I just don't understand why they don't just use suits, low budget films have been using animatronics and practical effects for about forty years, they could have made Supernova looked better...and for cheaper if they just used a suit and built some animatronic pieces for it.

CGI is just lazy, especially when it looks this shittastic.

Because an animatronic would probably be slow, lifeless and equally unbelievable. The trade off for using slightly below-par CGI is you can actually have speed and motion in the creations.

Have you seen what they can do with animatronics? I'd be happy if they at least had a suit and just animated it for stunts and stuff they couldn't achieve with such a bulky suit but doing the ENTIRE thing in CGI just looks like garbage. And it is inexcusable, they have other options, but they choose the easiest and most creatively dead ones since they don't even animate it well, it looks like CGI from the early nineties rendered over the top of the film stock and has so few frames of animation it looks like a screengrab.

Of course I have. But you're expecting them to pour a huge animatronic budget into a show primarily aimed at small children which mostly garners its budget from toy sales?

In a situation like that, CGI is always going to win out.

No, I'm expecting them to create basic animatronics like limbs and stuff that can move for close ups with limited movement ranges, then a suit for when they show the entire creature and then CGI for when they try and do it with stuff that the wirework can't handle.

Animatronics and suit making can get expensive to make a suit that'll only be used for one episode and wouldn't have very many parts that can be salvaged to create another suit.

Then again, I don't know much about making suits and such.

If suits is how they've done it since the 70s, then I think they can manage in two thousand and whatever Fourze was made.

Fourze also does fifty times more than the 70's shows.

I just think, if in the 80s a bunch of teens with a camera were able to shoot their supernatural movie with a bit ingenuity then there is no excuse not to do the same. There are some films from the 80s which still look fantastic now and are appreciated because everything on the screen is actually there. If that was a viable option for Z-grade films of thirty years ago then surely it is just common sense to be used now.

That is why I can never understand why CGI this shit looking has so many defenders and people tell me to let it go. Maybe people just need to watch more stuff.

Nothing you said made sense just now.

Toku doesn't have big budgets. Toku doesn't have a lot of time to produce the series. Toku doesn't have the resources available to do all the things western productions can. Not even close. On top of that, they are a vehicle for toys and other product, and need to be action-y and quick and bright to appeal to children that like that kind of fast action.

Toku uses bad CGI. Get over it. Your constant berating of this unavoidable reality in the face of reason is a detriment to your character. It's something they have to do, it's something they all do. Even the non-CGI effects are bad and you don't complain about that. How many bad shots of green-screened characters are in every episode? Hell, in Ryuki Kamen Rider Knight had his finisher where his CGI monster turns into a cape and then into a drill as he kicks and enemy, wheras Ryuki just has CGI Dragredder snake around him as he does a kick. Honestly, Ryuki looks better because Knight is so horribly composed into the shot and the greenscreen is so awful. The CGI is hardly the worst visual effect in Kamen Rider or Super Sentai.