By skyforbes I was recently looking over the production details for the original Lord of The Rings movies. They each cost just under $100 million to produce (about $175 million adjusted for inflation) and took about a year to come out after production wrapped.
I always assumed CGI must be much cheaper than practical, or that it at least saved tons of time, but that doesn’t seem to be the case. Comparing LoTR to any marvel project, even a more contained story like The Winter Soldier, Marvel is spending as much or more money than they did for a movie like LoTR, took about as long in production, and produced a more homogeneous and forgettable result than well done movies that utilize practical effect well.
Obviously, I know LoTR has CGI in it as well, but only in places where it was necessary. I just don’t understand why this isn’t more of the standard model. If it’s slightly cheaper, not wildly more labor intensive, and adds the benefit of immersing your actors in a believable world, it feels like the most sensible, or at least artistically minded method of approach.
I’m sure I’m not considering some important factor, feel free to explain to me why I’m being naive.