Have you noticed that CGI in recent blockbusters often looks surprisingly fake compared to films from a decade ago? You’re not imagining it. Despite massive improvements in technology, many visual effects today seem less convincing. The issue isn’t the tools—it’s how the industry is using them. Increasing production demands, tighter deadlines, and a shift in creative priorities have led to a noticeable decline in quality. Here’s a closer look at why CGI sometimes looks worse now than it did 20 years ago.
The Golden Age vs. Modern CGI
In the late 1990s and early 2000s, films like Jurassic Park (1993), The Matrix (1999), and The Lord of the Rings trilogy (2001–2003) set new standards for visual effects. These productions relied on a blend of practical effects and carefully integrated CGI. The digital elements were used sparingly and supported by strong planning and long post-production timelines.
What made early CGI effective:
- Digital effects were used with purpose, not excess
- Storyboarding and pre-visualization were prioritized
- Practical effects provided a grounded base
- Post-production teams had more time to refine visuals
In contrast, modern blockbusters often rely heavily on CGI for nearly every visual component—environments, characters, even costumes. While this allows greater creative freedom, it frequently leads to artificial-looking results that lack weight or realism.
⇢ VIRAL RIGHT NOW
What’s Going Wrong?
1. Rushed Production Timelines
Studios now push for faster releases, especially with franchise-heavy schedules. Visual effects teams often receive final footage just months—or even weeks—before the film’s release. That leaves little time for rendering, revisions, or quality control. As a result, many effects look unfinished or lack polish.
2. Budget Distribution
Even though overall budgets are larger, the number of VFX shots per film has increased dramatically. A movie that once had 200 effects shots might now require 2,000. This means less money—and time—allocated per shot, which impacts quality.
3. “Fix It in Post” Mentality
There’s a growing reliance on digital solutions to fix problems that could be avoided with practical planning. Directors and producers may skip real sets, props, or makeup, expecting everything to be handled later in post-production. This often results in visual effects that feel disconnected from the physical world.
Technical Challenges Behind Poor CGI
Lighting and Physical Inconsistencies
One major reason CGI fails to convince is poor integration with real-world lighting and physics. If shadows don’t fall correctly or materials don’t reflect light naturally, our brains detect something is off—even if we can’t explain why.
Typical issues include:
- Mismatched lighting
- Unnatural surface reflections
- Inconsistent shadow placement
- CGI characters that appear to “float” rather than interact with their environment
The Uncanny Valley
As digital artists get closer to photorealism, they risk entering the “uncanny valley”—where faces or movements are almost real but still slightly off. This can make CGI humans or creatures feel unsettling rather than believable.
Industry Habits That Undermine Quality
Overuse of Green Screens
While green screen technology is essential, over-reliance on it can lead to flat, sterile scenes. Real locations or practical sets provide texture and imperfections that help CGI blend more naturally.
Neglecting Practical Effects
Many recent films rely entirely on CGI when practical effects would offer a more grounded visual base. The best-looking scenes often come from combining physical effects with digital enhancements—not replacing one with the other.
Standardized Workflows
Studios now use streamlined pipelines and asset libraries to speed up production. While efficient, this can result in visual sameness across different projects. The push for speed and scalability often comes at the expense of uniqueness and detail.
The Human Cost: Burnout in the VFX Industry
Visual effects artists frequently work under extreme pressure with tight deadlines and long hours. This leads to burnout, talent loss, and declining morale—factors that inevitably affect output quality. Additionally, outsourcing to multiple studios around the world can introduce communication issues and inconsistencies across sequences.
How the Industry Can Do Better
Blend Practical and Digital
Reintroducing more practical effects—models, sets, prosthetics—can help digital elements feel grounded. CGI works best when it enhances what’s already real, not when it replaces it entirely.
Prioritize Time and Planning
Studios need to give visual effects teams more time in post-production. Good CGI requires thoughtful planning, proper on-set supervision, and space for revision—not just computing power.
Use Pre-Visualization Effectively
Early-stage planning tools like storyboards and animatics help identify potential problems before filming starts. Better pre-visualization means fewer surprises during post, and better final results.
Best practices include:
- Extensive storyboarding and shot planning
- On-set visual effects supervision
- Cross-department collaboration
- Iterative review cycles during post-production
Hope on the Horizon: New Tech and Smarter Tools
AI and Machine Learning
Artificial intelligence is starting to assist with repetitive tasks, allowing artists to focus on more creative and detail-oriented work. This could reduce strain on teams and improve overall output.
Real-Time Rendering and Virtual Production
Engines like Unreal allow directors to view and adjust scenes in real time. This helps filmmakers make better decisions early in production, leading to stronger visual results later.
LED Walls and Volume Stages
Used in shows like The Mandalorian, LED volume stages combine the flexibility of digital environments with the realism of practical lighting. This method improves actor interaction and reduces post-production work.
Conclusion
The belief that “CGI is getting worse” isn’t just nostalgia—it reflects real challenges in today’s film industry. Despite better tools, the combination of tight deadlines, creative shortcuts, and strained labor practices has led to a dip in quality. But the solution isn’t to abandon CGI. It’s to return to thoughtful, well-planned filmmaking that uses digital effects as part of a broader, more balanced visual strategy.
With smarter planning, proper resource allocation, and respect for the craft, the industry can once again produce digital visuals that both impress and immerse. CGI isn’t broken—it’s just being misused. And with the right changes, it can look better than ever.
