Is anyone else amazed by the level of realism in special effects?... (1 Viewer)

[Inspector Hammer!]

I agree with this thread, effects are simply astonishing these days, and they directly assist me in my enjoyment of a given movie. IMO, Titanic is a superior movie to any other film about TITANIC because it made me truly believe I was seeing the ship, not a model floating in a bathtub.

That's just me, don't hurt me.

And if you want to see what an ocean liner would REALLY look like being capsized by a wave, check out the capsizing sequence in the Poseidon remake, absolutely terrifying!

 

[SteveJKo]

Sorry John we're just going to have to agree to disagree. I love TITANIC and think it was very worthy of it's Oscar. However A NIGHT TO REMEMBER will always be THE movie about the Titanic for me. It's effects still work for the story, as opposed to existing to call attention to themselves, from which TITANIC (1997) does sometimes suffer.

As for the POSEIDON remake, the most terrifying thing about it to me besides the typical artificial looking CGI work was the horrendous script. I'm terrified anyone deemed it worthy of a theatrical release.

 

[Magnus T]

No. The reason you loved Titanic so much is because of the story. If a movie has a strong narrative it's easy to forget that you're watching CGI. Take The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones for example. I know alot of people that are very unimpressed with the special effects (they think it looks mostly like a cartoon), but Revenge of the Sith usually gets high praise for it's CGI. This is simply, IMHO, because people aren't bored with the movie and aren't looking for bad CGI. The CGI becomes more integrated.

Just a sidenote. I want to mention a CGI company called Rhythm & Hues. This is, IMHO again, quite simply the best special effects company out there right now. I think their work far exceeds ILM. Check out their filmography at IMDB.

http://imdb.com/company/co0075252/

 

[Charles CB]

You guys should look at these:

http://www.fxguide.com/article357.html

http://aimediaserver.com/studiodaily...480&height=310 (you will need flash 8 to watch this)

 

[Andy Sheets]

Yeah, that reminds me of Jumanji, which used CGI to simulate real animals and looked really goofy compared to Jurassic Park.

 

[Robert Anthony]

Are you saying that because it makes your argument easier or do you really know exactly how John Williamson feels about the movie from personal experience living inside his brain?

 

[Kevin Grey]

What was the source of the clips in that second link (ie content not the effects house)?

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Absolutely.

The effects in Titanic draw the same amount of attention to themselves as the effects in ANTR, the difference being that Titanic's were truer to real life than ANTR and one is just kidding themselves if they believe otherwise.

RMS TITANIC was truly brought to life in that film while ANTR could only adequately recreate the ship...it wasn't good enough for me.

Another example is the opening Omaha beach invasion in Saving Private Ryan, the reason that scene is so heart wrenching is because it looks absolutely real with no punches pulled and because of that it makes you believe what your seeing.

Story wise, ANTR is the more factual of the TITANIC films that's very true, but being as unsold as I am on the visuals in that film, I wasn't as drawn in as I should have been.

For me, a film of this type needs not only to be TOLD realistically, but it must LOOK realistic as well.

ANTR fails to make me FEEL the pain of TITANIC's tragedy, and the lack of realism has a lot to do with that, not sayng that I need CGI for a film to really effect me, merely that with a story like this, realism is key to really bringing me there and making me believe what i'm seeing.

When I look at ANTR, I see smoke and water that doesn't scale properly, sets that do not resemble TITANIC's interiors and an inaccurate rendition of the physics involved in the sinking. The ship's final plunge in ANTR, a model slipping peacefully and gracefully beneath the water with nary a passenger in sight...inaccurate in the extreme. TITANIC's final moments were neither peaceful or graceful, they were horrifying and Titanic brought that MUCH NEEDED element across in a way that brought me tears.

Moderen effects made that possible.

Yes, they did not know, or more accurately BELIEVE that TITANIC broke apart before it went down and so they showed what they thought was true at the time so I don't blame the film for that at all, but it doesn't change the fact that TITANIC DID break apart and ANTR does not reflect that and that, too, effects my involvement.

Steve, that's cool, but I cannot agree that the CGI in Poseidon was fake looking, it looked all too real IMO. As for the script, it was just as cheesy as the original film was, that's not a put down, mind you, of the first film as I like the original, but the script was far from Shakespear just like the remake.

 

[Charles CB]

Kevin, I actually dont know what the contect is from. I found it in the mattepainting.org forums. There was a topic about virtual sets or something like that. Sorry I cant be more help.

 

[Chuck Anstey]

The CGI is good but I am still waiting for photo-realistic CGI and not the shiny metal / plastic look and also to get the lighting to match the lighting on the characters (direction and intensity).

I agree with others about the too often lack of physics. Two examples:
Harry Potter 1: Longbottom loses control of his broom and hangs by his robes. When he falls, he immediately accelerates to full velocity (twice) instead of at the speed of gravity.

Spiderman 1: Spidey vs the robbers where he bounces around like rubber with no mass.

An object in motion stays in motion unless acted upon by another force.
When two objects collide, the object with the higher momentum (mass * velocity) has the least amount of change to its velocity and is not driven backwards by the smaller object.
Gravity = 9.81 meters / second / second.

Learn them. Model them. Use them.

 

[Malcolm R]

Don't we all live in John's brain?

 

[Chuck Mayer]

I disagree. Directors have, since the dawn of the realization they could do so, toyed with physics and chemistry and mathematics in the effort of being DRAMATIC, not realistic. Realism is rarely the goal of a film. Lighting is often impossible within the world of physics, but they cheat it. My issue isn't with the visual effects, but with their impact. Cars don't blow up because of one bullet, the geek doesn't get the hot & sensitive model, and then underdog almost always loses. Dramatic license applies to SFX as much as any other tool in the toolchest.

As with any rule, the actual skill comes in knowing when to break it.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

Ahh, so the voices i've been hearing in my head belong to YOU GUY'S! Get out, all of ya, now!

 

[Darcy Hunter]

Those links that Charles posted, especially the one set in Russia are exactly the type of effects that still impress me. When these "invisible" effects are done well, they can be just as amazing as the big money shots in Lord of the Rings, or Spiderman. Rainmaker studios did some nice work on The Da Vinci Code of shots of the Saint-Sulpice (not the "walking through time" stuff).

http://www.rainmaker.com/

I think the problem is, most audience members are too jaded these days, with all the wealth of behind the scenes material that is available to them, most feel that they know all of the tricks. Plus, because of the increasing power and lower costs of home PCs, there is the mentality that they could just do the same thing at home. The fact is, weather a shot was done with CG, practical, or a combination of the two, there is a lot of skill and talent involved. A 10 second shot might take weeks or even months so complete, and there is no one-button solution to any shot, regardless of how you think they are done.

 

[Jason Harbaugh]

That's the kind of stuff that really impresses me, especially since a lot of it can now be done in small production houses on tight budgets. I've been working in a few compositing programs learning how to do match motion and compositing, especially with shaky cam which is what sells most shots, even though I mostly hate that style of filmmaking.

 

[Kevin Grey]

Yeah, that's exactly why I mentioned being more impressed by TV these days. Since I didn't recognize the films or the actors in those clips I had assumed they might possibly be from television.

 

[Holadem]

Since we're nitpicking to the point of citing laws of physics, I think it is only fair that I ask what on earth are "full velocity" and "speed of gravity", expressions which laymen will accept, but that are seriously ruffling the feathers of this one engineer .

Seriously, I see (and even agree with) what you're trying to say, but if you're gonna get that technical on us, you need to be accurate as well. "Speed of gravity" does not mean what you think it does, and "full velocity" means nothing at all.

But yeah, Spidey vs Robbers blows .

--
H

 

[Jon Mahoney]

After numerous disagreements and agreements, I just have to note one of my favorite non-CGI effects in recent films is the train crash in "The Fugitive" (aside from Ford's face shot in it) where they actually crashed the train and the shots looked fantastic.

"Kingdom of Heaven" DE also uses special effects really well, which is minimal except for the huge battle scenes.

 

[Francois Caron]

Ugh! Shakey Cam! Can't stand those anymore! It makes the whole production look like an amateur crew filmed it!

And now they're DIGITIZING it?!? No thanks!

 

[SteveJKo]

Sorry there John but again were going to have to agree to disagree.

With A NIGHT TO REMEMBER I get sucked into the best written and acted telling of the story of the Titanic ever filmed. Yes its FX have flaws but so does the newer film. A NIGHT TO REMEMBER is so well done as a drama I can easily ignore those flaws. You say the realism of the new film is what helps you feel the pain of the tragedy. For me that realism is accomplished by the actors and story in A NIGHT TO REMEMBER, with the FX in service to the story. With the more recent film I often feel like I’m being shown a test film that screams, “See what we can do now”. This includes the final plunge sequence, of which I’ve never read an account that comes across like the theme park ride on display in TITANIC. Apart from the lack of seeing the ship split in two, every account of the sinking that I’ve read is captured better in A NIGHT TO REMEMBER.

As to POSEIDON I consider the script of the original a masterpiece compared to the new film. Same thing for its FX. It’s become a cliché to say this but I felt like I was playing a video game.