+Working Joe I actually had a brief PTSD episode in the lobby afterwards - accelerated heart rate, breathlessness, emotional reactions, the whole bit. On some level, between the 3D and the surround sound, my body read the battle scene as real... even though I knew perfectly well what I watching...
Agreed I thought that was something else. I was like it looks pretty good, I'll see it. I had no idea how amazed I would be. I've seen it since, but in IMAX that was something else
+roloug95 I'm not that good with programming but i could probably do something similar (but im to lazy to do 360 animations and rendering everything :P)
I hate when people bad mouth CGI. They have no idea how many great movies would be different or not made at all if this stuff wasn't invented. And it's not like it's easy. This stuff requires just as much artistic merit and creative thinking as model work does.
Because there are too many mediocre CGI out there. No one mock groundbreaking VFX like everything in this videos. And yeah Hobbit VFX is way worse than LotR VFX. Can you believe that?
Rowan J Coleman The problem with CGI is how to apply it properly in the movies, the goal is to fool the audience into thinking that what they we're seeing wasn't computer generated. Overuse of CGI and VFX ruins the illusion thus the audience know what they we're seeing was fake. A prime example of Overused of CGI is Michael Bay's Transformers franchise and Peter Jackson's the Hobbit trilogy.
bunnyfreakz That's because Lotr didn't used that many VFX effects compared to the Hobbit, for example they used a enormous amount of real practical effects and body prosthetics, for the near the camera Uruk Hai, goblins and Orcs, but for the Hobbit they used digital characters instead, that is why they look more real in Lotr, that's because they are real, but i predict that VFX in 5 years time will be indistinct from real life or them close, at least for big James Cameron like blockbusters.
people dont usually bash the artists and animators, but hate the overall overuse of CGI in film when it's just plain unnecessary, and practical effects would look much better
Now that you mention it, it reminds me that here at school all we have for render are the individual computers that we use in class. During Finals Week all the Senior are hogging the computers to render.
One of my favorite stories about that was that they had real trouble tuning the AI. One of the characteristics they wanted each "actor" to have was a desire to survive. Which resulted in them frequently running away en masse from the battle ;)
How about Interstallar's black hole that required 800 TB to render and furthered science's knowledge of the physics. I'm pretty sure that hasn't been done before
+AuroraDarkStar To simulate gravitational lensing by rapidly spinning black holes is an awesome feat! Although I doubt it will be used in many movies other than Insterstellar (if at all), it really deserves a spot on a future version of this list.
This list is more of innovations that can be used by other films. Realistic black holes aren't something that is seen often in movies. Tho the effect is still really impressive
oh yes... and that they built a brand new ray tracing engine that bends light according to gravity in order to predict what a black hole will look like... and had scientific papers published because of its discoveries... that's mind boggling..!
Davy Jones is perhaps my favorite CGI character ever. They managed to capture Nighy’s performance perfectly while making you doubt if you were watching someone under makeup and prosthetics. He was a brilliant technical achievement.
CseRedHide But it isn't essencially a groundbraking technique. It's basically just a diffrent way to use the existing things. They did some not fotorealistic animation, played around with shaders and choose some intresting camera angles and depth of field effects. But it's defenetly one of the first photorealiscic fully CG-animated movies.
It's too bad the story and characters didn't live up to the effects. Hardly anybody remembers this movie now, because of the lackluster and flawed plot, less than stellar writing, some terrible casting choices, etc.
Some notes: 1. Photoshop: 1990. A household name by 1993. iMovie released in 1999. 2. One of the engineers at ILM who developed the water simulation was Masi Oka - yes, the _actor_ who played _Hiro_ _Nakamura_ in the TV-series _Heroes_ . 4. The Final Fantasy movie might have been one of the first _full_ movie that was motion-captured, but mo-cap had been used _lots_ of times before that for individual effects.
I'm deaf, and have read lips all my life. I can spot a CGI human the instant they start talking. The Gollum character was done so well that I can 'read his lips'. It makes me wonder if they had a deaf person help with the phonemes. What makes it even more impressive, is that it was done only a 2 -3 years after Final Fantasy. Watching FF is hard to do without cringing now, but I had such high hopes for that film.
@@foop2954 Jurassic park used mostly Stan Winston animatronics (there is about five minutes of CGI in JP) and in Star Wars (i'm talking about prequels now) it's mostly miniatures. It gets bad rep for its CGI, but I reckon that's mostly because of Jar Jar. :-P ua-cam.com/video/DvpMVirLsY0/v-deo.html
We're nearly 10 years on from Avatar (definitely 10 years since the CGI was done) and I imagine it will hold its own for many years from now. The only thing that might change that is the visual phenomenon Avatar 2 is sure to be, after which we'll notice a huge difference in realism between the two. I expect Avatar 2 to again blow every other CGI film out of the running for many years until they catch up with its technology.
This is hands down the most informative top 10 list I've seen... totally blows watchmojo out of the water with reasoning and non repetition when discussing a topic... Segments each contribution and "honorable mentions" many movies based on similar criteria and doesn't play on popularity... Hell of a list this was and finally a top ten I said to myself "you got every goddamn spot right" kudos... Wow... Gasp
Holy shit, I had no idea thos sequences from LOTR were so heavily realyingCGI, I thought they were mostly groups of real people duplicated! It's incredible what they did in 2003 with such a "small" budget, it looks way more realistic than all the Hobbit movies... and thinking that all 3 LOTR cost as much as a single Hobbit movie is absurd!
Funny story about that. The first test of that system was programmed to complete a battle as efficiently as possible. As a result, both armies ran the opposite direction.
Quick comment on O Brother, Where Art Thou? (2000) , there were other effects. They basically paid for a cosmetic fix (paint job) on a dead engine at the North Carolina Transportation Museum, rented that, a few coaches and other cars and a diesel to push them around. VFX was used to add steam, smoke and so on because the engine was not burning anything or actually running. The color correction was the biggie, of course. They also used effects to paint the diesel out of the final print... The results were so good that most people had NO idea that the steamer wasn't running....
Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within is one of my favorite animated films. I think it was ahead of it's time in terms of designing a CGI science fiction film for adults, as well as telling a story centered on the concept of spiritual energy. It was so far ahead of it's time, that most people seeing it did not even know what to expect, thus it was hit with a lot of negative criticism. Even though the CGI looks a tad dated, I think it aged relatively well. The Spirits Within actually got me interested in Final Fantasy as a whole. It's differences from the FF games does not make it a bad movie, in my opinion. It does tell an interesting story by itself.
The LCD background thing used by the Mandalorian is pretty cool and I would bet that movies in the future will definitely use this. I wonder if going forward that will be a significant landmark in film VFX
I really like the fact that you guys aren't just showing a top ten list but actually giving an explanation for everything. Hats off to you guys and keep up the good work :D
The opening shot (all 20 minutes of it) of Gravity was the most immersed I've ever been in a film. Front row at IMAX and I'd just smoked a joint, the illusion was so convincing I felt mild vertigo looking down at earth.
Yes, Gravtiy is really a rare film that is worthy of 3D and of being watched in a cinema. The story isn't all that spectacular but the cheer optics of space and near zero gravity is more than awersome. What a ride.
Thinking back on it, Avatar was pretty fucking incredible. Silly, a tad long, cheesier than a grilled cheese sandwich covered with easy cheese but it was damn fun.
I think the way I'd put it is that the CGI and the other parts blended together so well you couldn't tell them apart. There were moments in the Final Fantasy movies that approached that level of rendering, but only moments.
Current FF15 gameplay graphic and cutscenes nearly close to Within ( or maybe better ) . Kind of crazy huh. Not only VFX technology getting advanced, gaming also. Maybe 10 years later, we can run Gravity CGI level in gaming platformers real time
bunnyfreakz actually we can do it right now, however the cost of such thing will be greater than everything you can imagine, that's why no gaming companies do it. the closest thing i can see a video game dat match a movie or more like an animation movie is Ratchet and Clank 2016
Remember it was created just before zbrush and digital sculpting brake through. Rendered with Pentium3 machines each with less than 1GB of memory. Pretty much every element in scene rendered into a seperate layers and composited together. (Smoke, characters, hair, athmospherics and if I remember correctly specular, diffuse.. etc. (Possibly different parts of characters.. not sure.)) Rendered with renderman, which meant traditional micropoly rasterization with all the problems with shadowmaps etc. (They actually did bake some shadows separately to textures and used them as drop down maks.. etc.) Long before energy preserving rendering pipeline was considered and we heard things like we tweaked materials per shot in commentary.. If I remember correctly most of the information was from Cinefex 86 which I cannot access anymore. (Lost my copy long time ago.)
Definitely right about the Lighting affecting the realism of CGI! I've been doing Photography for a few years now, and whenever doing a composite, or a photo illustration the lighting is the number one thing you have to have right. Even back in the days of Space Jam and Who Framed Roger Rabbit, they had to draw the correct lighting and shadows on the cartoons to really sell the effect.
this channel is a thousand times better than some of the other channels in its genre. thank you for actually showing what the title promises and sharing side by side and immediate before and afters of the vfx in movies!
So for Avatar 2-5(?) they use VR for the actors and face tracking (eye+camera for the lower face part) and for all crew Members, so they all play a really really cool video game and the "playthrough" is the final Movie(s).
liquidsoap89 Total War is a thing, you know. Granted, it's far more simplistic, but it's the same basic concept. Their idea was clearly based in video-game AI. Which is pretty neat and, I just realized, is an argument I can bring up against the recent trend in making games more "cinematic". PS: Fuck people who think games should be "cinematic", these people need to be locked in portable toilets and set on fire.
"Sky Captain" also pulled off the rather impressive job of having a long-dead actor (Laurence Olivier) make a cameo, although that might be more clever video editing than VFX?
HitomiAyumu In their defense, it IS hard to make a flying, supersonic, laser-vision, ice-breathing, super-strong man in tights look realistic, although I will say that most of the shots looked one or two lighting renders away from being realistic. I do appreciate your point, Aaron Kalat . Color Grading has gotten a bit out of hand. Sure, it's nice in films like "O Brother, Where Art Thou" and "Fury Road", when it's there for a sense of style- a 1930's period piece for the former, and a truly insane, dry desert for the latter. "Man of Steel"'s color grading, though, didn't really seem to go for a particular style. Maybe it was trying to look as deep or as contemplative as it was trying to be, but it ended up adding to the overall lack of appeal.
HitomiAyumu Right- if we've seen anything from the trailers for the "Assassin's Creed" franchise, it's that humans can look as good as we want to. I meant that "Man of Steel" was doing a LOT with its human rigs- maybe too much. We can recognize a human character from a CG model, but we can DEFINITELY tell the difference when one is running faster than the human eye can track, or running like an animal up the side of a building. They were trying to make those more stylistic and in line with the comics when the rest of the movie was trying to be too serious with it all. The lack of effort shows on deeper levels than the lighting or the color grading- that's why it failed to please critics.
Jacob Wheeler I'm not too concerned with the animation. Its the lighting and textures that throw me off. You were right when you said that its a few renders off looking good. Turn up the ray tracing depth and it will look much better.
One of the things I love about your videos the most is the amount of amazing and interesting facts about movies you guys put together. Being able to understand a little more about how movies are made makes them so much more fascinating!!!!
cpypcy you can often tell because things happen that would be nearly impossible to do with practical fx. That said looking at the video about practical effects achieved...
Nahele Duskwalker Yeah I really liked the movie too :) and my parents only bought it for me because "It has final fantasy in the name and she likes the games", or else I probably wouldn't have watched it.
***** It was directed by the creator of the franchise, it had a guy named Sid (spelled differently, doesn't really matter when the dialogue was voiced) and follows a party of four. It's Final Fantasy. The only thing that separates it from other Final Fantasy stories is that it was a movie instead of a game.
The virtual camera thing was done during the filming of Lord of the Rings, not the exact same as in Avatar, or anywhere near that extreme extent, but still was very useful and helped Peter Jackson in his filming.
For people thinking all of these VFX looking fake: You need to watch them on Blu-ray/UHD Blu-ray on a calibrated setup. Davy Jones looks so friggin' amazing and is probably my favourite CG character of all times. ILM's genius combined with Bill Nighy's perfectly whimsical performance is simply awesome. Not seeing the Star Wars Prequels mentioned here is a huge fail here. These films did more to drive the advancements of modern films than pretty much anything else. George Lucas has always been a pioneer. The digital backlot, digital stunt doubles, CGI characters, world building, crowd animation, etc.. They are legendary. I wish the Blu-ray of TPM did the film justice.
Dude, George Clooney was in three of these! Did he do it, like, on purpose? Will there be a groundbreaking VFX innovation in Tomorrowland? And why be the worst Batman ever in the worst Batman movie ever? We demand answers, Clooney!
James Ray Is funny that the first ever film was caused by the motion tracking of a horse, they wanted to know if a horse when running, gets all its paws in the air at once, they took 24 photographs at regular intervals (using that old cameras that used exploding powder as flash) and found that yes a horse fly's when running, they also without knowing invented film (that is why film is 24 fps not because that is the best frame rate). :)
You're in the minority on this one. For most, it was a pretty forgettable film. Not many people even care about it now. In fact, when it was mentioned in this video, it was the first time I ever thought about it since watching it soon after its original release. To each his own, but it's no shining example of a great film. Innovations in effects aside, there's nothing to sink one's teeth into. All the technical innovations in the world can't make up for forgettable story and characters.
I didn't mind the movie. It wasn't what I was expecting, being a FF and all, but it was good. What I freaking loved was the animation. It was amazing for the time!
Alvin Kae Cabato totally! I liked the movie and I've never played one of the final fantasy games. if it had a different title it would have had much better reviews.
+Fabrice Bongartz It's incredible that movie was greenlit at all. A movie with a budget that big using only 2 actors, 1 of them not even the entire way through the movie, and a female scientist at that, is pretty amazing. It paid off big-time because it felt really fresh at the time. The effects of zero gravity were definitely seamless too
To people Fighting over what's best CGI, as a CGi artist myself, I will enlighten you one thing. To make a scene , character Believable and merge well with the Environment, The most Important Aspect is understanding Lighting. I Vote Interstellar As best Visual effects, Not Necessarily in a Nolan Fan, But that Movie Has great Challenges. they actually Studied lighting in Space, and in galaxies, to make it believable, The physics used in the more are real Physics, Working with Dynamics. We all know its all 3D generated ,but Look at the Lighting, the dynamics , look at the accuracy and or how Believable it is. Thank You.
RecKt TV - Didn't you know that in Interstellar most of the space ship scenes were done with practical effects i.e. models? That's why the lighting looks so real. Or are you refering to a specific scene?
You may say everything you want about Avatars plot or characters, but you can't deny the incredible experience of watching that movie in Imax 3D for the first time. It was simply unbelievable.
Maximiliano Ríos Vera working on it! we're going to start with spanish and build from there! Hopefully the fan translators will be up soon and we can get some support in that from you guys!
CineFix tx guys, ive been sharing this videos with my friends in college but sadly most of them have problems with the language, so it will be awesome to have subs, tx again really apreciate all the effort
Mr. Lombardi I hope your not referring to me, cause I don't like pokemon movies / anime. And dont like the fast and furious (except the first one). I just find gravity really boring. And also I don't make memes, I tried, but somehow it doesn't work.
I just find people like you who watch video games really boring. All in all, I'd rather listen to the critics, whom in which gave Gravity universal acclaim.
Mr. Lombardi I'm with you on this one. Watching gameplay of a game you can play yourself isnt boring but watching a deep, thrilling exciting beautifully shot and directed movie is? People are fucking weird
The most surprising part of this video for me was actually the beginning. Oh Brother is one of the last films you would think of when it comes to digital VFX but there it is. Mind blown.
Yeah.. Umm I know you hate them but you left out the Star Wars prequels, which undoubtedly pushed boundaries and revolutionized visual effects. The problem is you're MAD at them for doing that because you wish it was just models and sets again instead of pushing for something new. Sad to say, but I'm pretty sure Jar Jar Binks was the first ever mo cap and according to everyone who hates the prequels for too much green screen, the Star Wars prequels were the first films to project a cg environment on the green screen around the actors and few props. Sky Captain was 2004 if your video is correct and by that time two of the prequels had already come out and Revenge of the Sith was only a year away
Attack of the Clones was the first fully digital movie (it was recorded with digital cameras enabling to edit it on cumputers instead of scanning films and then edit them on computers to lastly, "print CGI onto the existing films as the time of Episode I's making) to include vast number of CGI. It'sad not to see the prequels, because as you said they pushed the bouderies of film making, before LOTR, Avengers, Pirates of the Caribbean, Iron Man, Gravity, Avatar etc.
+The Vicious Chicken of Bristol you know for a man that owned the company that single handedly transformed VFX its surprising the new Star Wars has pathetic CGI. I mean over half the pre 2000 list is ILM innovation and like 8 of this list is also ILM work... I will admit the Phantom Menace has the best CGI out of the 3, its before he let loose with the CGI backdrop. There are still more sets than CGI back drop and the CGI that is in it is sic!!! Jar Jar was the first character of its type but he and many other reasons ruined that film though. Like that kid who was terrible and Portman who I usually like but was shockingly bad. Pointless pod race mashed into the story (did look amazing though). Then the CGI backdrop came for like EVERY scene in the next 2 movies....
People don't realize how much ground-breaking technical innovation was put into Avatar. Leagues ahead of anything else. Glad this video shed light on that.
I just watched Avengers Civil War and all I could think through out the movie was the vehicles / buildings that were CGI - it really took me out of the movie. Whenever I saw the actors in a gorgeous room with a view over the ocean - i knew it was a green screen. Ignorance is bliss sometimes. But I think we need more realism in movies.
Man, I enjoyed Sky Captain so much, I must have watched it 20 times. Thanks to make me remember :)
8 років тому+33
You know when you watch a movie and after you have seen how cgi and special effects are made, you can notice in the movie and think "oh that is a green screen" "oh that building is cgi" but when i first saw gravity, i have no clue how those effects were made, like i have no way to tell if it was cgi or real elements. However, the movie suck.
Đivector Kyané Lightning and shaders are prolly the most important thing when it comes to photorealism. You know, photo=light. That's why Gravity is so important. Even though it sucks.
Fantastic work on this. Glad someone else can see the massive work Cameron did for Avatar tech wise. Miles ahead of it's time. Although he had to wait for other tech to be done to realize his ideas. Imagine what he will do with the sequels with full freedom. Need to strap yourself in for the sequels.
I am so happy Gravity is number one. Even though the first time I saw it it wasn't HD, but I was still stunned. Best movie of 2013. You may replace it with 12 years a slave.
dont mean to be rude, but Interstellar created the first realistic interpretation of a black hole using butt loads of math and programming, and almost all of the physics was correct, it wasn't your average movie
There are surprizingly few VFX in Interstellar, however the black hole and how they simulated the bending of the light around it was absolutely mindblowing and definitely deserved a place on this list
Seeing Avatar in Imax was one of my most memorable movie experiences. It was simply jaw-dropping
+Working Joe i know!!
+Working Joe I actually had a brief PTSD episode in the lobby afterwards - accelerated heart rate, breathlessness, emotional reactions, the whole bit. On some level, between the 3D and the surround sound, my body read the battle scene as real... even though I knew perfectly well what I watching...
Same Skip, i about had a panic attack while watching gravity I guess it was way to much spinning.
Agreed I thought that was something else. I was like it looks pretty good, I'll see it. I had no idea how amazed I would be. I've seen it since, but in IMAX that was something else
And then a day passed and I realized that it was jaw-droppingly bad.
That AI crowd animation is actually fucking incredible, I had no idea thats how it worked
ikr
+roloug95 I'm not that good with programming but i could probably do something similar (but im to lazy to do 360 animations and rendering everything :P)
+katten elvis Haha yeah sure
Catherine Alces It doesnt seem to hard, just ad some random values to a set of characters in a programming program and i would be done
No, I'm saying go do it. Seems like a big case of "sure I could, I'm just too lazy" = no. no you cant
I hate when people bad mouth CGI. They have no idea how many great movies would be different or not made at all if this stuff wasn't invented. And it's not like it's easy. This stuff requires just as much artistic merit and creative thinking as model work does.
Because there are too many mediocre CGI out there. No one mock groundbreaking VFX like everything in this videos. And yeah Hobbit VFX is way worse than LotR VFX. Can you believe that?
Rowan J Coleman The problem with CGI is how to apply it properly in the movies, the goal is to fool the audience into thinking that what they we're seeing wasn't computer generated. Overuse of CGI and VFX ruins the illusion thus the audience know what they we're seeing was fake. A prime example of Overused of CGI is Michael Bay's Transformers franchise and Peter Jackson's the Hobbit trilogy.
bunnyfreakz That's because Lotr didn't used that many VFX effects compared to the Hobbit, for example they used a enormous amount of real practical effects and body prosthetics, for the near the camera Uruk Hai, goblins and Orcs, but for the Hobbit they used digital characters instead, that is why they look more real in Lotr, that's because they are real, but i predict that VFX in 5 years time will be indistinct from real life or them close, at least for big James Cameron like blockbusters.
people dont usually bash the artists and animators, but hate the overall overuse of CGI in film when it's just plain unnecessary, and practical effects would look much better
+Michael Sandoval See: The Hobbit
I feel bad watching these and thinking about render times
+Jessur. ENTIRE BUILDINGS FILLED WITH RENDER FARMS
All I could think about man.
+Jessur render lasts forever :P
Now that you mention it, it reminds me that here at school all we have for render are the individual computers that we use in class. During Finals Week all the Senior are hogging the computers to render.
Chichislover Yeah, and also pros use mostly renderfarms
I still get impressed by Pirates of Caribbean of 2006
Davy Jones is still the greatest CG of all time. I didnt find out until years later his whole body was cg, I just thought it was his face.
Me too
wow that crowd animation was genius
One of my favorite stories about that was that they had real trouble tuning the AI. One of the characteristics they wanted each "actor" to have was a desire to survive. Which resulted in them frequently running away en masse from the battle ;)
No it wasn't. It looked like fucking crap.
@@youtubesuresuckscock thats entirely subjective, plus i think most people would disagree.
@@youtubesuresuckscock Except it didn't though. It was genius.
Starts with Clooney, ends with Clooney...
Somehow that feels right for a video about film in the 21st century.
Right? I noticed that! He is not that great of an actor but I feel fine with it.
I didn't notice that! 😀
There are probably straight women and gay men who want to join NASA to look for George Clooney
How about Interstallar's black hole that required 800 TB to render and furthered science's knowledge of the physics. I'm pretty sure that hasn't been done before
+AuroraDarkStar To simulate gravitational lensing by rapidly spinning black holes is an awesome feat! Although I doubt it will be used in many movies other than Insterstellar (if at all), it really deserves a spot on a future version of this list.
This list is more of innovations that can be used by other films. Realistic black holes aren't something that is seen often in movies. Tho the effect is still really impressive
I was also searching Interstellar .
fuck yeah bro !! I love this movie
oh yes... and that they built a brand new ray tracing engine that bends light according to gravity in order to predict what a black hole will look like... and had scientific papers published because of its discoveries... that's mind boggling..!
Davy Jones is perhaps my favorite CGI character ever. They managed to capture Nighy’s performance perfectly while making you doubt if you were watching someone under makeup and prosthetics. He was a brilliant technical achievement.
The LEGO Movie made me believe that I was watching stop motion, that is something.
The most amazing part is that it only cost $60 million to make.
Well it's much less than you'd expect it to cost
CseRedHide But it isn't essencially a groundbraking technique. It's basically just a diffrent way to use the existing things. They did some not fotorealistic animation, played around with shaders and choose some intresting camera angles and depth of field effects.
But it's defenetly one of the first photorealiscic fully CG-animated movies.
> create something à 24fps
> go to after effect
> apply « posterize time »
> profit
@@MoonWalkerTexsRanger dont fucking greentext on youtube
FINALLY someone gave some credit to Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow. Thank you!
It's too bad the story and characters didn't live up to the effects. Hardly anybody remembers this movie now, because of the lackluster and flawed plot, less than stellar writing, some terrible casting choices, etc.
Hell I love that movie!
It's silly as shit, but I've always liked it
Sky Captain wasn't the first to do a fully-rendered world with live actors. See Casshern, which came out a few months earlier in 2004.
Some notes:
1. Photoshop: 1990. A household name by 1993. iMovie released in 1999.
2. One of the engineers at ILM who developed the water simulation was Masi Oka - yes, the _actor_ who played _Hiro_ _Nakamura_ in the TV-series _Heroes_ .
4. The Final Fantasy movie might have been one of the first _full_ movie that was motion-captured, but mo-cap had been used _lots_ of times before that for individual effects.
You skipped 3. :)
The CGI in LotR was incredible. It's the only movie I can think of where the CGI still stands up 17 years later.
I'm deaf, and have read lips all my life. I can spot a CGI human the instant they start talking. The Gollum character was done so well that I can 'read his lips'.
It makes me wonder if they had a deaf person help with the phonemes.
What makes it even more impressive, is that it was done only a 2 -3 years after Final Fantasy.
Watching FF is hard to do without cringing now, but I had such high hopes for that film.
Jurassic Park, Star Wars, etc are films that personally did better
@@foop2954 Jurassic park used mostly Stan Winston animatronics (there is about five minutes of CGI in JP) and in Star Wars (i'm talking about prequels now) it's mostly miniatures. It gets bad rep for its CGI, but I reckon that's mostly because of Jar Jar. :-P
ua-cam.com/video/DvpMVirLsY0/v-deo.html
We're nearly 10 years on from Avatar (definitely 10 years since the CGI was done) and I imagine it will hold its own for many years from now. The only thing that might change that is the visual phenomenon Avatar 2 is sure to be, after which we'll notice a huge difference in realism between the two. I expect Avatar 2 to again blow every other CGI film out of the running for many years until they catch up with its technology.
No man. The cgi aged fast and hard. The Cave Troll fight is still fun, but awkward as Hell.
This is hands down the most informative top 10 list I've seen... totally blows watchmojo out of the water with reasoning and non repetition when discussing a topic... Segments each contribution and "honorable mentions" many movies based on similar criteria and doesn't play on popularity... Hell of a list this was and finally a top ten I said to myself "you got every goddamn spot right" kudos... Wow... Gasp
Gotta say that to this day Avatar still blows me away, it puts 90% of today’s stuff to shame
Jeez...Watching the making of Avatar must be one hell of a ride, equally interesting and fascinating than the movie itself.
I am so happy to see Sky Captain mentioned! Such a beautiful and unique film.
Holy shit, I had no idea thos sequences from LOTR were so heavily realyingCGI, I thought they were mostly groups of real people duplicated!
It's incredible what they did in 2003 with such a "small" budget, it looks way more realistic than all the Hobbit movies... and thinking that all 3 LOTR cost as much as a single Hobbit movie is absurd!
Especially since Weta Workshop was a small New Zealand company.
BubuSnow93 They did not have a small budget. Especially on Return of the King, LOTR had a huge budget.
@@peterjoyfilms The budget of One LOTR film cost around 130m in today money. What's more amazing is a small company and an unknown director did that!
@@peterjoyfilms the movies were filmed directly after each other. It's not like they had a gap year. They filmed the whole trilogy in a 400 day span
Funny story about that. The first test of that system was programmed to complete a battle as efficiently as possible. As a result, both armies ran the opposite direction.
Quick comment on O Brother, Where Art Thou? (2000)
, there were other effects. They basically paid for a cosmetic fix (paint job) on a dead engine at the North Carolina Transportation Museum, rented that, a few coaches and other cars and a diesel to push them around. VFX was used to add steam, smoke and so on because the engine was not burning anything or actually running. The color correction was the biggie, of course. They also used effects to paint the diesel out of the final print... The results were so good that most people had NO idea that the steamer wasn't running....
Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within is one of my favorite animated films. I think it was ahead of it's time in terms of designing a CGI science fiction film for adults, as well as telling a story centered on the concept of spiritual energy. It was so far ahead of it's time, that most people seeing it did not even know what to expect, thus it was hit with a lot of negative criticism. Even though the CGI looks a tad dated, I think it aged relatively well. The Spirits Within actually got me interested in Final Fantasy as a whole. It's differences from the FF games does not make it a bad movie, in my opinion. It does tell an interesting story by itself.
I loved that movie. one of my favorite animated movies ever.
I. Love. CineFix. So. Much.
The LCD background thing used by the Mandalorian is pretty cool and I would bet that movies in the future will definitely use this. I wonder if going forward that will be a significant landmark in film VFX
I really like the fact that you guys aren't just showing a top ten list but actually giving an explanation for everything. Hats off to you guys and keep up the good work :D
The opening shot (all 20 minutes of it) of Gravity was the most immersed I've ever been in a film. Front row at IMAX and I'd just smoked a joint, the illusion was so convincing I felt mild vertigo looking down at earth.
Yes, Gravtiy is really a rare film that is worthy of 3D and of being watched in a cinema. The story isn't all that spectacular but the cheer optics of space and near zero gravity is more than awersome. What a ride.
I feel like Gravity is one of the films you can't watch on your home screen
Suggestion:
"Last time we talked about..."
Link the "last time" video in the description for those who haven't seen it, and want to see it first.
Thinking back on it, Avatar was pretty fucking incredible. Silly, a tad long, cheesier than a grilled cheese sandwich covered with easy cheese but it was damn fun.
I think the way I'd put it is that the CGI and the other parts blended together so well you couldn't tell them apart. There were moments in the Final Fantasy movies that approached that level of rendering, but only moments.
Great video! Its obvious you put a lot of time, effort and investigation to make it, appreciate it
So, in short the flop films brought a revolution. Which created some Oscar winning films.
And here I am, derping around adobe PS and AE
lol
OMG Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within...my cousin loved that movie and she watched it all the time with my brother and I so I have a soft spot for it.
Damn, Spirits within looks so dated by todays standards, I remember seeing it and thinking it was really really good CGI :)
Current FF15 gameplay graphic and cutscenes nearly close to Within ( or maybe better ) . Kind of crazy huh. Not only VFX technology getting advanced, gaming also. Maybe 10 years later, we can run Gravity CGI level in gaming platformers real time
bunnyfreakz actually we can do it right now, however the cost of such thing will be greater than everything you can imagine, that's why no gaming companies do it.
the closest thing i can see a video game dat match a movie or more like an animation movie is Ratchet and Clank 2016
I think for being made in 2001 it still looks quite impressive
Remember it was created just before zbrush and digital sculpting brake through.
Rendered with Pentium3 machines each with less than 1GB of memory.
Pretty much every element in scene rendered into a seperate layers and composited together. (Smoke, characters, hair, athmospherics and if I remember correctly specular, diffuse.. etc. (Possibly different parts of characters.. not sure.))
Rendered with renderman, which meant traditional micropoly rasterization with all the problems with shadowmaps etc. (They actually did bake some shadows separately to textures and used them as drop down maks.. etc.)
Long before energy preserving rendering pipeline was considered and we heard things like we tweaked materials per shot in commentary..
If I remember correctly most of the information was from Cinefex 86 which I cannot access anymore. (Lost my copy long time ago.)
You included Beowulf, unlike every other VFX list. So...thank you. :)
Golden Compass had some good CGI that's convincing even today. Gave them an Oscar, too, so not like it went unnoticed.
Definitely right about the Lighting affecting the realism of CGI!
I've been doing Photography for a few years now, and whenever doing a composite, or a photo illustration the lighting is the number one thing you have to have right.
Even back in the days of Space Jam and Who Framed Roger Rabbit, they had to draw the correct lighting and shadows on the cartoons to really sell the effect.
This video answered many questions I had about visual fx
this channel is a thousand times better than some of the other channels in its genre. thank you for actually showing what the title promises and sharing side by side and immediate before and afters of the vfx in movies!
I want to rewatch Gravity, but that film is only worth watching in 3D on a massive screen.
I think the same way
apotheos1s Specially if this massive screen happens to be an IMAX screen, like the one which I watched the movie on.
Thales Nunes Moreira It's kind of disappointing I'll never experience the movie like that again :/
SensualCream Who knows? Considering the great success it was, I wouldn't be surprised if they decide to show it again.
Spartan Gamer Yeah, never considered that. It would be nice :)
So for Avatar 2-5(?) they use VR for the actors and face tracking (eye+camera for the lower face part) and for all crew Members, so they all play a really really cool video game and the "playthrough" is the final Movie(s).
i had no idea digital colour grading was so recent. i would have thought they'd be doing that around the same time as early CGI.
O Brother where art thou is an under appreciated masterpiece, glad you guys gave it some recognition
The sheer number of innovations in Avatar is enough to make someone's head spin.
You guys rock! I love your top 10 lists. So much better and way more informative than other lists out there.
amazing work putting this video together.
Thanks for covering all this cinema history and knowledge. And especially for recognizing Sky Captain - a fiercely indi film. GREAT WORK ALL
Sky Captain wasn't the first to do a fully-rendered world with live actors. See Casshern, which came out a few months earlier in 2004.
On the LoTR one. So...basically they used video-game AI?
+The Crimson Fucker Sort of, yeah, but ~15 years ago, for up to 70,0000 characters at once...
Johny Ludvigsson It's not like that kind of AI didn't exist 15 years ago. The scale is impressive, though.
+The Crimson Fucker The scale is the main reason it's important. They simulated entire armies!
liquidsoap89 Total War is a thing, you know. Granted, it's far more simplistic, but it's the same basic concept.
Their idea was clearly based in video-game AI. Which is pretty neat and, I just realized, is an argument I can bring up against the recent trend in making games more "cinematic".
PS: Fuck people who think games should be "cinematic", these people need to be locked in portable toilets and set on fire.
+The Crimson Fucker yes it loks like total war game
"Sky Captain" also pulled off the rather impressive job of having a long-dead actor (Laurence Olivier) make a cameo, although that might be more clever video editing than VFX?
jliller if did? I've started to watch it a bit on Netflix
Good color grading = Max Mad: Fury Road
Bad color grading = Man Of Steel
Aaron Kalat Man of Steel's problem was its CGI. I mean holy crap, that shit looked fake.
HitomiAyumu In their defense, it IS hard to make a flying, supersonic, laser-vision, ice-breathing, super-strong man in tights look realistic, although I will say that most of the shots looked one or two lighting renders away from being realistic.
I do appreciate your point, Aaron Kalat . Color Grading has gotten a bit out of hand. Sure, it's nice in films like "O Brother, Where Art Thou" and "Fury Road", when it's there for a sense of style- a 1930's period piece for the former, and a truly insane, dry desert for the latter. "Man of Steel"'s color grading, though, didn't really seem to go for a particular style. Maybe it was trying to look as deep or as contemplative as it was trying to be, but it ended up adding to the overall lack of appeal.
Jacob Wheeler Making humans look real isn't difficult anymore. They just failed to meet the benchmark.
HitomiAyumu Right- if we've seen anything from the trailers for the "Assassin's Creed" franchise, it's that humans can look as good as we want to.
I meant that "Man of Steel" was doing a LOT with its human rigs- maybe too much. We can recognize a human character from a CG model, but we can DEFINITELY tell the difference when one is running faster than the human eye can track, or running like an animal up the side of a building. They were trying to make those more stylistic and in line with the comics when the rest of the movie was trying to be too serious with it all.
The lack of effort shows on deeper levels than the lighting or the color grading- that's why it failed to please critics.
Jacob Wheeler I'm not too concerned with the animation. Its the lighting and textures that throw me off. You were right when you said that its a few renders off looking good. Turn up the ray tracing depth and it will look much better.
One of the things I love about your videos the most is the amount of amazing and interesting facts about movies you guys put together.
Being able to understand a little more about how movies are made makes them so much more fascinating!!!!
TLDR VFX is so good you don't even know it's VFX anymore.
cpypcy you can often tell because things happen that would be nearly impossible to do with practical fx. That said looking at the video about practical effects achieved...
If it was just called Spirits Within it would of been much more widely accepted. Square Enix fucked up by calling it Final Fantasy.
Yes! That is what i always say about spirits within.
Personally I loved the movie. Ya it may not have been the best for it time. But it certainly was admit better that people give it credit for.
Nahele Duskwalker Yeah I really liked the movie too :) and my parents only bought it for me because "It has final fantasy in the name and she likes the games", or else I probably wouldn't have watched it.
***** It was directed by the creator of the franchise, it had a guy named Sid (spelled differently, doesn't really matter when the dialogue was voiced) and follows a party of four.
It's Final Fantasy. The only thing that separates it from other Final Fantasy stories is that it was a movie instead of a game.
I loved Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within :)
+Holly Travers Me too.
+Holly Travers Thank goodness I'm not the only one!
I watched it a long time. The cgi has aged a lot, but I always remember that movie fondly... Don't know why people hate it so much.
The virtual camera thing was done during the filming of Lord of the Rings, not the exact same as in Avatar, or anywhere near that extreme extent, but still was very useful and helped Peter Jackson in his filming.
Three of the movies on this list were George clooney movies
Tedious Totoro George Clooney is CGI
Not cinema, but regarding the newest VFX innovations, The Mandalorian would now deserve a spot on the list IMO.
Why no mention of Pixar's contribution to this world like for Nemo with water or Monster's Inc with fur/hair
Dimple John It's about VFX contribution to the advancement of VFX in motion picture, not Animated ones.
+Ellijah De Leon Animated movies are motion pictures so they do count.
For people thinking all of these VFX looking fake: You need to watch them on Blu-ray/UHD Blu-ray on a calibrated setup. Davy Jones looks so friggin' amazing and is probably my favourite CG character of all times. ILM's genius combined with Bill Nighy's perfectly whimsical performance is simply awesome. Not seeing the Star Wars Prequels mentioned here is a huge fail here. These films did more to drive the advancements of modern films than pretty much anything else. George Lucas has always been a pioneer. The digital backlot, digital stunt doubles, CGI characters, world building, crowd animation, etc.. They are legendary. I wish the Blu-ray of TPM did the film justice.
Wow, I didn't know that about Gravity. Amazing!
Terminator2, the Matrix and Pirates2 were just awsome. Everything they did came together perfectly
Dude, George Clooney was in three of these! Did he do it, like, on purpose? Will there be a groundbreaking VFX innovation in Tomorrowland? And why be the worst Batman ever in the worst Batman movie ever? We demand answers, Clooney!
From a VFX guy......EXCELLENT PRESENTATION which is also ENTERTAINING! Now Mom, Dad and Friends will get it.
13:58, you can motion track horses now?
James Ray You could've motion cap'd just about anything when the ability to motion track humans was released.
James Ray Is funny that the first ever film was caused by the motion tracking of a horse, they wanted to know if a horse when running, gets all its paws in the air at once, they took 24 photographs at regular intervals (using that old cameras that used exploding powder as flash) and found that yes a horse fly's when running, they also without knowing invented film (that is why film is 24 fps not because that is the best frame rate). :)
That's probably the world's most confused horse, lol.
Didn't even notice that clip when I watched the video.
They mo-capped horses in Beowulf...
Redwald Cuthberting - And of course for computer games like Red Dead Redemtion.
I was so glad when I heard him mention Sky Captain. That one is a childhood favorite for me.
also with the LotR AI crowds, when they first ran the program they all ran away, so the y had to take that out so they couldn't retreat!
The Spirits Within was a fantastic movie, just because it didn't live up to the FF name, doesn't mean it had the worst of effects, story and feels.
You're in the minority on this one. For most, it was a pretty forgettable film. Not many people even care about it now. In fact, when it was mentioned in this video, it was the first time I ever thought about it since watching it soon after its original release. To each his own, but it's no shining example of a great film. Innovations in effects aside, there's nothing to sink one's teeth into. All the technical innovations in the world can't make up for forgettable story and characters.
I didn't mind the movie. It wasn't what I was expecting, being a FF and all, but it was good. What I freaking loved was the animation. It was amazing for the time!
Alvin Kae Cabato totally! I liked the movie and I've never played one of the final fantasy games. if it had a different title it would have had much better reviews.
I've never played a single second of any of the Final Fantasy games, but I found "Spirits Within" to be boring.
Spirits Within had the best CG realism of that time, and one of the best scifi animated movies of then , the other being Titan AE.
I have a feeling this list should be updated every 5 to 8 years.
Avatar is the ultimate example of style over substance because once you look past the CGI you've got the most formulaic story you've ever seen.
Your comment is the epitome of unoriginal and formulaic.
Fantasic video! Iove how you talk about all the technical elements aswell as the effects themselves.
Gravity easily earned that no 1 spot.
Fabrice Bongartz YEAH!
+Tom Slak agree it was shit
+Ajay Singh - LOL... you two best stick to comic book heroes...
noIMspartacus dont even read comic stuff. I like the vfx in Gravity. but the story was not good it make me feel watching a boring movie
+Fabrice Bongartz It's incredible that movie was greenlit at all. A movie with a budget that big using only 2 actors, 1 of them not even the entire way through the movie, and a female scientist at that, is pretty amazing. It paid off big-time because it felt really fresh at the time. The effects of zero gravity were definitely seamless too
Once again, astounding video and thesis. You guys are the best at deconstructing the best.
So, Gravity should have been nominated for best animated feature? I am actually serious.
yeah, I feel that debate isn't talked about enough nowadays. at what point is a film live-actionanimated?
Quite a dilemma we have here.
The #2 & #1 spots were so satisfying. Couldn’t agree more.
Ummm hello, we DID have Photoshop before the early 2000's! Do your research!!!
Photoshop was created in 1988 . So yes, we did have Photoshop waaaaaay before the 2000's.
I loved Spirits Within when it came out. I thought it was glorious!
To people Fighting over what's best CGI, as a CGi artist myself, I will enlighten you one thing. To make a scene , character Believable and merge well with the Environment, The most Important Aspect is understanding Lighting. I Vote Interstellar As best Visual effects, Not Necessarily in a Nolan Fan, But that Movie Has great Challenges. they actually Studied lighting in Space, and in galaxies, to make it believable, The physics used in the more are real Physics, Working with Dynamics. We all know its all 3D generated ,but Look at the Lighting, the dynamics , look at the accuracy and or how Believable it is. Thank You.
RecKt TV - Didn't you know that in Interstellar most of the space ship scenes were done with practical effects i.e. models? That's why the lighting looks so real. Or are you refering to a specific scene?
You may say everything you want about Avatars plot or characters, but you can't deny the incredible experience of watching that movie in Imax 3D for the first time. It was simply unbelievable.
we need subs guys, this videos are hard to understand for foreign people like myself
***** great comment thanks a lot
Maximiliano Ríos Vera working on it! we're going to start with spanish and build from there! Hopefully the fan translators will be up soon and we can get some support in that from you guys!
CineFix interstellar transform data into visual, i can help with the subs saludos
CineFix Cz subs for your Top 10 are being made by www.videacesky.cz so you have some fans (and views) in Czech Republic :D
CineFix
tx guys, ive been sharing this videos with my friends in college but sadly most of them have problems with the language, so it will be awesome to have subs, tx again really apreciate all the effort
I was expecting just a list of movies, this was so much better, thank you!
guys, make sure you don't become like watchmojo. know when there are no more lists to make.
Top 10 films made on the 2nd tuesday of the third month in 2003
+cherry-trix That sounds like the only way watchmojo could ever sustain its movie lists
+Gary why what's wrong with this list?
electric_magnetic
Nothing. He's saying that he wishes that this channel would keep putting good content out unlike watchmojo.
cherry-trix but they are so I'm a bit confused
Wow I didn't know anything about that crowd animation. That's really clever.
Wow that 'Avatar' technology is amazing too.
Gravity is an awesome tech demo. nothing else
Nah
Its actually a very symbolic movie. And its a thrilling movie. Whats the hate all about?
Mr. Lombardi I hope your not referring to me, cause I don't like pokemon movies / anime. And dont like the fast and furious (except the first one). I just find gravity really boring. And also I don't make memes, I tried, but somehow it doesn't work.
I just find people like you who watch video games really boring. All in all, I'd rather listen to the critics, whom in which gave Gravity universal acclaim.
Mr. Lombardi I'm with you on this one. Watching gameplay of a game you can play yourself isnt boring but watching a deep, thrilling exciting beautifully shot and directed movie is? People are fucking weird
The most surprising part of this video for me was actually the beginning. Oh Brother is one of the last films you would think of when it comes to digital VFX but there it is. Mind blown.
Can't wait for Avatar 2 in IMAX 3D Dolby atmos with a $22 per ticket price.
2018 m9 look it up
2018 what? release of the movie?
If the movie was hyper-boneristic, and considering the effort in making it, I totally would pay for that
I'm still amazed at how well Dead Man's Chest still holds up after over a decade. Seriously, look at 12:06 it's flawless.
Yeah.. Umm I know you hate them but you left out the Star Wars prequels, which undoubtedly pushed boundaries and revolutionized visual effects. The problem is you're MAD at them for doing that because you wish it was just models and sets again instead of pushing for something new. Sad to say, but I'm pretty sure Jar Jar Binks was the first ever mo cap and according to everyone who hates the prequels for too much green screen, the Star Wars prequels were the first films to project a cg environment on the green screen around the actors and few props. Sky Captain was 2004 if your video is correct and by that time two of the prequels had already come out and Revenge of the Sith was only a year away
Film Buff 92 Revenge of the Sith looks absolutly amazing. Especially Yoda. ILM dropped the fucking mic with him.
Film Buff 92 And The Phantom Menace still used a LOT of practical effects. Including explosions, sets and yes, they shot on location.
Attack of the Clones was the first fully digital movie (it was recorded with digital cameras enabling to edit it on cumputers instead of scanning films and then edit them on computers to lastly, "print CGI onto the existing films as the time of Episode I's making) to include vast number of CGI. It'sad not to see the prequels, because as you said they pushed the bouderies of film making, before LOTR, Avengers, Pirates of the Caribbean, Iron Man, Gravity, Avatar etc.
BTW: That top 10 list that you don't really agree 100% but the video and the research is SO well put together that you can't even argue.
The Phantom Menace?
Ha ha... just kidding!
+The Vicious Chicken of Bristol you know for a man that owned the company that single handedly transformed VFX its surprising the new Star Wars has pathetic CGI. I mean over half the pre 2000 list is ILM innovation and like 8 of this list is also ILM work... I will admit the Phantom Menace has the best CGI out of the 3, its before he let loose with the CGI backdrop. There are still more sets than CGI back drop and the CGI that is in it is sic!!! Jar Jar was the first character of its type but he and many other reasons ruined that film though. Like that kid who was terrible and Portman who I usually like but was shockingly bad. Pointless pod race mashed into the story (did look amazing though). Then the CGI backdrop came for like EVERY scene in the next 2 movies....
Jar Jar looks terrible though,as does the battle of Naboo.
+The Vicious Chicken of Bristol lol!!
James Cameron and Weta working together. Match made in heaven.
Only if you knew how expensive those ping pong balls are
People don't realize how much ground-breaking technical innovation was put into Avatar. Leagues ahead of anything else. Glad this video shed light on that.
I just watched Avengers Civil War and all I could think through out the movie was the vehicles / buildings that were CGI - it really took me out of the movie. Whenever I saw the actors in a gorgeous room with a view over the ocean - i knew it was a green screen. Ignorance is bliss sometimes. But I think we need more realism in movies.
"Avengers Civil War"
That's funny.
Man, I enjoyed Sky Captain so much, I must have watched it 20 times. Thanks to make me remember :)
You know when you watch a movie and after you have seen how cgi and special effects are made, you can notice in the movie and think "oh that is a green screen" "oh that building is cgi" but when i first saw gravity, i have no clue how those effects were made, like i have no way to tell if it was cgi or real elements.
However, the movie suck.
Đivector Kyané Lightning and shaders are prolly the most important thing when it comes to photorealism. You know, photo=light. That's why Gravity is so important. Even though it sucks.
That's exacly how I felt after watching Blade Runner 2049. Although this movie not suck.
Fantastic work on this. Glad someone else can see the massive work Cameron did for Avatar tech wise. Miles ahead of it's time. Although he had to wait for other tech to be done to realize his ideas.
Imagine what he will do with the sequels with full freedom. Need to strap yourself in for the sequels.
I am so happy Gravity is number one. Even though the first time I saw it it wasn't HD, but I was still stunned. Best movie of 2013. You may replace it with 12 years a slave.
Have you seen Prisoners?
Not yet, maybe I will
Austin Chang don't watch any trailers, watch it when you can your opinion on the best film of 2013 may change
Bravo! Never seen 16 minute UA-cam video from beginning to end before!
I honestly think Interstellar has better VFX than Gravity
Interstellar is a lot of practical effects while gravity is almost 100% CGI, Interstellar CGI is amazing too but gravity is groundbreaking
Gravitiy is on another level.... Interstellar is at best average...
dont mean to be rude, but Interstellar created the first realistic interpretation of a black hole using butt loads of math and programming, and almost all of the physics was correct, it wasn't your average movie
Kobeedge yea ... interstellar is way above average
There are surprizingly few VFX in Interstellar, however the black hole and how they simulated the bending of the light around it was absolutely mindblowing and definitely deserved a place on this list
Anyone else here in 2019 somehow?...
Thisnis why everyone likes and adores Alita. How far cgi has gone. Sometimes i wish she was actually a real person. In to the future!
i like the matrix sequels :)
now this is worth watching. both educational and entertaining. keep up the good work Cinefix!