Why puppets not used in movies as much anymore?

Puppet count as Cred Forums

Expense, uncanny valley, and poor aging is a better reason.

Puppets are Cred Forums. Stop being such a stupid please.

But user i already did. Every laika film i see

>Puppets are comics and/or cartoons.

No.

There animation you dunce.

It is technically animation and is way too nitch to have a board of it's own.
Also
>Lel pleb go to /trash/
You are being unreasonably childish.

Where?

Personally I never had a problem with CGI.

Same. The main problem with CGI is that the smallest details can make something look completely off and uncanny. Amateur 2d animation looks choppy at worst but amateur CGI is almost always nightmare fuel.

You two have shittate and have killed puppetering and made the film industry into a cgi infested shithole.

>Amateur 2d animation looks choppy at worst but amateur CGI is almost always nightmare fuel.

That same thing goes for puppets though. There have been shitty puppets throughout the decades.
user one of my favorite Childhood films is Jurassic Park which had both great CGI and great puppetry. Acting like you should have one or the other is idiotic.

Calm your butt buborino. All I said Is I don't hate CGI.

I wish we had more good practical effects, but I can appreciate that CGI lets people do things on screen that they can't do practically. We need another Winston or Henson.

The animatronics and special effects in JP were amazing, for it's time, but this looks just as amazing if not better.

youtube.com/watch?v=eSUHwqIOf4s
youtube.com/watch?v=uEK9mitagS8

Now if modern movies could just mix of the various special effects instead of just relying on CGI I think we could get some amazing stuff.

...

Because they are very limited.
Most movies have to make multiples each with a different function.

Not to mention there could always be delays from them acting up.
Take this 10 second moment for example.
m.youtube.com/watch?v=clglK6LLd6Y
This lil bit of the Klown popping out of the pizza, smiling sinisterly, aiming the gun, and shooting
It took them HOURS because of lil issues they kept having (wouldn't pop up on cue, puppet face or gun weren't pointed in right direction, or prop gun wouldn't light up)

Or take the two King Kong remakes
The 80s remake involved 40ft tall mechanical props.
The 00s remake had Andy Serkis doing what he does best.
Which I'm sure any producer is gonna look at his options and think 40ft props feel a lil unreasonable when you have other options.

Puppets and mechanical is more of a labor of love now days thanks to newer options.
Sometimes you don't find enough love to build a 5ft radius giant spider face that will only be used for close ups that have to cut away from anything else from the movie.

I agree. It's really interesting to see the technology advance as well.

Nobody else will take them.
And puppets done deserve /trash/

Me neither. Most of the hate for it is very idiotic. I get people get tired of it, but when CGI is done well, it's hard to argue against it. Some people just fucking hate it and that's it. I've made peace with that, honestly.

If you tried to do all the things we do with CG using puppets, sets, and animatronics, it would cost billions.

It's expensive and it's hard to pull off right. The are experts in the field, but puppetry has far more chances of fucking up during production than CGI. Ever read or heard of all the bullshit that happened with the Jaws shark? Shit like that is common in films that use puppets or animatronics. Sure, Spielberg's crew learned their lesson when they did Jurassic Park, but even then the T-Rex animatronic could malfunction in the scenes involving rain. The margin of error for non-CGI is just much higher.

youtu.be/G1iVJExd5vA

They actually still use practical effects and animatronics in movies by the buttload, it's just gotten so advanced that sometimes it actually looks like cgi.

The thing is that cgi is only cost effective in some areas, and in others it costs a lot less to just build a puppet than it is to pay out to a render farm.

Yeah but once you have the CGI down you can do ANYTHING the story can call for.

You want 1000 Chitari aliens swarming a city in Avengers? They can do that almost as easily as doing 100.

You want 3 pig lizard monsters instead of 1 in Galaxy Quest?
You gotta hire more willing puppeteers and build 2 more costumes (maybe a few extra in case of damages or technical issues on one).

Though I'm in no way an expert on animation.
If hand drawn I'm betting it'd throw off a lot of how the characters are already set, if you try to add something.

what's your opinion on Nu Star Wars deliberately going out of the way to avoid CGI (and use practical effects) as much as possible?

I feel like there should be a better balance between the shit ton of green screen Lucas used and practical effects.

No, in the words of Michael Bay, it would cost "time", not "money". He saved almost 5 million in CGI costs with ONE Bumblebee model. ONE. The trade-off is that the model cost shitloads to make in "time currency", as in, months and weeks. It's economically feasible to use practical effects.

It's just not feasible time-wise because people, you know, want to see something coming in in the foreseeable future and not have to ring you up to ask how the movie's going only to find that you're still making that Megatron model's face. It would've taken 5 extra years for us to have that Transformers film if Bay had gone the mile with practical effects and models.

I generally like a combo of both. Cgi has it's merits and is just as interesting as physical puppets.

Also this. CGI is easier and more accessible if you want a film to come out on time. It's hard work, but at least they can reuse and rework models far easier and less time consuming than doing it mostly with practical effects.

Thanks for supporting me, bruv.

Practical/puppets + CGI is true master race.

Where the Wild Things Are was a shitty movie, but the wild things were people in costumes with CGI faces and it looked great.

give it time user

>CGI is simplier and cheaper.

That is entirely false and I don't know where that came from.

Yeah CGI is a great tool to enhance other effects, but it's often a really shitty replacement

Still remember when BB8 was first shown and people were calling it a shitty CGI effect when it was practical the whole time. Bet those are the same ones calling CGI "shitty". Talking out of your asses.

youtu.be/g5tyWld5uyQ

If you want puppets just watch anime

Yes, that existed

What do you mean "existed"? It's a new series.

Is this any good? Looks amusing like it doesn't take itself too seriously

Well sooorrry, i must have been thinking of another action based series that used puppets wulin warriors

This...looks intriguing.

We've had this discussion a million times. Puppets count as Cred Forums. I'm posting puppets that sing.
youtube.com/watch?v=VPs8SZZTg68
youtube.com/watch?v=KBthi_An5qQ

It's surprisingly alright, worth at least a one episode test to see if you like it.

>Now if modern movies could just mix of the various special effects instead of just relying on CGI I think we could get some amazing stuff
Isn't that what the force awakens did?

How does this belong on a comics and cartoons board?

Fucking love me some puppets
youtube.com/watch?v=SVxGh5GpP0Q

cgi and puppetry are both considered Cred Forums material

No they aren't. They're tv and film

It's generally what all movies do.

Lack of artists and production