Originally Posted By: tfabris
The CGI work in Star Trek was definitely well done. Better than most.

Something interesting to note: Whereever obvious CGI has bothered you in the past, you might not have noticed an equal number of CGI effects that were so seamless you didn't know they were an effect at all.

I've seen CGI effects that were so well done that I only learned about them long after-the-fact. Or realized only after thinking about it that they must have been an effect because there would have been no other way to do it.

It tends to be spotty; in a given film you might get a bunch of great shots and a bunch of crappy shots. It's very hit or miss.

I'd agree with all that, but it make no difference how many excellent effects shots there are in a film if there are also jarring ones, it just ruins the whole experience when you can see any joins.

I've just remembered the last films I saw before Dark Knight, it was the LotR trilogy. Those three films were very good films and I enjoyed them a lot. However despite the huge amount of seamless CGI in them they also had plenty of jarring moments through out. I had to actively choose to ignore them to get through them.

The LotR films also had another technique that I'd forgotten about, moving the camera very quickly to disguise the fact that the CGI in the background of the shot isn't quite up to close inspection. Thankfully despite ST's rapid pace, there wasn't too much of that.
_________________________
Remind me to change my signature to something more interesting someday