Crappy tools that makes the movies worse.Or use the other tools available to you!
And the option of CGI is always the worse one because it looks fake. I know it's cost-effective.Yes, and now there are alternatives to the cost, lack of control, and danger of working with these animals on crowded and chaotic movie sets. Now filmmakers can decide which options will work best for what they are trying to accomplish and which options will work at all for them.
You mean to tell me the Wolfman set was so chaotic and dangerous that they couldn't have real bear?Again, you don't know that they used it simply for the sake of having CGI. Actually we do, because they originally intended to use an animatronic bear so we know for a fact that it wasn't simply a case of CGI for the sake of CGI and a decision, for whatever reason, that it would be better to not have a real bear on set for that reason.
But he used CGI in the end. Same thing for the Wolfman transformation. Rick Baker had all of it figured out to do a unique mix of CGI and pratical and the director to do CGI because it was quicker.So yeah, your example of the temptation of CGI and "CGI simply for the sake of CGI" is coming from a filmmaker whose first choice wasn't even CGI.
The Batman I know all of this, why they used so much CGI is for cost-cutting measure. But as a fan, I hate it. There's this tool that is there to use but it doesn't make movies better, it makes them look more fake.