so here's a talking point: i think you're using a s**t plugin and therefore got a warped sense of what voxels are/do/how they work and therefore gave an explanation that couldn't have been more wrong. bam there's your engagement. also i've suggested getting (not namedropping but hdr-related person) on a while ago maybe thats still worth a try - or anyone who knows the basics of computergraphics for that matter... but i am guessing nobody reads these.
I think we need a whole series of "Why CGI can't save the writing/directing". Because people often point fingers at the CGI, say it looks bad, it looks fake, it doesn't fit, it stands out, when they really mean "the writing and directing was so poor, that I couldn't suspend my disbelief and the situation seemed so artificial, it helped me notice all the little inconsistencies in the CGI.
@@someguy9204 I think a good example of the latter was "Prey" on Hulu. There were some obviously flawed/rushed VFX on several of the full CGI animals, but I was so invested in the story and scenarios that it was easy to not linger on or be bothered by them, personally. I understood that the filmmakers didn't have unlimited resources or time for all those shots, but they were effective enough as I was watching because of my investment in the story.
@@LunarEclipsism1 I agree! Plus it's not about the animals & I thought the Predator itself looked amazing. The cinematography made me wish it was in theaters.
This isn't new from CGI, remember how people looked at the Shark from Jaws in vacuum? It looks fake, rubber teeth, etc. But when watching the movie, you forget that entirely as the story, characters and acting have got you so far that a not-perfect shark doesn't take us out of the movie.
I think they said it perfectly “ they’re not buying the situation and they’re blaming the vfx” Jurassic park took the franchise from a block buster thriller to just another action movie. The original kitchen scene is a good example slow paced and the animals made mistakes and acted like animals it wasn’t just constant senseless action
Lol did you watch the movie? There are scenes like that. And in the scene they showed they are legit meant to be missiles. It's explained why they are doing what they're doing.
@@drduck3722 While true what didn't make sense is targeting a person with lasers to show who to kill, but then showing the raptor is busing doing/attacking someone else, doesn't actually see the laser but instinctively knows who to target so the disbelief starts from there, if she shot a pheromones dart or something at them instead it'd make far more sense
I also agree that the dinosaurs look like they’re acting. I’ve never thought about it like that but it really does explain it. There’s too much perfection in the eye movement, the claw movement, etc. The eyes are anthropomorphized to the point that they don’t look real anymore. The eyes need to look more like dumb lizard eyes rather than “evil” eyes.
@@elvewizzy the girl on foot was jumping across buildings and doing all sorts of stuff. On bike they would catch up then Chris Pratt would to something(like the metal bar) do throw them off. It's also literally explained why the didn't lose interest. Id highly recommended paying attention to the movies when you are going to criticize it later. There's plenty of things this movie did wrong and it wasn't the best JW movie but "the dinos not losing interest" isn't a valid point
I've been saying it for years, YEARS that the dinosaurs started behaving less like animals with every sequel. The reason the dinosaurs behave so real in the first one is simply Phil Tipett's involvement who knew what dinosaurs do and shouldn't do. He wasn't afraid to tell the director that the script is ridiculous when the T-Rex was supposed to lift the whole car with his mouth. Phil Tippett pointed out that a T-Rex simply doesn't have enough neck muscles to be able to perform that action. So they changed it and we got that great business in the car where the T-Rex tries to get to the kids by turning over the car first to attack the underside and squeezing them. There used to be a teaser for an abandoned Jurassic Park project by Ian McCaig and I hated how they animated the dinosaurs, especially the flying ones were treated by the animators as if they are fighter jets, doing barrel rolls, twist, turnsand whatnot. Cg is truly useless without a strong direction or someone with a vision.
You’re exactly right. Phil Tippet doesn’t get enough recognition for his input on JP. (And that’s a pun if you know about the dinosaur input device) The movement sells the CGI. And it’s the movement that breaks the CG for Creatures in so many other movies. Another case for tippet: the t-Rex tech- demo they did, with the Rex just walking looked nice but the movement was subpar. With tippets involvement that improved a lot
@@jl.7739 Yeah, I can safely say that the movement in the first Jurassic Park is superb and realistically, to some degree, Despite the fact that no one really cared much about Dinosaurs at the time.
I'd argue the Dinosaurs in Dominion are 100% the most animalistic Dinosaurs we've seen in JP. They main Villian isn't even a Villian, He just acts like a normal animal intimidating others for food or defending itself
Sam keeps saying that he isn’t trying to talk about story/direction but I feel like that would be a good spin off too. Talking about why stylistic decisions are made and how story beats work. Like a combination of screenwriter reacts and cinematographer reacts.
@@gambello1195 Yeah, but he kept appearing all the time. I even forgot he had left Corridor when I heard them saying that he was "back" and even then I had to ponder a little about what they meant.
I've been noticing that whenever Wren talks in any of these series, he teaches the audience and treats it like a tutorial. But no one else does that. Just an observation. I love Wren. The whole crew is great.
All of them explain technical terms whenever they use them they just use them according to their expertise. Niko usually explains terms related to practical filmmaking or stunts for example
I’m glad you guys talked about the punch zoom and realism. It’s a pet peeve of mine when a movie switched to cg and then physics of capturing a movie go out the window. In a lot of movies, as soon as they commit to cg, the camera starts doing crazy things, flying through windows, etc and it doesn’t have the same impact of something like mission impossible where you can see how it was filmed and that’s an enjoyable part of the moment.
I don't mind punch zooms too much, but cameras that can be anywhere and everywhere almost immediately take me out of the experience. Honestly one of my favorite aspects of 2014's Godzilla is that most shots were filmed at "ground level" which works wonders in establishing realistic POV footage, and presenting Godzilla at the appropriate scale.
@@drawosaurusrex5919 those two movies are masterclasses when it comes to portraying the absolute scale of cgi creatures and objects. Makes me wonder even more how Pacific Rim Uprising managed to fuck it up to such an extent.
I think it's actually interesting he mentioned that the raptors are like "missiles locked on" because, in the context of the scene, they're wired to follow whatever this like laser pointer points at. So the evil lady points her laser pointer at Chris Pratt, and the dinosaurs lock on. It's not only the context, and that the dinosaurs aren't really behaving like animals-- if anything, in context they shouldn't be. It's just that the context is so unbearably stupid lmfao
They're not genetically wired, they're trained, like the Indo-raptor was. Like dogs are. And sure, it's kinda ridiculous to be using dinosaurs like hunter-killer drones, but people seem to ignore the fact that JP's basic premise was that a company had such mastery over genetic engineering that they could not only re-create creatures they had mere fragments of DNA from, but they could also introduce specific deficiencies across a large variety of species, many of which are only distantly related to each other, if at all... and all they used it for is to *make a dinosaur theme-park zoo*.
There were other examples from the movie they could've picked that might have made more sense. Then again, even most of those could be chalked up to animals defending their territory.
Exactly, you can explain away your writing decisions with the most in-depth backstories, it just won't change how stupid the idea is in the first place. The writers are starting from a point where they're trying to come up with action set pieces akin to Transformers and Fast and Furious and working backwards to how they can feasibly explain how they got in that situation and how it's "possible".
The thing is that they aren't even velociraptors, they are a hybrid "atrociraptor". This can explain how they are basically monsters/killing machines which are obsessed with killing anything living, just like the Indominous Rex.
The thing is even in context, the animal acting is very B-movie bad acting. Like the behavior from the raptors is what you get from someone playing charades and getting the prompt “scary monster”. A lot of teeth gnashing, roaring, and threat posturing, but no serious attempts to actually attack the characters (because the movie would just be over). An animal trying to hunt a person would not do so much threat posturing, but would engage in stalking behavior, which has a lot less showing off and a lot more assessing the prey for an opening to pounce. It doesn’t help that the fact that Chris Pratt is on the motorcycle kneecaps the tension because the audience knows that motorcycles are really fast. A motorcycle is faster than any known land animal and can keep top speeds for much longer. The equivalent to a raptor in real life would probably be an ostrich (43 mph), and a motorcycle (80-165mph) can easily outpace it. In real life as soon as he took off, he’d be leaving them in the dust as soon as he got to an open road, so the very premise of this chase scene is very silly. He could easily escape at any time. Even in the original JP, while the T-Rex chase was cool, the chase ended immediately when the jeep reached faster speeds because the T-Rex couldn't keep up. The tension came from the fact that the jeep was a stick shift that needed to be manually accelerated and people were panicking.
Prehistoric Planet is the most scientifically accurate take we have on dinosaurs EVER Thank you for including the Jurassic Franchise and Prehistoric Planet
I love the hell out of that show, I'm sure it doesn't make a whole lot of money but I'm glad there's people that care enough to make something so scientifically accurate with that amount of stunning detail.
Ok, just straight up, I was absolutely enamoured by the CGI in Prehistoric Planet. CGI is good these days, but I just found it to be so next level on that series. Absolutely spectacular. But asides from the pure quality of the modelling, texturing, rigging, lighting, compositing, etc. I think the thing that made it step 'beyond' is how it was directed. I seem to recall one of your previous episodes where Pacific Rim was discussed and the shortfalls of the sequel whereby one of the biggest issues was just camera angle. The original was often 'shot' from angles a real person with a camera on the ground could get and it's this limitation that sells it because it ties the imagery with stuff we associate with the 'real'. The problem with so many action-driven movies these days is that they take the full freedom of the CG camera and go crazy with impossible shots, but also from an acting perspective, almost every monster (including Jurassic World dinosaurs) is just that, a 'monster', something unreal with a plot-purpose to be a "homing missile" of pure destruction. If it sees you it's in "seek and destroy mode". Prehistoric Planet took the approach of being a nature documentary and took its reference very seriously. The camera work is very grounded in reality, filmed in the same way as real-world nature documentaries of real 'animals'. The shots zoom a lot (because the film crew don't want to disturb the action) and sometimes even wobble about and the animals aren't always perfect centre in the shot. It's realistic imperfection. But then, the other point is that they really wanted to sell the point that they're not 'monsters'. Even in the real world, a lion or a crocodile isn't always in 'kill mode'. They have lives full of socialising, survival, mating, play, resting and more and the doco puts a focus on these real-life behaviours. Seeing them just doing what any other animal would do suddenly grounds them into familiar realism. But icing on the cake is the eyes. It's one of the first things I saw in the trailer was how good their eyes look, and its the eyes that really sell them on being alive. They're not monster eyes, they're soulful, they have distress, curiosity, love, alertness, etc. The CGI can be amazing, but its the acting and filming that just makes it pop. It's been a long time since I've loved something so much as that doco.
Shame they're still mocking CGI for being jank when all I ever see them produce is Jank. The only thing they've ever done that looked anywhere near hollywood was the Luke Skywalker deepfake - and 90% of that was the AI - not human skill. I guess they're a company that talk about professional CGI - not a professional CGI company.
Honestly one of my favorite parts of Dominion was just seeing the Therizinosaurus living a (semi) normal life for like 2 minutes. Not totally insane. More realistic, not moving in weird to ways and not acting crazy. It looked like a wild animal
Tbh it's quite ballsy to spend a ton of money and labour on creating this creature just to have it eat greens and scratch its butt... And I love that. That's what animals are like most of the time, and that really is the point of the show.
@GTortillaz21 Already watched the extended edition a week ago...didn't know the prologue was cut from the movie cause I missed it in the theaters. Can't imagine the movie without the opening Cretaceous sequence. This movie sort of redeemed the JW franchise for me though the previous two movie don't exist in my headcanon
@@AshrafAnam extended edition? first time i heard about it, i hate all JW movies, the one i hate the less is the first one (it is garbage but not in a dumpster and not in fire like the second and third one, just regular garbage)
@@enriquedossantos3283 The extended cut is 14 minutes longer and from what I've heard about the theatrical cut, the extended cut is the definitive one. The first two JW movies are just a dumb monster movie and its sequel, not real Jurassic movies. This one surprised me 'cause I wasn't expecting what they did at all and only watched 'cause the original three protagonists coming back. It's first time they made an effort to catch the spirit of the original Jurassic Park.
That was what made the first Jurassic Park so great: the dinosaurs felt like animals. And that's what made them terrifying: they were just doing what animals do. They were a force of nature, acting like nature acts, whether humans are present to see it or not - which incidentally fit the theme of the movie really well - and the humans were just unfortunate to be in their path. T-Rex gotta eat. Raptor gotta hunt. But in the World movies they feel like movie monsters or theme park attractions, not acting with independence, not following their animal instincts, but following a script to give a certain experience to the main characters and, by proxy, the audience. Ultimately they are created for OUR benefit, so we can watch cool motorcycle chases, and we can sense that when we watch the film, and that's not as compelling, somehow. You could argue that that fits the theme of the World movies, but . . . it still feels meh.
Seriously. Why does a (presumably hungry?) raptor run past like 10 human snacks to chase this loud angry machine? Are they saying this is a territorial sort of aggression then? I don't buy it. He said it best, they act more like missiles than animals.
The book goes into even more detail about how they're strictly not monsters, but animals. The raptors bob their heads about like birds. The t-rex plays with it's food. And (similar to real life tiger attacks) the raptors had to learn that humans could be hunted, It's not instinctual. Even then, creative liberties have to be taken, because real life predators don't keep hunting after a kill has been made. They stop hunting and eat what they've got.
@@aggonzalezdc I'm not about to sit here and try to say that the last JW was great or anything, but seriously did anybody (including Corridor) even WATCH the movie? That raptor chase sequence features animals that, in the world of the film, were specifically bioengineered to seek out specific targets. The reason that they act like missiles is because that's quite literally what they're built to be in the context of the film. In the film, the bad guys have access to these 4 or 5 specific raptors that will ceaselessly hunt specific marked targets. They don't behave like animals in the wild because that's not what they are. Again, not trying to defend the movie at large but going after this particular sequence without the necessary context is careless.
@@stephenpatterson8056 dude great answer. Seriously they forgot that the World movies became (lame) action movies. I see their point on how the dinosaurs on World are more like attractions than animals, but again in the 1st World movie they (scientists) stated that they can completely modify the dinosaurs' DNA to completely change their attitude and their intelligence. So that’s the whole point of the JW franchise to be more of an action movie rather than the amazing essence of resurrected animals living on the modern world that the 1st and even the 2nd Jurrasic Park movies had.
I think what makes Jurassic Park and The Lost World: Jurassic Park stand out for me is how grounded they feel compared to the rest of the series. The Spielberg-directed entries portrayed them as animals, whereas the later films went in the monster direction. The first two feel like they could take place in “our” world: where the other four have a hyper-stylized feel.
Spielberg gets a bit too much credit id say, specially considering he mostly wanted retro stop motion depictions, is just once they got Stan Winston and his team on the project that they tried to push for realism on the designs and implementation
@@MrTroodon_Official The initial want of stop motion is because the CGI technology was not even known about until later into early development, some guy in his free time cooked up the CGI and ILM caught wind of it then they did something with it The push for more realism was likely more from the Paleontologists they had working on the project such as Jack Horner going nuts over the monitor lizard tongue flicking in one of Phil Tippets demo reels of the raptors And it's not like Steven wasn't on board with the realistic approach, as soon as he saw the renders of a T Rex hunting some Gallimimus he knew it would make his movie a sensation
3 was grounded outside of the Spineasaurus that was a chasing villain like Nemesis from RE3 or Lady D from RE8, someone might bring up the raptors from 3 not feeling real because they acted like a pack of wolves and honestly i feel thats how they were based off actual studies.
@@MikaiGamer1286 Agreed. The way they communicated and gently took the eggs were amazing. Also the scene with the Ceratosaurus. Can't say the same about the Spinosaurus though. I think there's a line between dangerous, scary animals and angry, maniac monsters. I feel like JW crossed it. That's why the Velociraptors in kitchen scene in JP felt scary for me but the Indoraptor from Fallen kingdom just didn't. Now I'm no filmmaker but I'm just sharing my opinion :)
@@BenjiGojira Yeah but was Winston who presented them with the cgi demonstration after his team made the cgi models. The push for realism was a mix of scientific advisors and the art team, specially based of the behind scenes from the og trilogy, like Winston and his team really pushed fowards realism, even wanting to add feathers on the 4th film when technology allowed it, but well sadly what happened happened.
Four years of Comparative Anatomy classes have programmed me to scrutinize animal motility and behavior in films. You guys are right about dinosaurs not behaving like they're theorized to. Jurassic World leans so heavily into the Sci-Fi Fantasy aspect of dinosaurs that it's hard to believe their interpretation could be real. Mixing this fantastical interpretation with the rest of the movies' realistic setting only highlights the dissonance between the two elements.
Good creature design is more than just thinking about how the creature looks. it's about asking lots and lots of questions like how does thing eat, what are its relationships with other creatures, what are its relationships with others of the same kind, how does the creature spend its time and so many more. the more answers you get, and the more detailed the answers, the more believable your creature will be in the end. the main reason why the Prehistoric Planet dinos look so convincing and the Dominion ones don't is that paleontologists have been asking and answering those questions for decades and Prehistoric Planet uses them while Dominion doesn't.
It's telling the Raptors ignore any and all easier prey and just keep chasing the protagonist for no other reason than he is the hero. One of them snaps at a person who looks mildly surprised rather than terrified. And the raptor doesn't bother just changing course and eating the ready made snack.
@@TubeEamo This is where context is important. Those raptors are trained to hunt whoever is targeted by a a red laser pointer, as of course Grady was. So it makes perfect sense in the context of the story. Manhunting dogs don't stop hunting the target just because they smell easier prey.
It's not that simple, unfortunately. Dominion had Steve Brusatte as a technical expert and he is a very good paleontologist. Did they listen to him? Who knows. But they definitely had scientific input on the dinosaurs.
@@knaughta.masso-kist5944 that’s all true, but ultimately doesn’t discredit CC’s point but instead reinforces it. The reason why Jurassic World’s dinosaurs are not as believable is because they’re not animals, they’re missiles. Yes, narratively that’s the direction the writers/directors took the JW franchise, but that’s also why JW doesn’t stack up to JP and Lost World. And unfortunately deviates from the original reason we all loved JP as kids; we believed the dinosaurs were real animals. And all the fears and wonder that comes with that.
I personally think that hyper-realism doesn't serve the purpose of the Jurassic World dinos. The dinosaurs are supposed to be chilling and scary, and presenting them as the real animals they were would only have diminished that. Could you imagine the real velociraptors from Prehistoric Planet hunting down people?
It's hilarious that Clint brought up the whole idea of a "CG punch zoom" because it immediately brought to mind the first "big shot" of Cloverfield where the cameraman frantically zooms in on a massive fireball near the city skyline. The intention was fine, but a more "analog" style zoom would have been far better than this rapid quick zoom that 90% of consumer-grade camcorders would be incapable of producing. It's a slightly wonky shot in otherwise incredible movie. And it got me thinking: I'd love to see these guys talk about Cloverfield, and break down some of its shots, like the helicopter crash or the group traversing a building that has collapsed onto another to save a friend. There were so many super small details of that film that I adore to this day.
They use it a lot in The Expanse as well, to focus in on the spaceships, and I think it works well in that show, it gives a sense of scale before the zoom.
Babylon 5 and Battlestar Galactica also liberally used the zoom. Maybe should be noted that Stanley Kubrick was also quite famous for using them, and 2001 kinda set a standard for what that kind of sci-fi should look like.
love the discussion about suspension of disbelief having a lot to do with design and direction not just vfx, the contrast of the raptor design/behavior from first and last jurassic movies was an excellent way to punctuate the point
I also have some issues with the dinosaur sound design in this one. There are a lot of points where a snarl or hiss stays on the same timbre as the mouth changes position or shape. It’s a small detail, but it makes the sound and image completely detached for me.
The point I make about the different design philosophies between Jurassic World & Prehistoric Planet is that the scientifically plausible documentary version of Dreadnoughtus manages to be more colourful, creative & scary than the genetically engineered blockbuster version. PP conveys much more believable animals, which means when they do show off how unpredictable & dangerous they can be, it has way more impact than a raptor with angry eyebrows sculpted into its skull.
I couldn't agree more with this. Something that always acts angry will have much less of an impact whenever it's shown being angry. However, something that isn't always angry, like an actual animal, will have so much more of an impact whenever it's shown being angry because you don't expect it as much. Also I'm glad I'm not the only one who notices the whole "angry eyebrows" design trope in most of the Jurassic Park dinosaurs
@@-samart2004- It's a really overdone trope with sauropod dinosaurs that they're portrayed as peaceful 'gentle giants '. Big herbivores like elephants, Rhino & Buffalo are so much more short-tempered and dangerous than people realise. An angry Titanosaur would be a walking natural disaster
My Jump-the-shark moment for the JW franchise was from JW where the tiny Pterosaurs were released from the aviary. Rather than just disappearing off into the forest like animals would, they ALL headed straight for the busiest, noisiest, most unfamiliar part of the island (the public areas of the park) and ALL began attacking the people, creatures 20 times their size, for no reason at all.
Right? Why would they risk their lives when they could just eat smaller animals or eat the park food? A human can 100% kill them in a fight so why be so aggressive? Plus, they're zoo animals. They're not kept starving. They're fed regularly. Why so ravenous?
@@JohnEusebioToronto Also, the Pteranodon picking up the Triceratops "What, a pterosaur carrying a Triceratops?" "It could grip it by the husk" "It's not a matter of where he grips it, it's a simple matter of weight ratios. A 100lb Pteranodon could carry a 600lb baby Triceratops"
@@manbat4582 Ah yes, that explains everything. The large, intelligent bird-thing tells the small, unintelligent bird-things to go and beat up a bunch of larger, intelligent ape-things AND THEY LISTEN. Jurassic World was the least terrible of the new trilogy, but the writing is... Not great
You should do an episode devoted only to Prehistoric Planet. I think it would be interesting for you to explain how they incorporated the dinosaurs into the environment so well
Prehistoric Planet, is literally the best documentary ever made, I rewatched it twice, the first time I was so focused on the next level effects I missed the story
The dinosaurs in “Dominion” all walked so stiffly. There was none of that jiggle in the legs like in the previous movies that made them look more real.
Honestly, I felt that the previous World movies, especially FK, had too much jiggle. The dinosaur felt less like living animals with tensing/flexing muscles and more like giant rubber toys.
Holy cow! You guys actually talked about Prehistoric Planet on the show! I do agree with a lot of your thoughts on comparing it to Jurassic World, and a lot of people who have seen both have the same opinion, but I also think it plays into preproduction and the idea of a set "vision" for the look of the film. The two shows had very similar scopes and budgets, but there seemed to be a kind of Marvel mentality on the latter of "we'll tweak it whenever we need to, no matter how late into post we do it." It is understandable considering the massive story overhaul that took place after Fallen Kingdom and the Pandemic production schedule, and in fairness, the cuts they made to keep it reproducable aren't all that big in theory. (A bit less to the muscle sims, maybe one less render pass here and there) It's just noticeable when you compare it directly to something like Prehistoric Planet that had a very solid production layout and a very dedicated team of artists and science consultants to each sequence.
What Wren said at 18:38 is partly evident in Gemini Man, where you know it's supposed to be Will Smith, but if he's jumping and falling like he's weightless and gravity affects him differently, then you lose the realism that it is Will Smith fighting Will Smith.
What you guys point out about subtle animal movements really backed what I feel while watching the original Jurassic Park vs the newer ones. The newer Jurassic Park movies felt so fake despite the upgrade in CGI. Really enjoyed this episode
I really think you guys need to watch/review Walking With Dinosaurs, a miniseries on BBC from 1999. It has a combo of CG and practical effects that really let the series hold up today. Not a lot of people know about it, but I always reference it when talking about how CG and practical can extentuate each other when used correctly.
Rewatching it now it definitely doesn't hold up well. I remember feeling the CGI was iffy even when it first came out. Prehistoric Planet on the other hand doesn't have that issue. I found myself gasping at how realistic it looked that I could hardly believe it was CGI.
17:19 when compared side to side, Dominion dino looks like an artistic interpretation made into a puppet, which goes to show that the render is amazing enough that it looks like something that exists in real life, but the design and the animation departs from a believable living being.
I'd love to hear more about cgi dino content!!! Specifically the "predecessor" of Prehistoric Planet the "Walking with Dinosaurs" series!! (Just all the dinosaur movies like the 2013 film Walking with Dinosaurs!!)
I was surprised 'Walking with Dinosaurs' apparently has left the pop culture mind that quickly... it was epic back then and done with immense care! Totally loved it and Framestore did an amazing job.
As a writer, I'm always evaluating a film from a storytelling standpoint, and a lot of films nowadays fall short in this regard because they rely more on spectacle than plot. You can absolutely make a big-budget blockbuster dinosaur film that's visually spectacular, but to put it in the context of a memorable story takes a lot more work - more than it would seem many studios are interested in doing. That's the problem with the Jurassic World movies. You might remember a fun scene or visual effect here and there, but you're not going to remember the story, and so eventually the film itself will be forgotten while the original Jurassic Park is always going to be highly-regarded because it was telling a story FIRST, and THEN supplemented it with groundbreaking effects.
I totally agree. The only things I really remember from Fallen Kingdom (and I almost called it Lost Kingdom for how forgettable it is...) are being bored during the big chase scene in the house, being annoyed that I figured out the "big twist" ten minutes after the girl was introduced, and how utterly stupid the auction house scenes were.
unfortunately in modern franchise blockbusters the story only functions as hot glue that holds together all the set pieces, needlessly integrated "legacy characters" (I hate that word so much) and nostalgia shots they came up with (meaning: copied straight from previous films).
As a musician I automatically pay attention to sound design. The spectrum of quality, even between blockbuster movies is *insane*. Most movies have realistic audio, nice ambiance and clever storytelling through sound, but at the same time you have movies that seem like they didn't have proffessionals on set at all. The most common sin is using the SAME DAMN EFFECTS LIBRARY thay has been in circulation since the 70's. Gamers probably notice when they hear the same door creak, foot steps or explosion in films that are familiar from years of triple-A games. Visuals really seem to go over everything else. And the movies get away with it because most people don't really pay attention to sound design, or writing.
@@VikingTeddy Personally, ever since Inception, it's been braaam-y soundtracks for me. The only film I feel like that's gotten away with having one is Dune Part 1. It fit. Also yes to your point about over used sound effects. I hear it in both movies/tv and games. Particularly noticeable with explosions. Though shout out to the Wilhelm Scream, that shit never gets old.
I've seen it said elsewhere, but really appreciate you guys taking a look at Prehistoric Planet. It's so bloody beautiful, brings a tear to my eye. Makes me wonder what Jurassic World could be like if it would just incorporate some of that more natural behaviour that PP showcased so wonderfully. Keep up the good work!
I've always had that feeling you were describing about the later Jurassic movies, and it's a really cool and thoughtful point about the direction and design and motivation behind the dinosaurs. Great comparisons and contrasts
It seems like the kind of mistake a less experienced compositor might make and a less experienced VFX supervisor might miss - where they're not incompetent and they try to think about the reality of the scene but they miss major things simply due to lack of experience. We know that the VFX industry has terrible problems with crunch and burnout, and the result is stuff like this because senior experienced artists aren't there to catch these errors.
My guess is that the truck explosion was done absolute last minute, if you look closely you can even see some "ground" floating in the air because the middle stock explosion wasn't masked properly and still includes some of the surface. So not only did they get the speed wrong and/or used inappropriate explosion footage for that scene, but even failed to compose it properly. Since the fire in the next scene looks way better, I'd guess that the truck explosion didn't work out like they wanted and they had no time to do a proper 3D simulation again, so they just quickly hacked something together to meet the deadline.
First thing I noticed with the truck explosion was the placement of the two front explosions... WHY would the windshield and front fender explode individually?? A fuel tank explosion would cover that area (maybe), but there isn't anything in those areas that could go off!
This was an amazing episode! Thank you so much! I'm studying for a career in cognitive biology, which is the study of animal minds: how they behave, how the interact, and how they adapt to their environment. Not surprisingly this means that I strongly prefer Prehistoric Planet's realism (that was an AWESOME show) to Jurassic Word's over the top dinosaurs. Having convincing animals makes an immediate connection between the viewer and the action on the scene: we are able to interpret the emotional lives of other creatures - even those that are vastly different from us mammals - and thereby understand and care about their motivation. To me this is what made Prehistoric Planet so powerful. We saw the plight of mother dinosaurs trying to protect their offspring and felt the love, we saw the competition for mates and understood the tenderness of pair bonding, we saw the chaos of hunting and understood the terror. Yes this is what we call "anthropomorphism", and while it must be used with extreme caution in scientific contexts (although it does have its place. I strongly suggest Wild Justice by Marc Bekoff if you want to know more about the cutting edge of cognitive science among animals), it is a really powerful tool in filmmaking. Lastly I want to touch on the subject of intelligence. It's easy to assume that the dinosaurs in Jurassic World are more intelligent because they are capable of navigating our human world with great skill. However, scientifically speaking, this could not be further from the truth. While dinosaurs did have relatively small brains, they are the direct ancestors of birds, which are a species group that is now recognized for extremely high levels of intelligence despite minuscule brains. Corvids (the family that includes crows, ravens, magpies, and jays) reach intelligence levels similar to many primates (although these measures are by nature anthropocentric and, thereby, also in some ways biased). Secondly, dinosaurs were highly adapted to their ecosystem. The behavior observed in Jurassic world is often very dangerous with little benefit. Wild predators are strategic in what prey they hunt as an difficult hunt might not be worth the effort. Predators, ranging from highly intelligent wolves and lions to spiders with brains too small to see, are never ruthless hunters. Their effort is always calculated against the benefit of success. I would argue that the behavior seen in Jurassic World signifies a lack of intelligence due to the reckless behavior of the dinosaurs, while Prehistoric Planet instead more accurately shows the subtlety that dinosaur minds were likely capable of. Prehistoric planet shows social skills, group coordination, problem solving, and parental care: all traits both seen in modern birds and which require significant intelligence. Let us not judge other creatures' intelligence on metrics that center on ridiculous standards of being able to navigate machineries and cities. Otherwise we are guilty of anthropocentrism: acting as if human intelligence is the gold standard for all other forms of intelligence. Intelligence should be adapted to a creature's way of life, and that is exactly what is brilliantly shown in Prehistoric Planet. We humans also have our own limitations and abilities dictated by the environment to which we are adapted. Yes, we are a highly *adaptable* species, but that does not make us a metric for measuring other intelligences. I hope you found some of this interesting! And thank you again for the marvelous episode!
Hi from Australia. Really liked the conversation in this ep, Corridor Crew. The Prehistoric Planet stuff is amazing because you feel like you're going to witness something for the first time. The unpredictable beauty of watching wildlife. Thanks CC.
14:46 THANK YOU! People always say "ah it's all CGI nowadays" as if there's a computer app with a button "create realistic dinosaur" in it or smth. That's a shitton of work right there
This is literally the most interesting channel on here, I’ve learned so much watching you guys I remember I started watching on like the 13th cgi good vs bad and never missed a vid
We got Prehistoric Planet LET'S GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!! I'm so delighted you guys were able to do some more dinosaur stuff; that breakdown of the steps needed to produce realistic anatomy & skin was quite insightful! If you'd like some more content on the subject of too much/too little creature work, the program 'Dinosaur Revolution/Dinotasia' could be an interesting choice in more stylized dino depictions; for that matter, it could be worthwhile to look more closely at how Jurassic Park's own dinosaurs have evolved from film to film.
Glad they've shown Prehistoric Planet some love, it's the best depiction of dinosaurs on film ever, period. Hope they do a breakdown for Season 2 as well!
IMO, from now on all the next paleo medias will have to look back at Prehistoric Planet to get inspired by its animation nuances, such as they did when Jurassic Park (1993) was released, 'cause UOW, that's so superb and realistic. As you said, it's not about the CGI quality, but its concept. I'd love to see u guys reacting about other scenes from that, and also to take a look at the 99 documentary "Walking With Dinosaurs", produced by BBC. It was the first time we saw great cgi dinosaurs out of the jurassic park franchise, and it was impressing, especially 'cause it was a 99 TV Show with a lot more dino time screen.
It's worth saying that Walking with Dinosaurs was pretty groundbreaking as it was made on a relatively low budget by London VFX houses who were mainly working on TV level projects (back when TV was a very poor cousin to film). Even the 3D tracking was a new thing. Great kudos and respect to everyone who worked at Framestore back then.
@@wowmedialtd what a great addition. Yeah, I've heard the budget of the whole series was $9.9 million, and even today when I watch the episodes, I get amazed by the animation principles they used, which aged pretty well to me. Framestroe indeed nailed that.
If I'm seeing it correctly, it looks like the raptors feet motion is entirely divorced from their actual movement forwards. There's a bunch of places where their feet seem to be almost sliding forwards along the ground even as they're being placed down. Given those feet are pushing backwards to propel them forwards that looks super weird. Their progression forwards is just too smooth and seems almost like a fixed rate, too, for something propelling itself by running.
i don't know about it slipping, but you are right about a fixed rate. as i said elsewhere, even cheetahs don't sprint long distances before taking a sec to chill out. These raptors are somehow running across an entire city and out across the countryside without slowing down. Horses don't even do that. I don't think I took the time to realize how much this scene bothered me until CC started talking about it. trained navy seal attack dogs aren't even that single minded.
15:45 In order for that raptor to jump onto an airplane that has just taken off, it had to have been going slightly faster than the plane (which can only lift off when it hits around 90-100 mph minimum.) lol
The biggest damage is the fact that Corridor lost the "TheBatman'22 but it's Adam West" video to a copyright takedown. The Making-Of video on CorridorCrew is still there but the 3 minute video for the result is gone :(
I love at the very end Wren throws up the devil horns as he says goodbye and you can see him look at his hand and make a face like 'why is this what I'm doing with my hand?' as the camera pans past him.
I feel like the other problem with the raptors was the lack of consistency. They caught up with a motor bike but were outrun on foot in previous scenes. Makes you think something is off.
I don't know if y'all done it but can y'all do an animator's react to "Star Wars The Clone Wars, The Bad Batch, Rebels, & Star Wars Visions?" I found it very impressive and interesting on their progress over the years and how they also took a new direction regarding animation style.
Thanks for finally covering Prehistoric Planet. I wish you had covered the Mononykus segment, but the info you provided was still fantastic. Thanks! btw, dinosaurs are birds, not reptiles, technically speaking. Though I guess it's more accurate to say birds are avian dinosaurs. But you get my meaning. :P
I think the issue with JWD is that those scenes didn’t have as much punch because they did have the scenes with practical dinosaurs that had that more believable element to them. Looking at you, derpy Lystro.
Suggestion: The Sandman on Netflix, in particular the crow "Matthew", being voiced by Patton Oswalt. In the outdoor scenes in episode 3, "Dream a little dream of me" it looks outstanding.
2:58 A nice touch is that they made the rain move towards the camera with the shockwave of the explosion. You can see it well at the dark areas of the door.
9:36 I have to disagree with the "flawless", there is a noticeable issue of lack of "weight" to the creature, and in two separate respects. Firstly is volumetric displacement, the creature does kick up clouds of dust however the movements of is body have little to no interaction with those dust elements, whereas a real object of that size would move about large quantities of air with even slight movements just due to its mass. Secondly is any lack of "reverberation", it is assumedly a VERY heavy creature and yet the practical elements around it never seem to respond to that, despite there even being rather flimsy scaffolding, nothing ever really correctly shows the weight and mass of the creature effecting it as it should.
@@maccool5444 , we even see someone kicking its face away. If it was a T.rex, for example, kicking it would be futile as the head would have so much power and weight behind it. The worm has a much lighter structure and I agree with what you said. I find it believable.
The original Jurassic Park was such a critical success in part because dinosaurs had never been shown in such a creative practical + CGI way. They were also revealed slowly, just like the shark from Jaws. Nowadays, everybody knows you can render "realistic" dinosaurs, so every scene is about which character they are willing to sacrifice. Since you know the main group will survive and the villain will not, nothing is at stake.
The funniest thing about the last JW film, is the fact that they actually had scenes of dinosaurs acting like animals. There is an entire prologue, which they cut out of the final film, that shows dinosaurs, during the cretaceous period, acting like animals and it looks magnificient.
@@ExtremeMadnessX I personally believe that this is why they cut it out. What's the point of showing dinosaurs in prehistoric times if it isn't even trying to be scientifically accurate?
Okay, I just have to ask, how have you guys not reacted to the Star Wars: The Old Republic animatics? Those are some of the coolest effects I've ever seen (not to mention some of the coolest lightsaber duels in history). Please react to that in one of your next VFX artists react videos! It would be awesome to see what you think of them.
Holy sh*t! TY so much for talking about Prehistoric Planet! I hadn't previously heard of it, and that is not the kinda show I want to miss out on! It looks so cool! Y'all have introduced me to so many movies and shows that I woulda otherwise never heard of. I can't thank y'all enough for that 🙏
2 роки тому+7
It would be pretty interesting to see you guys do a whole video on what youve learned as vfx artists from your guests since youve started doing the show. Tell us how youve grown as pros of your field! 😊
The conversation: The guys touched on this in the video about context and the creatures presenting as animals or as weird missile monster things. My take is that this touches on a wider aspect of western (well Hollywood anyway) filmmaking (also applies to TV) at the moment that is to do with tone and visual style. So I think it's totally possible to have JW style raptors act like crazy monster missiles and still have the work be engaging, but you have to pick your overall tone and every aspect of the work needs to stay within that tone and work to strengthen it. So you can't cut from crazy raptor missiles (or whatever it is in a particular blockbuster effects movie) and then go to like, standard actor closeup drama characters that are lit and shot in really traditional live action methods. If feel like there is this disconnect between one half of Hollywood that is trying to make traditional live action actor focused drama stuff, and the other half of hollywood which is trying to do huge over the top archetypal action adventure spectacle stuff. When the people trying to do the tighter traditional dialog and actor focused work get to do that, it generally works really well. When the people who actually understand archetypal stylistic larger than life over the top stuff get to do that it also often works really well. Be we seem to constantly be getting people from one side trying to do things on the other side and it just doesn't work.
One thing that always gets me with creatures in movies like Jurassic World is that their eyes are on the side of their head, however they always look directly at their target/prey. They wouldn't be able to see it straight on! There are very few birds for example that actually look at objects head-on, their head is always tilted slightly.
Yeah... "weird". Taking over people's channels isn't just weird, I wouldn't say. Although there probably aren't laws for that, so I can't straight up call it a crime. I can call it a dick move, though.
I would love to see you guys react to the effects in the original Christopher Reece Superman movies. Although it’s clearly dated, there is some really good practical work and techniques they used to sell it. Has the same sort of mystique and grand feeling as the og Star Wars trilogy.
The most challenging part of writing is giving every character in every scene wants, needs, and agency. I haven't seen this new Jurassic Park movie, so I don't know what that dinosaur wants with Chris Pratt. Does Chris have something the dinosaur wants or needs? Does the dinosaur have a vendetta against Chris Pratt? Both things seem unlikely. From what little I know about predators, they have one thing they want to do: Stay alive. They need to hunt to stay alive. It seems like a massive waste of energy to chase after a human on a motorcycle through the streets of Rome when a dinosaur could just eat any human in the city. A van crashes in that scene; presumably, there's a concussed human in the van. Very easy to eat a concussed human in an immobile van. Very difficult to eat a Chris Pratt on a motorcycle. The lack of believable agency for the dinosaurs is one reason the scene feels silly and unbelievable. But again, haven't seen the movie, so maybe it's all explained before the chase scene.
Another problem that I saw for the velociraptor chase was how they were acting against the surface, in order to give them a sense of speed they make them move their legs very fast, but on asfalt with claws they would have more of a grip making them run a different way. You can even see at the beginning of the chase a moment where the raptor is running too fast compared to the street giving it a scooby-doo feel.
@@leoburningfast9103 in all fairness they're designed so similar to the Velociraptors of the series only diehard fans are really gonna be able to point out the difference. Especially with how varied Velo designs throughout the franchise have been.
@@knaughta.masso-kist5944 I both do and don't agree, if that makes sense? Like, there absolutely are differences between the film designs of the two raptors, and if you know what to look for you can easily tell them apart. But at the same time, they're differences that are subtle enough to easily fly over most audiences' heads, I can't really blame someone for not catching on to it.
Jurassic World vs Prehistoric Planet is like Tony Hawk's Pro Skater vs Skate. Both are fun skating games, one is arcady and the other is a bit more realistic.
Since I was two years old I always had this passion for dinosaurs and other creatures of the same period (pterosaurs [which are *not* dinosaurs] and megafauna [the giant mammals like colombian mammoth or the procoptodon]). When I was little the first two Jurassic Park movies always made me have this particular look of these animals, these movies made me look at them like they were actual creatures with working brains. Since then I have understood the biological innacuracies of the movie (the lack of feathers, venomous dilophosaurus theory, and oversizing), but that is not my point. Unfortunately, many people only had the exposure to documentaries that use paleontology as an excuse to show monstrous creatures in thir eternal an eternal bloodlust (like Jurassic Fight Club); then people would only see dinosaurs as that, not as they really were. And when a documentary like Walking with Dinosaurs or Prehistoric Planet comes out, these people are upset and curse at the creators for showing what people needed to see, not what the wanted to see. I've met people like that. And then the Jurassic Park movies, the same franchise I used to praise for showing one of the best dinosaur behaviours, went for the same rout and started to represent dinosaurs as bloodthirsty monsters. This is also one of the reasons the new movies don't give off the same feelings as watching the original movies. I know a person who said more or less this: 'They were giant lizards that ripped flesh of other creatures with giant claws and teeth; and you want us to see them as "animals", like...rolling in grass, caring for their young or taking a nap in the barn? What tf is your point here" He this because he was only exposed to the documentaries that depict dinosaurs as gruesome creatures. This is my point, if you have anything to say, I would be pleased to hear your opinion.
I'd argue that the new Jurassic World movies rely on near cartoon-levels of inane action as an attempt to masquerade debilitating flaws in an awful script and cardboard characters. I cannot imagine people getting upset with Walking With Dinosaurs because they show other aspects of dinosaurs beyond violence. At the end of the day, it's like Shark Week. If the promos promise a visceral experience fraught with danger, anything less (to the general viewing public) is a travesty.
I am also a bit of a dino fanatic and I share your frustration in dealing with people who seemingly get offended when their beloved bloodthirsty monsters are presented to them as real animals. However I think that Jurassic Park (though a great film) was no better than the following films in this regard. The dinosaurs rarely seem to have anything better to do than hunting and terrorising humans, and no complex behaviour is shown at all. Not to mention the T rex eyesight based on movement, which has no foundation in reality. At least Lost World shows parenting. I'm interested to know why you think JP does not portray dinos as bloodthirsty monsters (in fact it popularised the idea that they are). In fact I'd argue that JW shows the raptors as intelligent creatures that can be highly trained, such as dolphins and dogs. Definitely not simply bloodthirsty monsters. But I agree that Walking with Dinosaurs and Prehistoric Planet are masterpieces.
@@knaughta.masso-kist5944 Yes, In one hand I believe that Jurassic Park showed dinosaurs more as monsters than animals, take the scene of the Raptors in the kitchen, they just attack, with no apparent reason. But in the other hand we are also shown other aspects of dinosaur behaviour that are not shown in other media, just like you mentioned parenting ; the herd structure of the stegosaurus and parasaurolophus (and they also show that despite being "dumb herbivores", stegosaurus can protect their young and themselves) and in jurassic world they show packhunting in a not so accurate way, but at they showed it. So, Jurassic Park and expecially World show dinosaurs as monsters, but in many cases as animals. I would say it is a 50/50
@@knaughta.masso-kist5944 In addition to what @Francisco Moutinho already said, I think the first Jurassic Park deserves much more credit than its sequels just for how it frames the dinosaurs when they do hunt. There's a progressive aggressive recklessness to the meat-eaters through the films; but the first film presents the T-rex and the raptors as curious, possibly territorial animals exploring new ground. Not only did this suit the more suspenseful nature of the movie, it looks more natural in behavior, rather than just violent monsters who destroy everything on sight. Rexy might not have attacked the kids' jeep at ALL had she not noticed the flashlight, and she still took her time investigating the jeep before deciding that yes, there IS something tasty-looking inside. Jurassic World does introduce some intriguing possibilities with the raptors, that's true - but it also features every single Pteranodon and Dimorphodon in captivity making a beeline for the visitors' center to go on the attack because... Reasons. At least Rexy in the first film got be witnessed hunting Gallimimus in a natural(ish) habitat, with no disturbance from humans.
How cool would it be to compare these 2022 Prehistoric Planet shots to the OG version and award-winning 1999 Walking with Dinosaurs series!? See how far the genre has come and compare the two approaches to ‘realistic’ dinosaurs!
I love prehistoric planet, but what sam said about it imagining dinosaurs as “not intelligent” really irked me. many dinosaurs are thought to have been very intelligent, while others were dumb as rocks. it’s thought there was as much variation in intelligence between dinos as there is between mammals today
I think he was just being a contrarian about the way Jurassic Park portrays them: omniscient gods that will no-clip to wherever they have the best opportunity to kill you.
@@cogd1599 I mean I 100% agree that new JW movies portray dinos more as characters than as animals (I think I can pinpoint the third jurassic park’s spino as the main starting point for that nonsense) but just because something is an animal doesn’t mean that it’s stupid (dolphins, monkeys, octopi, etc)
The dinosaurs did act like animals in JP and the lost world. But it’s an unfair comparison for the raptors in Dominion bc they literally were missiles (mind controlled).
@@GabrielSousa7 it doesnt detract at all from what they are saying. It's the concept/context of the movie that sells away you suspension of disbelief in the CG work. It looks great, but in context and therefore design, you arent onced made to believe that what you re seeing is real and it takes you out of the movie
@@hwroin There's this thing called suspension of disbelief. The fantastical science explains how the dinosaurs work in the movie. You can suspend your disbelief that dinosaurs are brought back through fantastical science and a theme park is the first thought that comes to the creator's minds but not that other people had militaristic interests and using that same fantastic science to engineer dinosaurs for those interests? The entire story from the start of the franchise is fantastical and impossible.
They definitely acted _more_ like animals in the first movies. Still overly aggressive, but believable. Like Hollywood animals, not Hollywood monsters. In JW the raptors and other carnivores act more like they will die, or something, if they won't attempt to shred the main characters the second they notice them. They see the humans - they go into bloodlusted frenzy, with maybe the solo exception of Blue.
There were some scenes in Constantine you guys might want to check out. The VFX on the dragon breath fire in the beginning was pretty dope and it's some other visual effects in there I think you guys might want to check out. Awesome video like always.
The velociraptor. thing is that the they don't breathe. So it doesn't feel like the velociraptors are real, it doesn't feel like they have to make a calculation of how much energy they spend chasing the character and how much they're going to gain from that. So it doesn't feel like they breathe or or after him to eat it feels like they're a robots. Animals don't chase you till the end of the world because they have to save some energy for when they catch you because they might have to fight you. So that's what makes it not real in my opinion
The instinct you had with the raptors is similar to how people will make fun of the logic in movies: "Why did X character do Y?" Because the plot needed to move forward. "Yeah but people don't *behave* like that." "Why do the raptors have arched, menacing eye sockets, even though there would be 0 evolutionary motivation to develop that way?" Because the designers are drawing on the cultural language of "evil" to make them seem more intimidating. You can realize the difference in the first scenario because you are a human being, you're constantly exposed to the thought process and behaviors of humans. But projects like _Prehistoric Planet_ remind us: "Wait, these are just animals, like a jumping spider, or a bird, or a tiger. They don't really care about human conceptions of morality or terror, they just want to survive and make babies." And so when you go back to Jurassic Park, now the curtain is pulled back. You can see the hand of the author, and it's uncomfortable, because you haven't had the time to decide whether or not you're okay with movies not being like real life in the same way that you've had time to process that fact in relation to human behavior.
It’s definitely more a context issue. The raptors chasing Pratt in a crowded city street would probably quickly lose interest and switch to chomping on bystanders they can catch much more easily
ExpressVPN ► expressvpn.com/corridorcrew Take back your Internet privacy TODAY and find out how you can get 3 months free.
Ironic
Wow, only one reply?
Should have used express VPN so the channel wouldn't have been hacked
fun fact : the backgrounds in Prehistoric Planet were filmed in real locations
only the Dinosaurs and things around then were (like foot steps) CGI
so here's a talking point: i think you're using a s**t plugin and therefore got a warped sense of what voxels are/do/how they work and therefore gave an explanation that couldn't have been more wrong. bam there's your engagement. also i've suggested getting (not namedropping but hdr-related person) on a while ago maybe thats still worth a try - or anyone who knows the basics of computergraphics for that matter... but i am guessing nobody reads these.
I think we need a whole series of "Why CGI can't save the writing/directing". Because people often point fingers at the CGI, say it looks bad, it looks fake, it doesn't fit, it stands out, when they really mean "the writing and directing was so poor, that I couldn't suspend my disbelief and the situation seemed so artificial, it helped me notice all the little inconsistencies in the CGI.
And conversely, if the story is gripping, you're much more forgiving of flaws in the CGI.
@@someguy9204 I think a good example of the latter was "Prey" on Hulu. There were some obviously flawed/rushed VFX on several of the full CGI animals, but I was so invested in the story and scenarios that it was easy to not linger on or be bothered by them, personally. I understood that the filmmakers didn't have unlimited resources or time for all those shots, but they were effective enough as I was watching because of my investment in the story.
@@LunarEclipsism1 I agree! Plus it's not about the animals & I thought the Predator itself looked amazing. The cinematography made me wish it was in theaters.
The cgi trash it distracts me from the story
This isn't new from CGI, remember how people looked at the Shark from Jaws in vacuum? It looks fake, rubber teeth, etc. But when watching the movie, you forget that entirely as the story, characters and acting have got you so far that a not-perfect shark doesn't take us out of the movie.
I think they said it perfectly “ they’re not buying the situation and they’re blaming the vfx” Jurassic park took the franchise from a block buster thriller to just another action movie. The original kitchen scene is a good example slow paced and the animals made mistakes and acted like animals it wasn’t just constant senseless action
Lol did you watch the movie? There are scenes like that. And in the scene they showed they are legit meant to be missiles. It's explained why they are doing what they're doing.
@@drduck3722 While true what didn't make sense is targeting a person with lasers to show who to kill, but then showing the raptor is busing doing/attacking someone else, doesn't actually see the laser but instinctively knows who to target so the disbelief starts from there, if she shot a pheromones dart or something at them instead it'd make far more sense
I also agree that the dinosaurs look like they’re acting. I’ve never thought about it like that but it really does explain it. There’s too much perfection in the eye movement, the claw movement, etc. The eyes are anthropomorphized to the point that they don’t look real anymore. The eyes need to look more like dumb lizard eyes rather than “evil” eyes.
@@elvewizzy they killed and ate multiple people. I think you oughta re watch the scene lmao
@@elvewizzy the girl on foot was jumping across buildings and doing all sorts of stuff. On bike they would catch up then Chris Pratt would to something(like the metal bar) do throw them off. It's also literally explained why the didn't lose interest. Id highly recommended paying attention to the movies when you are going to criticize it later. There's plenty of things this movie did wrong and it wasn't the best JW movie but "the dinos not losing interest" isn't a valid point
I've been saying it for years, YEARS that the dinosaurs started behaving less like animals with every sequel. The reason the dinosaurs behave so real in the first one is simply Phil Tipett's involvement who knew what dinosaurs do and shouldn't do. He wasn't afraid to tell the director that the script is ridiculous when the T-Rex was supposed to lift the whole car with his mouth. Phil Tippett pointed out that a T-Rex simply doesn't have enough neck muscles to be able to perform that action. So they changed it and we got that great business in the car where the T-Rex tries to get to the kids by turning over the car first to attack the underside and squeezing them.
There used to be a teaser for an abandoned Jurassic Park project by Ian McCaig and I hated how they animated the dinosaurs, especially the flying ones were treated by the animators as if they are fighter jets, doing barrel rolls, twist, turnsand whatnot.
Cg is truly useless without a strong direction or someone with a vision.
You’re exactly right. Phil Tippet doesn’t get enough recognition for his input on JP. (And that’s a pun if you know about the dinosaur input device)
The movement sells the CGI. And it’s the movement that breaks the CG for Creatures in so many other movies.
Another case for tippet: the t-Rex tech- demo they did, with the Rex just walking looked nice but the movement was subpar. With tippets involvement that improved a lot
@@jl.7739 Yeah, I can safely say that the movement in the first Jurassic Park is superb and realistically, to some degree, Despite the fact that no one really cared much about Dinosaurs at the time.
Funnily enough the most recent biomechanic studies show T. rex probably could actually lift a car weighing a little over one tonne
I'd argue the Dinosaurs in Dominion are 100% the most animalistic Dinosaurs we've seen in JP. They main Villian isn't even a Villian, He just acts like a normal animal intimidating others for food or defending itself
@@scatman9166 What bigger car weighs less than 2 tons? What are they supposed to drive in Jurassic Park, a Smart?
Sam keeps saying that he isn’t trying to talk about story/direction but I feel like that would be a good spin off too. Talking about why stylistic decisions are made and how story beats work. Like a combination of screenwriter reacts and cinematographer reacts.
Yes, please!
i feel like other channels do that. I think they would want to keep doing whats in their own lane
Should bring in some of the small time filmmakers living around LA like Lindsay Ellis.
I would love that!
Ow god, yess
I love how Clint is always introduced like “Clint is back!” but never really left
He's like the turd that won't flush
He did leave Corridor officially last year
@@gambello1195 Did anybody tell him?
@@gambello1195 Yeah, but he kept appearing all the time. I even forgot he had left Corridor when I heard them saying that he was "back" and even then I had to ponder a little about what they meant.
@@olacolega7067 Yeah, they're talking from a personal/company standpoint, I'm sure.
He went from a full-time presence to a guest for videos.
I've been noticing that whenever Wren talks in any of these series, he teaches the audience and treats it like a tutorial. But no one else does that.
Just an observation. I love Wren. The whole crew is great.
All of them explain technical terms whenever they use them they just use them according to their expertise. Niko usually explains terms related to practical filmmaking or stunts for example
remind me, which one is Wren?
@@sakarisippola5746 13:58 guy with the cast.
What happened to wrens arm/wrist? Another one wheel accident?
@@wordsinahandle He was being wren.
I’m glad you guys talked about the punch zoom and realism. It’s a pet peeve of mine when a movie switched to cg and then physics of capturing a movie go out the window. In a lot of movies, as soon as they commit to cg, the camera starts doing crazy things, flying through windows, etc and it doesn’t have the same impact of something like mission impossible where you can see how it was filmed and that’s an enjoyable part of the moment.
I don't mind punch zooms too much, but cameras that can be anywhere and everywhere almost immediately take me out of the experience. Honestly one of my favorite aspects of 2014's Godzilla is that most shots were filmed at "ground level" which works wonders in establishing realistic POV footage, and presenting Godzilla at the appropriate scale.
@@0hMyGandhi agreed, pacific rim also does a really good job at this while still delivering cool fight scenes
@@drawosaurusrex5919 Came to talk about pacific rim 1, it's a masterclass in immersion. I wish the second had held the same standard.
@@drawosaurusrex5919 those two movies are masterclasses when it comes to portraying the absolute scale of cgi creatures and objects. Makes me wonder even more how Pacific Rim Uprising managed to fuck it up to such an extent.
And of course, you can't talk about punch zooms without talking about Zach Snyder xD
I think it's actually interesting he mentioned that the raptors are like "missiles locked on" because, in the context of the scene, they're wired to follow whatever this like laser pointer points at. So the evil lady points her laser pointer at Chris Pratt, and the dinosaurs lock on. It's not only the context, and that the dinosaurs aren't really behaving like animals-- if anything, in context they shouldn't be. It's just that the context is so unbearably stupid lmfao
They're not genetically wired, they're trained, like the Indo-raptor was. Like dogs are. And sure, it's kinda ridiculous to be using dinosaurs like hunter-killer drones, but people seem to ignore the fact that JP's basic premise was that a company had such mastery over genetic engineering that they could not only re-create creatures they had mere fragments of DNA from, but they could also introduce specific deficiencies across a large variety of species, many of which are only distantly related to each other, if at all... and all they used it for is to *make a dinosaur theme-park zoo*.
There were other examples from the movie they could've picked that might have made more sense. Then again, even most of those could be chalked up to animals defending their territory.
Exactly, you can explain away your writing decisions with the most in-depth backstories, it just won't change how stupid the idea is in the first place.
The writers are starting from a point where they're trying to come up with action set pieces akin to Transformers and Fast and Furious and working backwards to how they can feasibly explain how they got in that situation and how it's "possible".
The thing is that they aren't even velociraptors, they are a hybrid "atrociraptor". This can explain how they are basically monsters/killing machines which are obsessed with killing anything living, just like the Indominous Rex.
The thing is even in context, the animal acting is very B-movie bad acting. Like the behavior from the raptors is what you get from someone playing charades and getting the prompt “scary monster”. A lot of teeth gnashing, roaring, and threat posturing, but no serious attempts to actually attack the characters (because the movie would just be over).
An animal trying to hunt a person would not do so much threat posturing, but would engage in stalking behavior, which has a lot less showing off and a lot more assessing the prey for an opening to pounce.
It doesn’t help that the fact that Chris Pratt is on the motorcycle kneecaps the tension because the audience knows that motorcycles are really fast. A motorcycle is faster than any known land animal and can keep top speeds for much longer. The equivalent to a raptor in real life would probably be an ostrich (43 mph), and a motorcycle (80-165mph) can easily outpace it. In real life as soon as he took off, he’d be leaving them in the dust as soon as he got to an open road, so the very premise of this chase scene is very silly. He could easily escape at any time.
Even in the original JP, while the T-Rex chase was cool, the chase ended immediately when the jeep reached faster speeds because the T-Rex couldn't keep up.
The tension came from the fact that the jeep was a stick shift that needed to be manually accelerated and people were panicking.
Prehistoric Planet is the most scientifically accurate take we have on dinosaurs EVER
Thank you for including the Jurassic Franchise and Prehistoric Planet
I love the hell out of that show, I'm sure it doesn't make a whole lot of money but I'm glad there's people that care enough to make something so scientifically accurate with that amount of stunning detail.
@@MasDouc I imagine it did make quite a sum of money. It was hyped up pretty well.
Dinosaurs never existed.
It's finally getting Season 2 I mean took them long enough!! I was scared that they will just completely abandon this masterpiece for no godamn reason
Ok, just straight up, I was absolutely enamoured by the CGI in Prehistoric Planet. CGI is good these days, but I just found it to be so next level on that series. Absolutely spectacular.
But asides from the pure quality of the modelling, texturing, rigging, lighting, compositing, etc. I think the thing that made it step 'beyond' is how it was directed. I seem to recall one of your previous episodes where Pacific Rim was discussed and the shortfalls of the sequel whereby one of the biggest issues was just camera angle. The original was often 'shot' from angles a real person with a camera on the ground could get and it's this limitation that sells it because it ties the imagery with stuff we associate with the 'real'. The problem with so many action-driven movies these days is that they take the full freedom of the CG camera and go crazy with impossible shots, but also from an acting perspective, almost every monster (including Jurassic World dinosaurs) is just that, a 'monster', something unreal with a plot-purpose to be a "homing missile" of pure destruction. If it sees you it's in "seek and destroy mode".
Prehistoric Planet took the approach of being a nature documentary and took its reference very seriously. The camera work is very grounded in reality, filmed in the same way as real-world nature documentaries of real 'animals'. The shots zoom a lot (because the film crew don't want to disturb the action) and sometimes even wobble about and the animals aren't always perfect centre in the shot. It's realistic imperfection. But then, the other point is that they really wanted to sell the point that they're not 'monsters'. Even in the real world, a lion or a crocodile isn't always in 'kill mode'. They have lives full of socialising, survival, mating, play, resting and more and the doco puts a focus on these real-life behaviours. Seeing them just doing what any other animal would do suddenly grounds them into familiar realism. But icing on the cake is the eyes. It's one of the first things I saw in the trailer was how good their eyes look, and its the eyes that really sell them on being alive. They're not monster eyes, they're soulful, they have distress, curiosity, love, alertness, etc. The CGI can be amazing, but its the acting and filming that just makes it pop.
It's been a long time since I've loved something so much as that doco.
i was looking for this comment! i must watch now
Glad to see the channel back at full swing!
Wanted to post this comment =)
Wait what happened?
@@sonryle5738 some people hacked the channel.
Shame they're still mocking CGI for being jank when all I ever see them produce is Jank. The only thing they've ever done that looked anywhere near hollywood was the Luke Skywalker deepfake - and 90% of that was the AI - not human skill. I guess they're a company that talk about professional CGI - not a professional CGI company.
@@JohnnyWednesday k
Honestly one of my favorite parts of Dominion was just seeing the Therizinosaurus living a (semi) normal life for like 2 minutes. Not totally insane. More realistic, not moving in weird to ways and not acting crazy. It looked like a wild animal
Tbh it's quite ballsy to spend a ton of money and labour on creating this creature just to have it eat greens and scratch its butt... And I love that. That's what animals are like most of the time, and that really is the point of the show.
It makes me wish they had included the prolog in the original release. Hopefully the extended edition includes it
@GTortillaz21 Already watched the extended edition a week ago...didn't know the prologue was cut from the movie cause I missed it in the theaters. Can't imagine the movie without the opening Cretaceous sequence. This movie sort of redeemed the JW franchise for me though the previous two movie don't exist in my headcanon
@@AshrafAnam extended edition? first time i heard about it, i hate all JW movies, the one i hate the less is the first one (it is garbage but not in a dumpster and not in fire like the second and third one, just regular garbage)
@@enriquedossantos3283 The extended cut is 14 minutes longer and from what I've heard about the theatrical cut, the extended cut is the definitive one. The first two JW movies are just a dumb monster movie and its sequel, not real Jurassic movies. This one surprised me 'cause I wasn't expecting what they did at all and only watched 'cause the original three protagonists coming back. It's first time they made an effort to catch the spirit of the original Jurassic Park.
That was what made the first Jurassic Park so great: the dinosaurs felt like animals. And that's what made them terrifying: they were just doing what animals do. They were a force of nature, acting like nature acts, whether humans are present to see it or not - which incidentally fit the theme of the movie really well - and the humans were just unfortunate to be in their path. T-Rex gotta eat. Raptor gotta hunt. But in the World movies they feel like movie monsters or theme park attractions, not acting with independence, not following their animal instincts, but following a script to give a certain experience to the main characters and, by proxy, the audience. Ultimately they are created for OUR benefit, so we can watch cool motorcycle chases, and we can sense that when we watch the film, and that's not as compelling, somehow. You could argue that that fits the theme of the World movies, but . . . it still feels meh.
Seriously. Why does a (presumably hungry?) raptor run past like 10 human snacks to chase this loud angry machine? Are they saying this is a territorial sort of aggression then? I don't buy it. He said it best, they act more like missiles than animals.
The book goes into even more detail about how they're strictly not monsters, but animals. The raptors bob their heads about like birds. The t-rex plays with it's food. And (similar to real life tiger attacks) the raptors had to learn that humans could be hunted, It's not instinctual.
Even then, creative liberties have to be taken, because real life predators don't keep hunting after a kill has been made. They stop hunting and eat what they've got.
@@aggonzalezdc I'm not about to sit here and try to say that the last JW was great or anything, but seriously did anybody (including Corridor) even WATCH the movie? That raptor chase sequence features animals that, in the world of the film, were specifically bioengineered to seek out specific targets. The reason that they act like missiles is because that's quite literally what they're built to be in the context of the film. In the film, the bad guys have access to these 4 or 5 specific raptors that will ceaselessly hunt specific marked targets. They don't behave like animals in the wild because that's not what they are. Again, not trying to defend the movie at large but going after this particular sequence without the necessary context is careless.
Hugging you through the phone because I couldn’t have said it better myself ❤️
@@stephenpatterson8056 dude great answer. Seriously they forgot that the World movies became (lame) action movies. I see their point on how the dinosaurs on World are more like attractions than animals, but again in the 1st World movie they (scientists) stated that they can completely modify the dinosaurs' DNA to completely change their attitude and their intelligence. So that’s the whole point of the JW franchise to be more of an action movie rather than the amazing essence of resurrected animals living on the modern world that the 1st and even the 2nd Jurrasic Park movies had.
I think what makes Jurassic Park and The Lost World: Jurassic Park stand out for me is how grounded they feel compared to the rest of the series.
The Spielberg-directed entries portrayed them as animals, whereas the later films went in the monster direction. The first two feel like they could take place in “our” world: where the other four have a hyper-stylized feel.
Spielberg gets a bit too much credit id say, specially considering he mostly wanted retro stop motion depictions, is just once they got Stan Winston and his team on the project that they tried to push for realism on the designs and implementation
@@MrTroodon_Official The initial want of stop motion is because the CGI technology was not even known about until later into early development, some guy in his free time cooked up the CGI and ILM caught wind of it then they did something with it
The push for more realism was likely more from the Paleontologists they had working on the project such as Jack Horner going nuts over the monitor lizard tongue flicking in one of Phil Tippets demo reels of the raptors
And it's not like Steven wasn't on board with the realistic approach, as soon as he saw the renders of a T Rex hunting some Gallimimus he knew it would make his movie a sensation
3 was grounded outside of the Spineasaurus that was a chasing villain like Nemesis from RE3 or Lady D from RE8, someone might bring up the raptors from 3 not feeling real because they acted like a pack of wolves and honestly i feel thats how they were based off actual studies.
@@MikaiGamer1286 Agreed. The way they communicated and gently took the eggs were amazing. Also the scene with the Ceratosaurus. Can't say the same about the Spinosaurus though.
I think there's a line between dangerous, scary animals and angry, maniac monsters. I feel like JW crossed it. That's why the Velociraptors in kitchen scene in JP felt scary for me but the Indoraptor from Fallen kingdom just didn't.
Now I'm no filmmaker but I'm just sharing my opinion :)
@@BenjiGojira Yeah but was Winston who presented them with the cgi demonstration after his team made the cgi models. The push for realism was a mix of scientific advisors and the art team, specially based of the behind scenes from the og trilogy, like Winston and his team really pushed fowards realism, even wanting to add feathers on the 4th film when technology allowed it, but well sadly what happened happened.
Four years of Comparative Anatomy classes have programmed me to scrutinize animal motility and behavior in films. You guys are right about dinosaurs not behaving like they're theorized to. Jurassic World leans so heavily into the Sci-Fi Fantasy aspect of dinosaurs that it's hard to believe their interpretation could be real. Mixing this fantastical interpretation with the rest of the movies' realistic setting only highlights the dissonance between the two elements.
This right here, Micheal Crichton i think would hate these modern JP movies were he alive, they are all missing the fucking point.
Glad to see y’all back on UA-cam. Gave the community a scare man.
I heard they got hacked, but how did it show here on UA-cam? Did there channel suddenly post weird shit?
@@AccAkut1987 Yeah, a crypto live video was playing and most of their videos were put to private, so you can't see them.
This happens regularly. UA-cam does very little to combat these issues. It's not really anything to fear thanks to backups.
Good creature design is more than just thinking about how the creature looks. it's about asking lots and lots of questions like how does thing eat, what are its relationships with other creatures, what are its relationships with others of the same kind, how does the creature spend its time and so many more. the more answers you get, and the more detailed the answers, the more believable your creature will be in the end. the main reason why the Prehistoric Planet dinos look so convincing and the Dominion ones don't is that paleontologists have been asking and answering those questions for decades and Prehistoric Planet uses them while Dominion doesn't.
It's telling the Raptors ignore any and all easier prey and just keep chasing the protagonist for no other reason than he is the hero.
One of them snaps at a person who looks mildly surprised rather than terrified.
And the raptor doesn't bother just changing course and eating the ready made snack.
@@TubeEamo This is where context is important. Those raptors are trained to hunt whoever is targeted by a a red laser pointer, as of course Grady was. So it makes perfect sense in the context of the story. Manhunting dogs don't stop hunting the target just because they smell easier prey.
It's not that simple, unfortunately. Dominion had Steve Brusatte as a technical expert and he is a very good paleontologist. Did they listen to him? Who knows. But they definitely had scientific input on the dinosaurs.
@@knaughta.masso-kist5944 that’s all true, but ultimately doesn’t discredit CC’s point but instead reinforces it. The reason why Jurassic World’s dinosaurs are not as believable is because they’re not animals, they’re missiles.
Yes, narratively that’s the direction the writers/directors took the JW franchise, but that’s also why JW doesn’t stack up to JP and Lost World. And unfortunately deviates from the original reason we all loved JP as kids; we believed the dinosaurs were real animals. And all the fears and wonder that comes with that.
I personally think that hyper-realism doesn't serve the purpose of the Jurassic World dinos. The dinosaurs are supposed to be chilling and scary, and presenting them as the real animals they were would only have diminished that. Could you imagine the real velociraptors from Prehistoric Planet hunting down people?
I’m Glad Prehistoric Planet is getting the Respect it Deserves and I’m sure the Audience outside of the Paleo-Community is Glad about it too.
It's hilarious that Clint brought up the whole idea of a "CG punch zoom" because it immediately brought to mind the first "big shot" of Cloverfield where the cameraman frantically zooms in on a massive fireball near the city skyline.
The intention was fine, but a more "analog" style zoom would have been far better than this rapid quick zoom that 90% of consumer-grade camcorders would be incapable of producing. It's a slightly wonky shot in otherwise incredible movie.
And it got me thinking: I'd love to see these guys talk about Cloverfield, and break down some of its shots, like the helicopter crash or the group traversing a building that has collapsed onto another to save a friend.
There were so many super small details of that film that I adore to this day.
I liked the way Zack Snyder used it in MoS.
They use it a lot in The Expanse as well, to focus in on the spaceships, and I think it works well in that show, it gives a sense of scale before the zoom.
Yess I loved Cloverfield. The found footage format was used really nicely for storytelling too.
Babylon 5 and Battlestar Galactica also liberally used the zoom. Maybe should be noted that Stanley Kubrick was also quite famous for using them, and 2001 kinda set a standard for what that kind of sci-fi should look like.
love the discussion about suspension of disbelief having a lot to do with design and direction not just vfx, the contrast of the raptor design/behavior from first and last jurassic movies was an excellent way to punctuate the point
I also have some issues with the dinosaur sound design in this one. There are a lot of points where a snarl or hiss stays on the same timbre as the mouth changes position or shape. It’s a small detail, but it makes the sound and image completely detached for me.
The point I make about the different design philosophies between Jurassic World & Prehistoric Planet is that the scientifically plausible documentary version of Dreadnoughtus manages to be more colourful, creative & scary than the genetically engineered blockbuster version.
PP conveys much more believable animals, which means when they do show off how unpredictable & dangerous they can be, it has way more impact than a raptor with angry eyebrows sculpted into its skull.
I couldn't agree more with this. Something that always acts angry will have much less of an impact whenever it's shown being angry. However, something that isn't always angry, like an actual animal, will have so much more of an impact whenever it's shown being angry because you don't expect it as much. Also I'm glad I'm not the only one who notices the whole "angry eyebrows" design trope in most of the Jurassic Park dinosaurs
@@-samart2004- It's a really overdone trope with sauropod dinosaurs that they're portrayed as peaceful 'gentle giants '. Big herbivores like elephants, Rhino & Buffalo are so much more short-tempered and dangerous than people realise. An angry Titanosaur would be a walking natural disaster
My Jump-the-shark moment for the JW franchise was from JW where the tiny Pterosaurs were released from the aviary. Rather than just disappearing off into the forest like animals would, they ALL headed straight for the busiest, noisiest, most unfamiliar part of the island (the public areas of the park) and ALL began attacking the people, creatures 20 times their size, for no reason at all.
Coz they smell your fear. And also cheeseburgers.
Right? Why would they risk their lives when they could just eat smaller animals or eat the park food? A human can 100% kill them in a fight so why be so aggressive? Plus, they're zoo animals. They're not kept starving. They're fed regularly. Why so ravenous?
@@JohnEusebioToronto Also, the Pteranodon picking up the Triceratops
"What, a pterosaur carrying a Triceratops?"
"It could grip it by the husk"
"It's not a matter of where he grips it, it's a simple matter of weight ratios. A 100lb Pteranodon could carry a 600lb baby Triceratops"
@@JohnEusebioToronto I thought the indominus rex ordered them to do that since it can communicate with everything
@@manbat4582
Ah yes, that explains everything. The large, intelligent bird-thing tells the small, unintelligent bird-things to go and beat up a bunch of larger, intelligent ape-things AND THEY LISTEN.
Jurassic World was the least terrible of the new trilogy, but the writing is... Not great
You should do an episode devoted only to Prehistoric Planet. I think it would be interesting for you to explain how they incorporated the dinosaurs into the environment so well
Prehistoric Planet, is literally the best documentary ever made, I rewatched it twice, the first time I was so focused on the next level effects I missed the story
What "channel" is it on?
@@RingoLoadagain Apple TV+
I would love to see them basically prank everybody, by making up an animal with VFX, and trying to trick the media into believing it is a real animal.
The dinosaurs in “Dominion” all walked so stiffly. There was none of that jiggle in the legs like in the previous movies that made them look more real.
Honestly, I felt that the previous World movies, especially FK, had too much jiggle. The dinosaur felt less like living animals with tensing/flexing muscles and more like giant rubber toys.
Holy cow! You guys actually talked about Prehistoric Planet on the show!
I do agree with a lot of your thoughts on comparing it to Jurassic World, and a lot of people who have seen both have the same opinion, but I also think it plays into preproduction and the idea of a set "vision" for the look of the film. The two shows had very similar scopes and budgets, but there seemed to be a kind of Marvel mentality on the latter of "we'll tweak it whenever we need to, no matter how late into post we do it." It is understandable considering the massive story overhaul that took place after Fallen Kingdom and the Pandemic production schedule, and in fairness, the cuts they made to keep it reproducable aren't all that big in theory. (A bit less to the muscle sims, maybe one less render pass here and there) It's just noticeable when you compare it directly to something like Prehistoric Planet that had a very solid production layout and a very dedicated team of artists and science consultants to each sequence.
What Wren said at 18:38 is partly evident in Gemini Man, where you know it's supposed to be Will Smith, but if he's jumping and falling like he's weightless and gravity affects him differently, then you lose the realism that it is Will Smith fighting Will Smith.
These guys are one of the few defenders of VFX artists, I wish we had more voices like theirs - keep up the good work!!!
What you guys point out about subtle animal movements really backed what I feel while watching the original Jurassic Park vs the newer ones. The newer Jurassic Park movies felt so fake despite the upgrade in CGI. Really enjoyed this episode
I'd love them to do a comparison between the JP trilogy and the JW trilogy
It'd be cool to see a "writers react to great and bad stories" idk how you'd get that series off the ground but I'm sure you all could do it.
Writers react to good and bad plot twists or plot points.
That is going to be the "Film Courage" channel.
Usually film critics will offer that kind of feedback?
As a writer I would love that
Would totally watch this! Great idea!
I really think you guys need to watch/review Walking With Dinosaurs, a miniseries on BBC from 1999. It has a combo of CG and practical effects that really let the series hold up today. Not a lot of people know about it, but I always reference it when talking about how CG and practical can extentuate each other when used correctly.
Rewatching it now it definitely doesn't hold up well. I remember feeling the CGI was iffy even when it first came out. Prehistoric Planet on the other hand doesn't have that issue. I found myself gasping at how realistic it looked that I could hardly believe it was CGI.
As much as I love when they bring guests in…
Nothing hits harder than the BOYS reacting to VFX
17:19 when compared side to side, Dominion dino looks like an artistic interpretation made into a puppet, which goes to show that the render is amazing enough that it looks like something that exists in real life, but the design and the animation departs from a believable living being.
as a huge Jurassic Franchise fan, i really think you hit the nail on the head with the new movies.
I'd love to hear more about cgi dino content!!! Specifically the "predecessor" of Prehistoric Planet the "Walking with Dinosaurs" series!! (Just all the dinosaur movies like the 2013 film Walking with Dinosaurs!!)
I was surprised 'Walking with Dinosaurs' apparently has left the pop culture mind that quickly... it was epic back then and done with immense care! Totally loved it and Framestore did an amazing job.
As a writer, I'm always evaluating a film from a storytelling standpoint, and a lot of films nowadays fall short in this regard because they rely more on spectacle than plot. You can absolutely make a big-budget blockbuster dinosaur film that's visually spectacular, but to put it in the context of a memorable story takes a lot more work - more than it would seem many studios are interested in doing. That's the problem with the Jurassic World movies. You might remember a fun scene or visual effect here and there, but you're not going to remember the story, and so eventually the film itself will be forgotten while the original Jurassic Park is always going to be highly-regarded because it was telling a story FIRST, and THEN supplemented it with groundbreaking effects.
I totally agree. The only things I really remember from Fallen Kingdom (and I almost called it Lost Kingdom for how forgettable it is...) are being bored during the big chase scene in the house, being annoyed that I figured out the "big twist" ten minutes after the girl was introduced, and how utterly stupid the auction house scenes were.
unfortunately in modern franchise blockbusters the story only functions as hot glue that holds together all the set pieces, needlessly integrated "legacy characters" (I hate that word so much) and nostalgia shots they came up with (meaning: copied straight from previous films).
As a musician I automatically pay attention to sound design. The spectrum of quality, even between blockbuster movies is *insane*.
Most movies have realistic audio, nice ambiance and clever storytelling through sound, but at the same time you have movies that seem like they didn't have proffessionals on set at all.
The most common sin is using the SAME DAMN EFFECTS LIBRARY thay has been in circulation since the 70's. Gamers probably notice when they hear the same door creak, foot steps or explosion in films that are familiar from years of triple-A games.
Visuals really seem to go over everything else. And the movies get away with it because most people don't really pay attention to sound design, or writing.
@@VikingTeddy Personally, ever since Inception, it's been braaam-y soundtracks for me. The only film I feel like that's gotten away with having one is Dune Part 1. It fit.
Also yes to your point about over used sound effects. I hear it in both movies/tv and games. Particularly noticeable with explosions.
Though shout out to the Wilhelm Scream, that shit never gets old.
I’m also trying to be a writer. Have you sold any scripts yet or made any headway in the industry?
I've seen it said elsewhere, but really appreciate you guys taking a look at Prehistoric Planet. It's so bloody beautiful, brings a tear to my eye. Makes me wonder what Jurassic World could be like if it would just incorporate some of that more natural behaviour that PP showcased so wonderfully.
Keep up the good work!
Oh man a modern big budget dinosaur movie with Prehistoric Planet's effects and design would be a dream!
@@ImVeryOriginal Wouldn't it just? 🥲
WE BACK BOYS!!
Be quiet
@@The_Ostrich 🤣🤣🤣
Wait, they were gone?
I remember a bunch of us in Clints server freaking out over the channel being hacked, glad to see its back safe and sound!
They were hacked?
@@blacklight4720 By cryptobros yes
@@blacklight4720 They got hack that some of their youtube videos were missing a couple days ago!
You wrote "Cryptowankers" wrong @@SaladSneky
@@experimetalfan8851 my mistake, thanks for the correction
I've always had that feeling you were describing about the later Jurassic movies, and it's a really cool and thoughtful point about the direction and design and motivation behind the dinosaurs. Great comparisons and contrasts
It's weird that they got the truck explosion speed wrong when they went to the trouble of displacing the raindrops with the shockwave.
It seems like the kind of mistake a less experienced compositor might make and a less experienced VFX supervisor might miss - where they're not incompetent and they try to think about the reality of the scene but they miss major things simply due to lack of experience. We know that the VFX industry has terrible problems with crunch and burnout, and the result is stuff like this because senior experienced artists aren't there to catch these errors.
My guess is that the truck explosion was done absolute last minute, if you look closely you can even see some "ground" floating in the air because the middle stock explosion wasn't masked properly and still includes some of the surface. So not only did they get the speed wrong and/or used inappropriate explosion footage for that scene, but even failed to compose it properly. Since the fire in the next scene looks way better, I'd guess that the truck explosion didn't work out like they wanted and they had no time to do a proper 3D simulation again, so they just quickly hacked something together to meet the deadline.
First thing I noticed with the truck explosion was the placement of the two front explosions... WHY would the windshield and front fender explode individually?? A fuel tank explosion would cover that area (maybe), but there isn't anything in those areas that could go off!
This was an amazing episode! Thank you so much!
I'm studying for a career in cognitive biology, which is the study of animal minds: how they behave, how the interact, and how they adapt to their environment. Not surprisingly this means that I strongly prefer Prehistoric Planet's realism (that was an AWESOME show) to Jurassic Word's over the top dinosaurs. Having convincing animals makes an immediate connection between the viewer and the action on the scene: we are able to interpret the emotional lives of other creatures - even those that are vastly different from us mammals - and thereby understand and care about their motivation. To me this is what made Prehistoric Planet so powerful. We saw the plight of mother dinosaurs trying to protect their offspring and felt the love, we saw the competition for mates and understood the tenderness of pair bonding, we saw the chaos of hunting and understood the terror. Yes this is what we call "anthropomorphism", and while it must be used with extreme caution in scientific contexts (although it does have its place. I strongly suggest Wild Justice by Marc Bekoff if you want to know more about the cutting edge of cognitive science among animals), it is a really powerful tool in filmmaking.
Lastly I want to touch on the subject of intelligence. It's easy to assume that the dinosaurs in Jurassic World are more intelligent because they are capable of navigating our human world with great skill. However, scientifically speaking, this could not be further from the truth. While dinosaurs did have relatively small brains, they are the direct ancestors of birds, which are a species group that is now recognized for extremely high levels of intelligence despite minuscule brains. Corvids (the family that includes crows, ravens, magpies, and jays) reach intelligence levels similar to many primates (although these measures are by nature anthropocentric and, thereby, also in some ways biased). Secondly, dinosaurs were highly adapted to their ecosystem. The behavior observed in Jurassic world is often very dangerous with little benefit. Wild predators are strategic in what prey they hunt as an difficult hunt might not be worth the effort. Predators, ranging from highly intelligent wolves and lions to spiders with brains too small to see, are never ruthless hunters. Their effort is always calculated against the benefit of success. I would argue that the behavior seen in Jurassic World signifies a lack of intelligence due to the reckless behavior of the dinosaurs, while Prehistoric Planet instead more accurately shows the subtlety that dinosaur minds were likely capable of. Prehistoric planet shows social skills, group coordination, problem solving, and parental care: all traits both seen in modern birds and which require significant intelligence. Let us not judge other creatures' intelligence on metrics that center on ridiculous standards of being able to navigate machineries and cities. Otherwise we are guilty of anthropocentrism: acting as if human intelligence is the gold standard for all other forms of intelligence. Intelligence should be adapted to a creature's way of life, and that is exactly what is brilliantly shown in Prehistoric Planet. We humans also have our own limitations and abilities dictated by the environment to which we are adapted. Yes, we are a highly *adaptable* species, but that does not make us a metric for measuring other intelligences.
I hope you found some of this interesting! And thank you again for the marvelous episode!
Hi from Australia. Really liked the conversation in this ep, Corridor Crew. The Prehistoric Planet stuff is amazing because you feel like you're going to witness something for the first time. The unpredictable beauty of watching wildlife. Thanks CC.
14:46 THANK YOU! People always say "ah it's all CGI nowadays" as if there's a computer app with a button "create realistic dinosaur" in it or smth. That's a shitton of work right there
This is literally the most interesting channel on here, I’ve learned so much watching you guys I remember I started watching on like the 13th cgi good vs bad and never missed a vid
It would be awesome if one day a VFX artists react episode ends with "and the Wren in this episode was all CG"
Hey, I'm happy you got the channel back, would you mind giving us an update on how everything went and what you did to recover the channel?
We got Prehistoric Planet LET'S GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!
I'm so delighted you guys were able to do some more dinosaur stuff; that breakdown of the steps needed to produce realistic anatomy & skin was quite insightful!
If you'd like some more content on the subject of too much/too little creature work, the program 'Dinosaur Revolution/Dinotasia' could be an interesting choice in more stylized dino depictions; for that matter, it could be worthwhile to look more closely at how Jurassic Park's own dinosaurs have evolved from film to film.
Glad they've shown Prehistoric Planet some love, it's the best depiction of dinosaurs on film ever, period. Hope they do a breakdown for Season 2 as well!
"We're forgetting it is a lizard." Sam cuts to the core of the issue.
I mean, it isn't really if we're being pedantic ^^
IMO, from now on all the next paleo medias will have to look back at Prehistoric Planet to get inspired by its animation nuances, such as they did when Jurassic Park (1993) was released, 'cause UOW, that's so superb and realistic. As you said, it's not about the CGI quality, but its concept.
I'd love to see u guys reacting about other scenes from that, and also to take a look at the 99 documentary "Walking With Dinosaurs", produced by BBC. It was the first time we saw great cgi dinosaurs out of the jurassic park franchise, and it was impressing, especially 'cause it was a 99 TV Show with a lot more dino time screen.
Maybe balsy but i think Prshistoric Planet is batter that W. w. Dinosaurus
It's worth saying that Walking with Dinosaurs was pretty groundbreaking as it was made on a relatively low budget by London VFX houses who were mainly working on TV level projects (back when TV was a very poor cousin to film). Even the 3D tracking was a new thing. Great kudos and respect to everyone who worked at Framestore back then.
You dont have to add “IMO” if youre just parroting the opinion of corridor lmao
@@wowmedialtd what a great addition. Yeah, I've heard the budget of the whole series was $9.9 million, and even today when I watch the episodes, I get amazed by the animation principles they used, which aged pretty well to me. Framestroe indeed nailed that.
hey you're my avatar twin
Im so happy you covered prehistoric planet and I'd love to see you cover it again in the future!
We need a Corridor Reacts to their channel being back! Let's goooo
If I'm seeing it correctly, it looks like the raptors feet motion is entirely divorced from their actual movement forwards. There's a bunch of places where their feet seem to be almost sliding forwards along the ground even as they're being placed down. Given those feet are pushing backwards to propel them forwards that looks super weird.
Their progression forwards is just too smooth and seems almost like a fixed rate, too, for something propelling itself by running.
i don't know about it slipping, but you are right about a fixed rate. as i said elsewhere, even cheetahs don't sprint long distances before taking a sec to chill out. These raptors are somehow running across an entire city and out across the countryside without slowing down. Horses don't even do that. I don't think I took the time to realize how much this scene bothered me until CC started talking about it. trained navy seal attack dogs aren't even that single minded.
15:45 In order for that raptor to jump onto an airplane that has just taken off, it had to have been going slightly faster than the plane (which can only lift off when it hits around 90-100 mph minimum.) lol
We've missed you! Hope nothing too damaging was done and that we can get back into our normal swing of amazing content!
it's always the criptobros
The biggest damage is the fact that Corridor lost the "TheBatman'22 but it's Adam West" video to a copyright takedown.
The Making-Of video on CorridorCrew is still there but the 3 minute video for the result is gone :(
@@SevenZeroEleven the watch the Batman video in that video. So you can still watch it there.
@@SevenZeroEleven also, that was gone before the hacking occurred.
@@SentinalSlice wait... What hacking...?
Welcome back guys! And you NEED to do Carter (Netflix). It's such a beautiful clusterf**** of weird CGI.
Guys, just rewatched Constantine this past weekend and I think the effects still hold up pretty well, you guys should add that to the list!
Happy you guys got your channel back. No one likes hackers
Whoever’s that hacker should unsubscribe. They’re no friend to this channel
@@isaackim7675 lol I doubt they are
Thank you for doing Prehistoric Planet! I look for more analysis of its effects!
I love at the very end Wren throws up the devil horns as he says goodbye and you can see him look at his hand and make a face like 'why is this what I'm doing with my hand?' as the camera pans past him.
I feel like the other problem with the raptors was the lack of consistency. They caught up with a motor bike but were outrun on foot in previous scenes. Makes you think something is off.
I don't know if y'all done it but can y'all do an animator's react to "Star Wars The Clone Wars, The Bad Batch, Rebels, & Star Wars Visions?" I found it very impressive and interesting on their progress over the years and how they also took a new direction regarding animation style.
Thanks for finally covering Prehistoric Planet. I wish you had covered the Mononykus segment, but the info you provided was still fantastic. Thanks!
btw, dinosaurs are birds, not reptiles, technically speaking.
Though I guess it's more accurate to say birds are avian dinosaurs.
But you get my meaning. :P
I think the issue with JWD is that those scenes didn’t have as much punch because they did have the scenes with practical dinosaurs that had that more believable element to them. Looking at you, derpy Lystro.
Suggestion: The Sandman on Netflix, in particular the crow "Matthew", being voiced by Patton Oswalt. In the outdoor scenes in episode 3, "Dream a little dream of me" it looks outstanding.
I was gonna say this
2:58 A nice touch is that they made the rain move towards the camera with the shockwave of the explosion.
You can see it well at the dark areas of the door.
Would love to see a closer look at using CGI from a director’s or writer’s perspective, especially if you can think of good and bad examples!
9:36 I have to disagree with the "flawless", there is a noticeable issue of lack of "weight" to the creature, and in two separate respects.
Firstly is volumetric displacement, the creature does kick up clouds of dust however the movements of is body have little to no interaction with those dust elements, whereas a real object of that size would move about large quantities of air with even slight movements just due to its mass.
Secondly is any lack of "reverberation", it is assumedly a VERY heavy creature and yet the practical elements around it never seem to respond to that, despite there even being rather flimsy scaffolding, nothing ever really correctly shows the weight and mass of the creature effecting it as it should.
No it's great, Lack of weight is due to the creature not having bones and muscles, it's a huge caterpillar.. it would be pretty light
@@maccool5444 , we even see someone kicking its face away. If it was a T.rex, for example, kicking it would be futile as the head would have so much power and weight behind it. The worm has a much lighter structure and I agree with what you said. I find it believable.
The original Jurassic Park was such a critical success in part because dinosaurs had never been shown in such a creative practical + CGI way. They were also revealed slowly, just like the shark from Jaws. Nowadays, everybody knows you can render "realistic" dinosaurs, so every scene is about which character they are willing to sacrifice. Since you know the main group will survive and the villain will not, nothing is at stake.
The funniest thing about the last JW film, is the fact that they actually had scenes of dinosaurs acting like animals. There is an entire prologue, which they cut out of the final film, that shows dinosaurs, during the cretaceous period, acting like animals and it looks magnificient.
It was still mostly scientifically inaccurate.
@@ExtremeMadnessX Literally all of Jurassic Park/World is scientifically bullshit, lol. It doesn't matter.
@@ExtremeMadnessX I personally believe that this is why they cut it out. What's the point of showing dinosaurs in prehistoric times if it isn't even trying to be scientifically accurate?
@@ExtremeMadnessX - "🤓"
Its on the extended cut on dvd release. It got cut cos universal wanted the view lower. With it in , makes the rex giga stuff have more depth
Okay, I just have to ask, how have you guys not reacted to the Star Wars: The Old Republic animatics? Those are some of the coolest effects I've ever seen (not to mention some of the coolest lightsaber duels in history). Please react to that in one of your next VFX artists react videos! It would be awesome to see what you think of them.
Holy sh*t! TY so much for talking about Prehistoric Planet! I hadn't previously heard of it, and that is not the kinda show I want to miss out on! It looks so cool!
Y'all have introduced me to so many movies and shows that I woulda otherwise never heard of. I can't thank y'all enough for that 🙏
It would be pretty interesting to see you guys do a whole video on what youve learned as vfx artists from your guests since youve started doing the show. Tell us how youve grown as pros of your field! 😊
A super-cut of all the insightful moments from previous guests would be cool too.
The conversation: The guys touched on this in the video about context and the creatures presenting as animals or as weird missile monster things. My take is that this touches on a wider aspect of western (well Hollywood anyway) filmmaking (also applies to TV) at the moment that is to do with tone and visual style. So I think it's totally possible to have JW style raptors act like crazy monster missiles and still have the work be engaging, but you have to pick your overall tone and every aspect of the work needs to stay within that tone and work to strengthen it. So you can't cut from crazy raptor missiles (or whatever it is in a particular blockbuster effects movie) and then go to like, standard actor closeup drama characters that are lit and shot in really traditional live action methods. If feel like there is this disconnect between one half of Hollywood that is trying to make traditional live action actor focused drama stuff, and the other half of hollywood which is trying to do huge over the top archetypal action adventure spectacle stuff. When the people trying to do the tighter traditional dialog and actor focused work get to do that, it generally works really well. When the people who actually understand archetypal stylistic larger than life over the top stuff get to do that it also often works really well. Be we seem to constantly be getting people from one side trying to do things on the other side and it just doesn't work.
Seeing that carno do his little dance was one of the best things I've seen all month.
I'd love to hear your guys take on anything that has come out of Studio OATS as well as the tunnel sequence in Sicario
I would love to see a breakdown of Disney's The Black Hole. That movie scared the life outta me when I was a kid.
One thing that always gets me with creatures in movies like Jurassic World is that their eyes are on the side of their head, however they always look directly at their target/prey. They wouldn't be able to see it straight on! There are very few birds for example that actually look at objects head-on, their head is always tilted slightly.
That's just one of many problems with design of raptors in Jurassic Park/ World movies. Their eyes should be directed forward.
Glad you guys got control of the channel back. Crypto people are weird as hell
Yeah... "weird".
Taking over people's channels isn't just weird, I wouldn't say. Although there probably aren't laws for that, so I can't straight up call it a crime. I can call it a dick move, though.
I would love to see you guys react to the effects in the original Christopher Reece Superman movies. Although it’s clearly dated, there is some really good practical work and techniques they used to sell it. Has the same sort of mystique and grand feeling as the og Star Wars trilogy.
I'm glad to see you guys back at it! No janky hacker can stop the corridor crew!! 💪
The most challenging part of writing is giving every character in every scene wants, needs, and agency. I haven't seen this new Jurassic Park movie, so I don't know what that dinosaur wants with Chris Pratt. Does Chris have something the dinosaur wants or needs? Does the dinosaur have a vendetta against Chris Pratt? Both things seem unlikely. From what little I know about predators, they have one thing they want to do: Stay alive. They need to hunt to stay alive. It seems like a massive waste of energy to chase after a human on a motorcycle through the streets of Rome when a dinosaur could just eat any human in the city. A van crashes in that scene; presumably, there's a concussed human in the van. Very easy to eat a concussed human in an immobile van. Very difficult to eat a Chris Pratt on a motorcycle. The lack of believable agency for the dinosaurs is one reason the scene feels silly and unbelievable.
But again, haven't seen the movie, so maybe it's all explained before the chase scene.
Another problem that I saw for the velociraptor chase was how they were acting against the surface, in order to give them a sense of speed they make them move their legs very fast, but on asfalt with claws they would have more of a grip making them run a different way. You can even see at the beginning of the chase a moment where the raptor is running too fast compared to the street giving it a scooby-doo feel.
They were atrociraptors
@@leoburningfast9103 in all fairness they're designed so similar to the Velociraptors of the series only diehard fans are really gonna be able to point out the difference. Especially with how varied Velo designs throughout the franchise have been.
@@MattHedgern In fairness they were designed similar because they are similar. I personally think they're pretty distinguishable.
@@knaughta.masso-kist5944 I both do and don't agree, if that makes sense?
Like, there absolutely are differences between the film designs of the two raptors, and if you know what to look for you can easily tell them apart. But at the same time, they're differences that are subtle enough to easily fly over most audiences' heads, I can't really blame someone for not catching on to it.
@@MattHedgern Thats true but running in mud and earth is very different to running in a hard surface.
My favourite shot from Prehistoric Planet is the close up of that Velociraptor foot slowly stalking forward. That was beautiful.
Jurassic World vs Prehistoric Planet is like Tony Hawk's Pro Skater vs Skate. Both are fun skating games, one is arcady and the other is a bit more realistic.
Since I was two years old I always had this passion for dinosaurs and other creatures of the same period (pterosaurs [which are *not* dinosaurs] and megafauna [the giant mammals like colombian mammoth or the procoptodon]).
When I was little the first two Jurassic Park movies always made me have this particular look of these animals, these movies made me look at them like they were actual creatures with working brains. Since then I have understood the biological innacuracies of the movie (the lack of feathers, venomous dilophosaurus theory, and oversizing), but that is not my point.
Unfortunately, many people only had the exposure to documentaries that use paleontology as an excuse to show monstrous creatures in thir eternal an eternal bloodlust (like Jurassic Fight Club); then people would only see dinosaurs as that, not as they really were. And when a documentary like Walking with Dinosaurs or Prehistoric Planet comes out, these people are upset and curse at the creators for showing what people needed to see, not what the wanted to see. I've met people like that.
And then the Jurassic Park movies, the same franchise I used to praise for showing one of the best dinosaur behaviours, went for the same rout and started to represent dinosaurs as bloodthirsty monsters. This is also one of the reasons the new movies don't give off the same feelings as watching the original movies.
I know a person who said more or less this: 'They were giant lizards that ripped flesh of other creatures with giant claws and teeth; and you want us to see them as "animals", like...rolling in grass, caring for their young or taking a nap in the barn? What tf is your point here" He this because he was only exposed to the documentaries that depict dinosaurs as gruesome creatures.
This is my point, if you have anything to say, I would be pleased to hear your opinion.
I'd argue that the new Jurassic World movies rely on near cartoon-levels of inane action as an attempt to masquerade debilitating flaws in an awful script and cardboard characters. I cannot imagine people getting upset with Walking With Dinosaurs because they show other aspects of dinosaurs beyond violence.
At the end of the day, it's like Shark Week. If the promos promise a visceral experience fraught with danger, anything less (to the general viewing public) is a travesty.
I am also a bit of a dino fanatic and I share your frustration in dealing with people who seemingly get offended when their beloved bloodthirsty monsters are presented to them as real animals.
However I think that Jurassic Park (though a great film) was no better than the following films in this regard. The dinosaurs rarely seem to have anything better to do than hunting and terrorising humans, and no complex behaviour is shown at all. Not to mention the T rex eyesight based on movement, which has no foundation in reality. At least Lost World shows parenting. I'm interested to know why you think JP does not portray dinos as bloodthirsty monsters (in fact it popularised the idea that they are).
In fact I'd argue that JW shows the raptors as intelligent creatures that can be highly trained, such as dolphins and dogs. Definitely not simply bloodthirsty monsters.
But I agree that Walking with Dinosaurs and Prehistoric Planet are masterpieces.
@@knaughta.masso-kist5944 Yes, In one hand I believe that Jurassic Park showed dinosaurs more as monsters than animals, take the scene of the Raptors in the kitchen, they just attack, with no apparent reason.
But in the other hand we are also shown other aspects of dinosaur behaviour that are not shown in other media, just like you mentioned parenting ; the herd structure of the stegosaurus and parasaurolophus (and they also show that despite being "dumb herbivores", stegosaurus can protect their young and themselves) and in jurassic world they show packhunting in a not so accurate way, but at they showed it.
So, Jurassic Park and expecially World show dinosaurs as monsters, but in many cases as animals. I would say it is a 50/50
@@knaughta.masso-kist5944 In addition to what @Francisco Moutinho already said, I think the first Jurassic Park deserves much more credit than its sequels just for how it frames the dinosaurs when they do hunt. There's a progressive aggressive recklessness to the meat-eaters through the films; but the first film presents the T-rex and the raptors as curious, possibly territorial animals exploring new ground. Not only did this suit the more suspenseful nature of the movie, it looks more natural in behavior, rather than just violent monsters who destroy everything on sight. Rexy might not have attacked the kids' jeep at ALL had she not noticed the flashlight, and she still took her time investigating the jeep before deciding that yes, there IS something tasty-looking inside.
Jurassic World does introduce some intriguing possibilities with the raptors, that's true - but it also features every single Pteranodon and Dimorphodon in captivity making a beeline for the visitors' center to go on the attack because... Reasons. At least Rexy in the first film got be witnessed hunting Gallimimus in a natural(ish) habitat, with no disturbance from humans.
,
How cool would it be to compare these 2022 Prehistoric Planet shots to the OG version and award-winning 1999 Walking with Dinosaurs series!? See how far the genre has come and compare the two approaches to ‘realistic’ dinosaurs!
I love prehistoric planet, but what sam said about it imagining dinosaurs as “not intelligent” really irked me. many dinosaurs are thought to have been very intelligent, while others were dumb as rocks. it’s thought there was as much variation in intelligence between dinos as there is between mammals today
I think he was just being a contrarian about the way Jurassic Park portrays them: omniscient gods that will no-clip to wherever they have the best opportunity to kill you.
@@cogd1599 I mean I 100% agree that new JW movies portray dinos more as characters than as animals (I think I can pinpoint the third jurassic park’s spino as the main starting point for that nonsense) but just because something is an animal doesn’t mean that it’s stupid (dolphins, monkeys, octopi, etc)
The dinosaurs did act like animals in JP and the lost world. But it’s an unfair comparison for the raptors in Dominion bc they literally were missiles (mind controlled).
Precisely the comment I was looking for. It's like they didn't even watch the movie before commenting. Bad.
@@GabrielSousa7 it doesnt detract at all from what they are saying. It's the concept/context of the movie that sells away you suspension of disbelief in the CG work. It looks great, but in context and therefore design, you arent onced made to believe that what you
re seeing is real and it takes you out of the movie
@@hwroin There's this thing called suspension of disbelief. The fantastical science explains how the dinosaurs work in the movie. You can suspend your disbelief that dinosaurs are brought back through fantastical science and a theme park is the first thought that comes to the creator's minds but not that other people had militaristic interests and using that same fantastic science to engineer dinosaurs for those interests? The entire story from the start of the franchise is fantastical and impossible.
They definitely acted _more_ like animals in the first movies. Still overly aggressive, but believable. Like Hollywood animals, not Hollywood monsters. In JW the raptors and other carnivores act more like they will die, or something, if they won't attempt to shred the main characters the second they notice them. They see the humans - they go into bloodlusted frenzy, with maybe the solo exception of Blue.
There were some scenes in Constantine you guys might want to check out. The VFX on the dragon breath fire in the beginning was pretty dope and it's some other visual effects in there I think you guys might want to check out. Awesome video like always.
The velociraptor. thing is that the they don't breathe. So it doesn't feel like the velociraptors are real, it doesn't feel like they have to make a calculation of how much energy they spend chasing the character and how much they're going to gain from that. So it doesn't feel like they breathe or or after him to eat it feels like they're a robots. Animals don't chase you till the end of the world because they have to save some energy for when they catch you because they might have to fight you. So that's what makes it not real in my opinion
The instinct you had with the raptors is similar to how people will make fun of the logic in movies:
"Why did X character do Y?"
Because the plot needed to move forward.
"Yeah but people don't *behave* like that."
"Why do the raptors have arched, menacing eye sockets, even though there would be 0 evolutionary motivation to develop that way?"
Because the designers are drawing on the cultural language of "evil" to make them seem more intimidating.
You can realize the difference in the first scenario because you are a human being, you're constantly exposed to the thought process and behaviors of humans.
But projects like _Prehistoric Planet_ remind us: "Wait, these are just animals, like a jumping spider, or a bird, or a tiger. They don't really care about human conceptions of morality or terror, they just want to survive and make babies."
And so when you go back to Jurassic Park, now the curtain is pulled back. You can see the hand of the author, and it's uncomfortable, because you haven't had the time to decide whether or not you're okay with movies not being like real life in the same way that you've had time to process that fact in relation to human behavior.
I really liked the last part about "directoring " and VFX collaboration
It’s definitely more a context issue. The raptors chasing Pratt in a crowded city street would probably quickly lose interest and switch to chomping on bystanders they can catch much more easily
I said this same thing when I was watching it. I was like, wow these are the most persistent bastards I've ever seen.
@@wavion2 They were genetically engineered to only attack the marked target. This was introduced in the previous movie. These raptors ARE weapons.
They're designed and trained to go after their target. You got a glimpse of this in the second jurassic world movie
11:38 ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED
I think you guys hit the nail on the head, they are animals not missles, thats what made the JP1 kitchen scene so good