>>149794400
CGI is a great example of a new tech thing that became valuable and worthwhile once it cleared traditionalist doubts because it could create something new instead of being literally conceived to produce cheap imitations of something that already existed.

It will never not be funny how shartgen shills consistently base their "position" in dumb broad comparisons that actually work against it rather than helping it.

>>11858523
Pro tip: read an entire post before knee-jerk reacting to part of it

>>149230377
Anon, /co/ is a beacon of ego-free critical thinking, good taste and sophisticated visual literacy, cerebral understanding of media demographics, and healthy adult relationship experience.

They loathe this movie out of deep insight onto its objective terribleness, not out of what at least other 25 threads in the catalog right now may imply.

>>212225702
Nah, I'm clocking about 4-5 per week which is a nice average to not saturate yourself imo

One potential problem though is that I mostly watch older stuff (pre-2000s) that I haven't watched yet. Modern filmmaking feels too samey and not particularly engaging to me lately.