Do you think the Muppets can stand the test of time or is their day over now that you can create Anything, via CGI?

I don't think so! CGI is WAY overrated in my book.

I'll take Muppets and puppets over CGI any day of the week!

I don't think so! CGI is WAY overrated in my book.


I tend to agree with you personally, but will a younger generation sit and enjoy muppets or find then ancient?

I tend to agree with you personally, but will a younger generation sit and enjoy muppets or find then ancient?
I can't vouch for all young kids, but my 3 1/2 year old nephew LOVES the Muppets. His favorite is Gonzo. :cool: :D

Ironically I think GGI reduces creativity. It's to easy for film makers to rely on technology. I really enjoy classic movies. And I never cease to be amazed at the creativity and genius of film makers of the 30's, 40's and 50's who created special effects without any computers or technology. That creativity is lost when film makers can just create something on a computer screen and add it in to the movie in post production.

I think CGI is becoming more and more common because it is cheaper and takes less time.

You don't have to pay a crew and puppeteers to constantly control the muppet/s for every episode.

Any person with the computer knowledge to do so can do CGI effects.


I think one of the most recent shows to use a muppet was Nickelodeon's Cousin Skeeter that ended in 2003.

The Muppets are classic!!! I don't think that any amount of technology could ever replace what it was/is, which is great television!!! :)

The Muppets are classic!!! I don't think that any amount of technology could ever replace what it was/is, which is great television!!! :) i agree 100 percent people like jim henson are irreplaceable

For me, the "Wow" factor is gone from modern movies. When I watched pre-CGI movies and saw a special effect I can remember thinking or saying "Wow! How did they do that?" Now, there's no mystery, you know it's CGI.

Heck, I'm still amazed by the special effects in Abbott and Costello Meets The Invisible Man, or the effects in Land of the Giants :)

I can't vouch for all young kids, but my 3 1/2 year old nephew LOVES the Muppets. His favorite is Gonzo. :cool: :D

My daughter's 11 and loves The Muppet Show, and The Muppet Movies, and Labyrinth, and The Dark Crystal, etc...and even watches and enjoys the old Ray Harryhausen movies with me.

My daughter's 11 and loves The Muppet Show, and The Muppet Movies, and Labyrinth, and The Dark Crystal, etc...and even watches and enjoys the old Ray Harryhausen movies with me.
You're bringing her up right!! :cool: :D

The Muppets are classic!!! I don't think that any amount of technology could ever replace what it was/is, which is great television!!! :)
:yeahthat :nod: BINGO!!

You're bringing her up right!! :cool: :D

:D I'm trying to introduce her to every movie and TV show I loved as a kid.

CGI negates the human element of special effects. It's neat to think that someone had to come up with ideas on how to visually convey fantastic elements on screen utilizing every day objects and simply artistry. As Marv said, it's just so easy to program stuff into a computer now. I'm not saying it never works, but I do say that it will never replace the power and charm of creating things with human hands and minds.

I don't know if future generations will agree. I truly hope so, though.

...during the 1930's and '40s, how a ventriloquist like Edgar Bergen was able to conduct a successful radio variety show with his dummy, "Charlie McCarthy", while other ventriloquists who tried, couldn't even approach his popularity?

How? Because "Charlie" had a personality all his own that transcended his being a "dummy"...Edgar Bergen was such a genius at characterization and comedy writing/editing, people forgot that "Charlie" was a ventriloquist dummy when they listened to both on radio!

Here's some dialogue from one of their 1947 radio shows:

[Charlie is asking Edgar to dictate his will...]
CHARLIE: "I, Charlie McCarthy, being of sound mind..."
BERGEN: Yes?
CHARLIE: Otherwise, in a heck of a mess..."do hereby leave my book of numbers to Skinny Dugan". And to you, Bergie, I leave all the money...you owe me!
BERGEN: Yes, I see...
CHARLIE: Also, my pet rat.
BERGEN: What would I do with a pet rat?
CHARLIE: Well, maybe you could teach it to talk!
BERGEN: I shall see that all your worldly possessions are disposed of!
CHARLIE: Well, only if I die!
BERGEN: Only if you die...
CHARLIE: Don't go out of your way!
BERGEN: No, I didn't mean that, Charlie, because...if you did pass away, I don't know what I'd do without you.
CHARLIE: No?
BERGEN: No, I'd....just hate to think about it.
CHARLIE: Is the thought of work really that depressing to you?

Except for a short-lived quiz show that he and Charlie (and "Mortimer Snerd") presided over in the mid-'50s, "DO YOU TRUST YOUR WIFE?", Bergen could never successfully host a TV show because of his dummies. He tried two filmed TV specials during the 1950-'51 season which included "special effects" photography enabling Charlie and Mortimer to "move" a bit, but they were ultimately considered "unsuccessful" (you can see them on YouTube ["EDGAR BERGAN SHOW {1/2}"]. He even tried an unsold pilot idea mixing live action and animation featuring Charlie in 1963, but that was a dud (it never even aired). So, "special effects" didn't help Edgar Bergen much on TV.


:tv:

CGI negates the human element of special effects. It's neat to think that someone had to come up with ideas on how to visually convey fantastic elements on screen utilizing every day objects and simply artistry. As Marv said, it's just so easy to program stuff into a computer now. I'm not saying it never works, but I do say that it will never replace the power and charm of creating things with human hands and minds.

I don't know if future generations will agree. I truly hope so, though.
Yeah, look at people like Cecil DeMille and Irwin Allen who didn't have the luxury of CGI - they REALLY needed to use their imaginations! Sure, not all of their effects came out perfect...but you have to applaud them for effort and making great use of what materials they had at the time.

Yeah, look at people like Cecil DeMille and Irwin Allen who didn't have the luxury of CGI - they REALLY needed to use their imaginations! Sure, not all of their effects came out perfect...but you have to applaud them for effort and making great use of what materials they had at the time.

Yes, I'd place Ray Harryhausen in that category too. John Dykstra (the Star Wars spfx guy), Rick Baker, Rob Bottin...all of these people were or are ARTISTS who rely on their own imagination to convey magic on screen. And the fact that someone's personal vision is being represented by their physical labor is something that really appeals to me.

Yes, I'd place Ray Harryhausen in that category too. John Dykstra (the Star Wars spfx guy), Rick Baker, Rob Bottin...all of these people were or are ARTISTS who rely on their own imagination to convey magic on screen. And the fact that someone's personal vision is being represented by their physical labor is something that really appeals to me.

I agree. I love listening to audio commentaries on DVDs for low-budget genre movies and hearing what these guys had to do to create special effects.

Even Peter Jackson who now is known for his huge budget CGI films, was a great F/X artist when he did his first feature Bad Taste back in the 80's. His effects that he created on his own in his parent's garage and kitchen rivaled that of bigger budget Hollywood films.

Yes, I'd place Ray Harryhausen in that category too. John Dykstra (the Star Wars spfx guy), Rick Baker, Rob Bottin...all of these people were or are ARTISTS who rely on their own imagination to convey magic on screen. And the fact that someone's personal vision is being represented by their physical labor is something that really appeals to me.
My feelings exactly!! :nod:

I agree. I love listening to audio commentaries on DVDs for low-budget genre movies and hearing what these guys had to do to create special effects.

Even Peter Jackson who now is known for his huge budget CGI films, was a great F/X artist when he did his first feature Bad Taste back in the 80's. His effects that he created on his own in his parent's garage and kitchen rivaled that of bigger budget Hollywood films.
Silent Running is another great example of that. A friend of mine, who paints cover art for vintage monster model kits, lists SR as his all-time favorite movie. They did a lot on what I venture wasn't a very big budget.

Silent Running is another great example of that. A friend of mine, who paints cover art for vintage monster model kits, lists SR as his all-time favorite movie. They did a lot on what I venture wasn't a very big budget.

That's one of my favorite scifi movies.

There is an extra on my Wizard of Oz DVD about how they created the tornado effect for the movie. They certainly didn't have CGI in 1939! They showed incredible ingenuity and put in a lot of sweat in creating this amazing effect and took justifiable pride in the results. No one will ever convince me that a computer can replace that!