Why action is no longer exciting.

So this evening I popped out to see Sherlock Homes: A Game of Shadows and despite some vastly overpriced tickets and consuming more than a years supply of Philadelphia in one evening, I rather enjoyed myself.  However, the film was at its best in some of the more...toned down scenes.  For instance, a part where two characters had to figure out who someone was by their gestures and movements was particularly enthralling.  However, for an action film, the action scenes didn't...excite me.  Surely that is what action is designed to do?  To transport the viewer into a situation that they would never (hopefully) normally encounter and to pump their body full of adrenaline and unleash their primordial blood lust.  But nope, not in this film.  It is interesting to note however that a mere two hours or so before Sherlock Holmes, I was watching Mad Max (1979) and that DID get the blood pumping.  Why?  Because it's all real.  The cars, the stunts, the explosions are all done on set and someone could, theoretically, die an extremely fiery death.  Not in Sherlock Holmes though, because most of the more elaborate fight sequences were done through the aid of a computer, with CGI.

Yuck, a pet hate.  Listen directors, CGI is a tool, not the be-all and end-all of your film.  You don't just use a hammer to make a table do you?  You need everything that comes with it, the screws, the wood, the varnish etc etc (I'm not a carpenter and I have no idea how to make a table).  So like that table analogy, a film needs multiple bits and pieces to make it work: a good plot, good characters, good actors, good direction etc.  And god forbid, some CGI can be a fantastic tool.  Look at some older films for example, when CGI was coming into its own.  Below is Jurassic Park (1993) which not only contains the best CGI for its time, but some of the best CGI I've ever seen and it feels REAL:



There is a mix of CGI and amazing puppetry to make one of the most memorable scenes in modern cinema.  That it feels real is of highest importance.  I don't want to go 'oh, that CGI looks great!'  I wanna go, 'Wow, that's a DINOSAUR!'.  Unlike this:



Yeh, I know, it looks impressive.  And all the reviews were like 'yeh the CGI does look fantastic!' but then were like 'but the story is a massive rip off of Pocahontas...'.  So yeh, CGI doesn't make a good film.

And to make it clear, I really did like Sherlock Holmes and it certainly doesn't overuse the CGI as much as some modern films, it just make me think.  So sorry Sherlock.  On that note, I'm off to go and do more exciting things with my life...joking, I don't have an exciting life.

But if you're still not convinced that over the top CGI is bad, I remind you of this beauty: