Anyone miss practical effects in films?

[Spokane]

Even when I was 7 or 8 I noticed how stupid that looks.

[AnimeGamer183]

Still looks like a Dreamcast game and the proportion to the puppet is wrong

Also, jaba never moved/walked/slithered, course that would have been too difficult with the puppet. As the new movies came out I always thought it was weird when they slithered around or whatever. Another thing that doesnt make sense he is mobile in new hope but isnt in return of the jedi. Makes little sense but ultimately comes down to limited tech/resources at the time of the original films. I would kill to have the 70s 80s and 90s back, in general.

[Let's Get Sweaty]

Totally agree with the principle of this thread. If they were making some of the old films today, the Ewoks and the Gremlins would be CGI and wouldn't look nearly as satisfying for it.

[AnimeGamer183]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJlbPXZEpRE[/youtube]

thought everyone might appreciate this.

[Bluecast]

I don't know how good or bad the remake is however this is a great vid showing how Practical and CG work very well together
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qbf1lQaE7o[/youtube]

[ThyDarkAngel]

Fortunately independent horror movies are still filled with practical effects and very good ones at that, now and then.

[Martin]

I'm with Sonikku. I think good practical effects stand up way better than any CGI. For all kinds of reasons.

1) Light falling on a real object is real light falling on a real object. Thus, it never looks in any way out-of-place. Lighting CGI elements on otherwise real footage almost always looks weird to me.

2) Actors actually have something to look at/visualise.

3) I find CGI elements are often over-beautified. Like, I dunno, a car will blow up. Forgetting the fact that it's obviously-fake for multitudinous reasons, I'll know it's fake because of the impossibly beautiful ballet-like way in which the car explodes. Shards will attractively spew out like a swarm of doves taking off. Parts cascading into surroundings with implausible choreography, ending with a lone type pirouetting towards the audience, coming to a stop like a penny. Things like that.

But as others have mentioned, practical effects aren't always capable of doing what's needed. Animatronics can be a cunt to work with, and cost a fortune. It's way cheaper to just do it on the computer.

Still, I think there's times where a practical effect will always look better. Going back to the exploding car example. I'll always take a real car really exploding over CGI.

[Bluecast]

I'm with Sonikku. I think good practical effects stand up way better than any CGI. For all kinds of reasons.

1) Light falling on a real object is real light falling on a real object. Thus, it never looks in any way out-of-place. Lighting CGI elements on otherwise real footage almost always looks weird to me.

2) Actors actually have something to look at/visualise.

3) I find CGI elements are often over-beautified. Like, I dunno, a car will blow up. Forgetting the fact that it's obviously-fake for multitudinous reasons, I'll know it's fake because of the impossibly beautiful ballet-like way in which the car explodes. Shards will attractively spew out like a swarm of doves taking off. Parts cascading into surroundings with implausible choreography, ending with a lone type pirouetting towards the audience, coming to a stop like a penny. Things like that.

But as others have mentioned, practical effects aren't always capable of doing what's needed. Animatronics can be a cunt to work with, and cost a fortune. It's way cheaper to just do it on the computer.

Still, I think there's times where a practical effect will always look better. Going back to the exploding car example. I'll always take a real car really exploding over CGI.

http://www.anyclip.com/movies/the-car/t ... exploding/

Movie sucks and this is drawn out too much but it was all pyro technics and that's why I love this clip. The car is the devil.

[mrslig100]

I wont deny It, a bit of painted PVC coated in some red paint and shot under a nice light on a good 35mm camera do give it a lovely consistency that no computer will ever regenerate.