Frank Longo Member since Nov 18th 2003 86673 posts
Sat Dec-02-23 02:47 AM
3. "Fury Road had a lot of CGI-- it was just *good* CGI." In response to Reply # 1 Sat Dec-02-23 02:53 AM by Frank Longo
Like, there are full digital character doubles, CGI vehicles, obviously CGI sets-- like, there are almost certainly more shots with CGI than without. It's just that there's also a lot of insane practical stuff in there too, so it's hard to tell what's what when you're caught up in the madness. Which is how CGI should be. If you're noticing the CGI, you're not making your movie correctly.
And sure, some of the CGI in this trailer looked a little too smooth, a little unfinished-- I strongly suspect the FX in this trailer are not done. George Miller has yet to release a movie in his entire career that doesn't look fantastic. I'm not worried at all.
5. "Right - it (WELL) ACTUALLY had CGI in nearly every shot" In response to Reply # 3
Both the baseline practical stunt work and magical editing job fueled the other narrative, but Fury Road truthfully hovered at or slightly below 10% fully practical photography.
The crude nuance being that they drove so many cars, jumped around on so many rigs and lit so many fires that it's pretty uncool to point out that movie would've been a litigation bonanza if it weren't mostly a mirage. And even more cool that they made the core shots so convincing that the effects artists weren't saddled with selling every pixel of it.
Printer-friendly copy 
Email this topic to a friend
Pass The Popcorn
