CGI piranhas. Who CGI swirl all across the actor, blocking your sight allowing for his "Magical" escape.

I personally felt INSULTED. If the point of the film is to convince me that these stunts are possible by mundane people, then don't use technology that proves its impossible!

These stunts aren't possible for mundane people.

They're possible for extremely highly trained people with years or decades of practice, which film actors and stuntmen do not have.

So, like they do with absolutely everything else because shock horror movies are not actually real things which are happening they use camera tricks, framing, editing, CGI, and other underhanded techniques to fool the audience into thinking that something which is not happening is, in fact, happening.

[AdmiralCheez]

You also have to consider the budget/time constraints of film making. It's just not practical to spend years and a considerable amount of money to train an actor to do stage magic, when they can just slap some simple CGI and editing tricks on it and call it a day.

[DigoDragon]

The film might get away with using mirrors and glass to make two tanks-- the one closer to the camera with the piranhas and the other behind that the tank with the actor/stunt double.

[Scowling Dragon]

Well Michael J Fox Learned how to play Guitar in back to the Future for maximum effect, but not every film can have love and care pushed into it.

The reason my pet peave is for CGI in particular, its because its a substitute for everything else.

Can't choreograph? CGI!
No Stuntmen? CGI!
No good scenario? CGI!

And I understand budget and I understand that audience people are stupid, but Im talking about a film as something that you make out of love (Even under restrictions and working to maximize profits) then out of obligation.

The Piraña Tank Scene was the least of its troubles, but its just its lazy slapdash attitude that gets me.

Instead of making a more realistic stunt, using stuntmen, some editing, and then resulting in a real dazzling display, they wen't the cheap nonsense route.

Its just such a Stupid, LAZY Movie. With a bajillion dollar budget.

Like the hypnotism is its way out of anything plotwise.

The Illusionist didn't bother me AS much, until they had a scene with the character reading notes for another impossible trick that was done using CGI in a "See it CAN be real" sort of way. Then I was mad.

Oceans 11 doesn't make full sense either, but it has so much more CARE put into it. There is so much better work giving the impression that this is all real and can happen.

I guess its just the lazy scriptwriting combined with lazy production that just gets my goat.

[Chen]

The film might get away with using mirrors and glass to make two tanks-- the one closer to the camera with the piranhas and the other behind that the tank with the actor/stunt double.

Yeah but then you need to a acquire a tankful of piranhas. And you know keep them alive for any of the reshoots or whatnot that may be necessary for that scene. And then deal with the tankful of piranhas after you're done.

[DigoDragon]

Yeah but then you need to a acquire a tankful of piranhas. And you know keep them alive for any of the reshoots or whatnot that may be necessary for that scene. And then deal with the tankful of piranhas after you're done.

Hollywood will paint entire swaths of sand red for Mars scenery (http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1469/2). All those cars in Mad Max Fury Road are actual working cars (https://www.wheretowatch.com/2015/05/heres-how-they-built-the-beastly-machines-for-mad-max-fury-road) they built. Tatooine is a full sized settlement (http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/18/travel/star-wars-visit-taooine-sahara/) of 20 buildings built for the Star Wars film.

Getting a tank of toothy fish for a couple weeks doesn't sound like a challenge for Hollywood. :smallbiggrin:

[aurilee]

Granted, it is relevant that most movies can't really expect their actors to learn real stage magic. But the thing with stage magic in a movie is that you only have all the time in the world till you get a cut where the trick looks real. This is especially true for a lot of tricks where a cut can just be used.


Well they don't have to learn stage magic...that's what editing is for.

And what ever happened to arm/hand doubles for this kind of thing? You show the actor's upper torso/head, then cut to a magician's hands doing magical stuff, then cut back to the actor. Similar principles to stunt doubles.

I know for Labyrinth they actually had another guy's hands sticking through David Bowie's costume to do the ball-spinning stuff since David Bowie couldn't actually spin the glass balls like that.

It's not terribly hard to do these things with practical effects/editing, but it's more effort. I suppose the studios/directors just don't care.

[Leewei]

Good practical effects age very well when compared to CGI. Bad practical effects are another matter. Labyrinth is full of good practical effects. Jim Henson puppetry and sets, Michael Motion's contact juggling, Cheryl (Gates) McFadden choreography all worked marvelously well. The floating glass orb and the owl CGI ... didn't. It'd be great to see that movie touched up with some better, more modern CGI.

I'd point to Pacific Rim as an example of CGI working very well. The Jaegers and the Kaiju were all gorgeous.

All movies are filmed with a budget, with teams of people working together. Each movie is expected to earn a profit for the studio that made it. Studios will not put a budget behind a movie unless they know it will pay for itself. The Star Wars franchise can use lots of great practical effects because they can afford the many specialists it will take to make the movie. Something new and unknown to the public is far riskier. Risk translates into fewer, smaller teams with CGI added in post-production.

[Avian Overlord]

They actually did get real piranhas. They just didn't look big enough on screen.

Plus, I think once you've actually chained up your lead actress underwater you have reached a sufficient level of authenticity.

[Scowling Dragon]

Huh, re-watching that scene your both right and wrong. There where occasional real Piranas, but a **** ton of other CGI stuff instead. Bubbles (Bubbles don't generate the way they showed), shakeycam.

Instead they had a guys head block the whole fishtank (In a very slow pan) during the moment that actually mattered. So Cudos for that?

Still crap scene, still atrocious movie.

[Kislath]

Well, darn.
I have a screenplay about a guy with real magic powers who decides to become a stage magician for wealth & fame. "...HA! tell 'em how I did THAT, masked magician!"* He gets famous on one of those TV talent search shows and gets a show in Vegas, and he puts out a TV special every now & then.

Then it all comes crashing down on him.

I guess you wouldn't like that. The seemingly impossible tricks he does are indeed quite impossible to do without real magic, and impossible to show onscreen without CGI. That's a major plot point as it drives all of the other magicians crazy and drives them to investigate.

* The Masked Magician was a magician who had a few TV specials explaining how dozens of popular magic tricks are done. He made a lot of other magicians quite angry.

[Nerd-o-rama]

But that's an entirely different premise than a film about an actual stage magician. It's a fantasy, rather than some more reality-grounded genre. The story you're telling requires things that can't actually happen to happen, where the point of stage magic and escape artistry is that it's always possible to do in the real human world, but the trick is covered with an illusion to make it seem impossible.

[halcyonforever]

So, like they do with absolutely everything else because shock horror movies are not actually real things which are happening they use camera tricks, framing, editing, CGI, and other underhanded techniques to fool the audience into thinking that something which is not happening is, in fact, happening.

This doesn't sound too far from the tricks of the trade of stage magic though. Mis-direction, limited viewing angles, distraction, concealment, to convince the audience that something is happening which is not what it really seems. Sounds very simmilar

[Leewei]

This doesn't sound too far from the tricks of the trade of stage magic though. Mis-direction, limited viewing angles, distraction, concealment, to convince the audience that something is happening which is not what it really seems. Sounds very simmilar

In the movie Terminator 2: Judgment Day, they did this very thing. Arnie was sitting in makeup while the actors he was with seemed to cut him open. A fake mirror showed a full-sized Terminator puppet along with Linda Hamilton's identical twin sister, making a very convincing illusion of a gory cyborg operation.

[Scowling Dragon]

Well, darn.
I have a screenplay about a guy with real magic powers who decides to become a stage magician for wealth & fame. "...HA! tell 'em how I did THAT, masked magician!"* He gets famous on one of those TV talent search shows and gets a show in Vegas, and he puts out a TV special every now & then.

Then it all comes crashing down on him.

I guess you wouldn't like that. The seemingly impossible tricks he does are indeed quite impossible to do without real magic, and impossible to show onscreen without CGI. That's a major plot point as it drives all of the other magicians crazy and drives them to investigate.

* The Masked Magician was a magician who had a few TV specials explaining how dozens of popular magic tricks are done. He made a lot of other magicians quite angry.

Well I might love that because thats not the plot of the movie!

Its not about the magician being so gosh darn clever. Its about the magician being a mage! Though I wonder why it would come crashing down. The magic being pact based?

Its for the same reason I prefer that Shonen have straight up dumb brawls instead of characters we are TOLD are smart, or pull off impossible strategies because "OMG this guy is SOOO good at chess". It might as well be "Smart No Jutsu!"

[Kislath]

I see the difference now, so I retract what I said. My idea is totally different.

[Scowling Dragon]

I see the difference now, so I retract what I said. My idea is totally different.

Yous aint off the hook yet! The screenplay best be good quality! :smallwink:

I am interested in that story, and would like to hear more of it.

Maybe PM me?

[Kislath]

It's not a pact kind of thing so much as a mess of getting caught between a bunch of magicians ready to resort to violence and a government agency that doesn't much like the idea of an actual magician running around loose. He winds up having to flee, go into hiding, and lose everything he worked to gain.

[Scowling Dragon]

Lets separate Magic User as Mages and our modern illusionists as Magicians.

So in a sense its a sort of tale about vanity, as the mage risks the security of all mages (Which I assume are hiding in secret) because some guys on TV nudged him the wrong way.

[Kislath]

Yes! That's it exactly. For selfish reasons, he broke the rules and risked exposing the world to the knowledge that magic is real.

[themaque]

I actually feel for what your are saying here.

the "He's so good at magic! It's like he's doing the impossible!" Becomes... well... yeah it is impossible They HAD to use CGI to pull that off. But there are several "Hack" contrivances in that film.

That being Said, using CGI to let a normal actor pull off amazing things that would be impossible FOR THAT ACTOR but not THE CHARACTER can work for me. but it's a delicate suspension of disbelief. I'm a big believer in melding both CGI and Practical effects for the best effects.

Would you even be able to get Mysterio to work as a Spider-man villain on the big screen these days? OP would you be willing to give him a pass for larger than life effects given the context?

[Scowling Dragon]

Yes! That's it exactly. For selfish reasons, he broke the rules and risked exposing the world to the knowledge that magic is real.

Sounds like the beginnings of a nice screenplay.


Would you even be able to get Mysterio to work as a Spider-man villain on the big screen these days? OP would you be willing to give him a pass for larger than life effects given the context?

Well Mysterio often indulges in the Super science so thats something different. He already indulges in impossible things so I don't mind CGI-ing those impossible things up. As long as its written well I have no problem.

His shtick isn't being the Batman of illusion but the Iron Man of Illusion. Robots, Holograms, Traps and the like. Thats fine.

[TripleD]

I really disliked "Now You See Me" for a number of reasons, among them the ones you listed.

The whole point of stage magic is that it is really happening in front of us. The effects themselves (objects floating, items teleporting, etc.) are not very interesting or thrilling; the fun comes from not understanding how they pulled it off. When you take away that guesswork all you are left with is a fairly boring CGI prop.

[comicshorse]

At the cinema today and caught the trailer for 'Now You See Me 2 '
Let the rejoicing begin :smallsmile:

[digiman619]

Well, darn.
I have a screenplay about a guy with real magic powers who decides to become a stage magician for wealth & fame. "...HA! tell 'em how I did THAT, masked magician!"* He gets famous on one of those TV talent search shows and gets a show in Vegas, and he puts out a TV special every now & then.

Then it all comes crashing down on him.

I guess you wouldn't like that. The seemingly impossible tricks he does are indeed quite impossible to do without real magic, and impossible to show onscreen without CGI. That's a major plot point as it drives all of the other magicians crazy and drives them to investigate.

* The Masked Magician was a magician who had a few TV specials explaining how dozens of popular magic tricks are done. He made a lot of other magicians quite angry.

This sounds like an awesome Dresden Files story...

[An Enemy Spy]

This sounds like an awesome Dresden Files story...

That was also the plot of a Supernatural episode.

[Peelee]

* The Masked Magician was a magician who had a few TV specials explaining how dozens of popular magic tricks are done. He made a lot of other magicians quite angry.

I believe you mean ILLUSIONS!

And yes, the Alliance is easily displeased.

[digiman619]

That was also the plot of a Supernatural episode.

But The Dresden Files has great writing and interesting characters going for it and not just pretty boys and shipping.

[Scowling Dragon]

But The Dresden Files has great writing and interesting characters going for it and not just pretty boys and shipping.

Aw comon. Two bros forever recycling the same plot lines over and over whilst all tension degrades around them is the BEST writing.

In all seriousness Supernatural should have ended at least 5 seasons ago.

[An Enemy Spy]

But The Dresden Files has great writing and interesting characters going for it and not just pretty boys and shipping.

Well gee, thanks for that entirely unprovoked broadside against a show I love. Why don't I just list all the shows I like so I can see if the great digiman619 approves of what I can bring up as a reference.

[Benthesquid]

But The Dresden Files has great writing and interesting characters going for it and not just pretty boys and shipping.

Oi, Supernatural had good writing! A nice block of about five seasons of it, with inevitably the occasional stinker, and still some good moments now and then going forward.

[digiman619]

Well gee, thanks for that entirely unprovoked broadside against a show I love. Why don't I just list all the shows I like so I can see if the great digiman619 approves of what I can bring up as a reference.

I'm sorry, I have a sore spot against Supernatural, as I feel it overstayed its welcome; I mean the Season 5 finale seem to be the perfect place to end it and I thought faeries and 'leviathans' were steps down from the literal apocalypse. Still, it wasn't my place to insult your favorite show. My bad.