This is all so fascinating! It isn't often that the people in the movie business take the time to explain the interesting details and specifics of how the movies we love come to be but when it happens, I always want to hear what they have to say. Explaining how movie magic makes it onto the screen is something these folks didn't have to do, and it would have been the easiest thing in the world for all of these busy folks to simply decline! But they took the trouble to sit down and explain a lot of the details of how Alien got made, and for that I wish to thank them profusely.
I love all these outtakes that didn't make the final cut into the movie! I heard the initial screening for the studio execs (I think) was like 4 hours long. I would love to see that- warts and all!
Just a Brilliant movie from all aspects .. and the use of practical effects .. and care of camera angles and lighting .. and forced perspective ..and just attention to detail ..by everyone
@Vladdyboy Yes,alot of the CGI looking real, has to do with getting a favorable lighting environment. DIstrict 9 had many great looking shots that blurred reality.There's a scene in Terminator 2,where the t-1000 goes through the ceiling of the elevator like a giant rain drop,and reforms that even 20 years old looks amazing.CGI can be very convincing but not in all situations.
I completely agree with you mate. I'd say the same thing applies to pyrotechnics (there's nothing like a real explosion) and stuntwork which is still around, but is slowly pushed out by flying cgi ragdolls.
The model work on Moon was awesome. I think it showed you could make a modern sci-fi movie using just minatures. I hope Prometheus follows somewhat in this way :-)
good point, although I feel those movies tend to be the exception that proves the rule and their use of CG effects was subtle and carefully considered (Terminator 2 uses a surprising amount of practical effects for the T1000 scenes). But yes I agree 100% it's the talent and artistry that makes or breaks the effect regardless of it being miniature or CG or whatever.
I hear that ! We've already begun ! ..... But it's great to know we are not alone in the same goal ! Like Ridley said in a set of interviews - Just F*#@!ing do it !
thats what i love abour real effects as apposed to CGI. Even if its crappy practical effects its still "real". There is SOMETHING there so its almost less insulting than CGI. And yes i know, movies are all visual and what is CGI but a visual tool. Its hard to explain but i get your point and i hope you get mine :)
I totally agree with Brian, CGI isnt a PATCH on a real detailed model and matte shots! I still watch Alien at least once a month and the effects for that era were outstanding! But I watch CGI films now and they just dont look as ‘real’ as models.
Yes, I was already big on Alien when my Father took me to the movies to see Blade Runner. I pointed the Lock and Purge part out to him when it came up. Another fun part from Blade Runner for me is when the big replicant (sorry, forgot his name) and Dekker are wrestling, He asks "What's my birthday?" He then answers with my Birthdate.
yes - when you actually think about it - there's probably ORDERS of magnitude more information in a physical model than is contained in a CGI shot - one way of verifying this is to compress a frame of each type (all other things being equal) - even a lowly computer will verify this fact...
There are exceptions. The original "Jurassic Park" was a game-changer, which incorporated CGI as well as animatronics. And yes, it was based on a novel, but lots of great films have a literary heritage.
The guy at the end of this makes a great point. Allot of movies today (cough Micheal Bay) seem to make movies that relay on special effects vise having a good story to tell. Although I thought Prometheus was a very stunning movie visually it doesn't have the character development that Aliens had.
I am a great fan of pratical effects, and its not true that you need all CGI these, days, christopher Nolan with interstellar used mainly practical effects and sets.. yes of course there was some CGI, but very little green screen, and the movie was amazing in terms of the shots, because the actors were not relating to a green screen but actual scenery and this was shown by the acting. JJ with star wars seven has also resorted to use more practical effects in this movie. CGI needs to be used, these days because it can be used very effectively in some scenes.. but there has to be a balance!!
Uh oh, you have me doubting now. I'm pretty sure all the creature shadow work was cg with the actual creature shadows removed in post which is why it has that obvious "pop" when you watch it now (I don't mean the greenscreen washout, I mean the actual shadows cast on objects). Will have to look that up, I could be wrong. A3 was just a poor choice as an example, my bad.
@eimb1999 Indeed! Christopher Nolan understands this. He will use CG if there is no other way to do it, and when he does use it it isn't used to showcase a scene which takes the audience out of the movie. I miss hand made visual effects.
the problem with CGI is that u will always know that it's there no matter how realistic. It kills the magic. Its so boring. U know if u see a spaceship nowadays it will be cgi. But with a model u dont know really what to think. U dont know how big it is in reality, or maybe u ask urself... "how the fuck did they did that effect?"
I'm not talking about the alien, there's more fx in the movie than just the creature you know. I'm well aware of all the visual effects techniques used, thanks. :)
The number one issue with CGI is it dates quite quickly, if you watch Aliens 3 they use CGI for a lot of the alien shots and it looked fine the first time I saw it but today it looks totally shit. Look at the series Babylon 5... state of the art CGI ships at the time, today it looks incredibly lame. Audiences learn to "see" CGI and as the technology improves older stuff looks more fake but models don't suffer from that which is why the ships in the original star wars still look awesome.
The craftsmanship and talent still exists, but it is done by indie and guerilla filmmakers that don't have the funds to get their films out to the world. To all you filmmakers that have a story to tell. Tell it with your own two hands. Your hard work and vision will translate better.
I loved Prometheus, but i wonder how the model makers feel about him using CGI for the ship Prometheus? I mean, i give Scott a pass for using REAL (stunning) sets that actors can interact with.
Jurassic park used models and animatronics, which supports xXdoctorXXGoNzOXx claims of carpentry superiority. Certain scenes in Jurassic park used CGI, especially in the mass quantity of dinosaur shots, however those were the weaker looking images, hence again proving this guys point. Toy Story is a purposeful "animation" not meant to emulate real life, therefore is void of comparison. Models still look better in terms of geometry and realism by far!
You make a decent point, but not an entirely true one. There are loads of films where the CGI holds up well. Jurassic Park, Terminator 2, The lord of the Rings (especially Gollum), Gladiator etc... A lot of model work dates badly too you know because you can clearly tell that they are miniatures. It is nothing to do with the technology but more to do with the talented artists that make the shots work.
7:15 No one loves CGI now a days more than the cartoonists at DISNEY! As a artist I recommend not following them cause cutting corners has always been their speciality. Anime is where the truly skilled artists are.
Absolutely right! CGI is utter shite, totally ruins the experience, look at the new Star Trek Series... waaaay to much CGI, just makes everything seem so fake, so respect to those that still do things the old way.
I love practical effects but all these CGI haters have no idea what they're talking about. There are times when CGI can be more believable than practical effects. There are countless examples of CGI so good that you can't even notice it.
I disagree. I think CGI looks horrible 98% of the time. Even when it's well done in movies like Avatar, it still looks like you're watching a cartoon in my opinion(just a good one). CGI has killed modern movie-making. You said it yourself that models look more real than CGI can ever look........so that tells you all you need to know. Shooting things "in camera" is always better. But nowadays, that just doesn't happen. BOO TO CGI!!!!!
Ich bin das ich schreibe diese SMS Darcho Jandreoski ich bin wirklich da im Weltraum mit Weltraum Raumschiff mit 4 Turbinen die Skizze skizziere ich morgen ---( )-----/ Cyborg Kampfroboter Roboter Arm ich schraube die zusammen nämlich in der Fabrik
![Reaction To Alien Part 2 [The Making Of A L I E N]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/idr3ktzBVNE/mqdefault.jpg)
![Reaction To Alien Part 2 [The Making Of A L I E N]](/img/tr.png)
![Visual Effects Part 1 [The Making Of A L I E N]](/img/n.gif)
'This is just a doodle' - proceeds to present an incredibly detailed and epic illustration. Bastard.
Loving all the comments here - Makes me feel good about forging on with traditional techniques (miniatures / mattes / stop motion animation). :D
Yeah really liked that he did it on prometheus too. You instantly recognize what is real and what is cgi.
"it didn't need to be a visual effects extravaganza..." "The key of the effects is the story"
J P disagree
@@paradisebreeze1705 disagree with you
@@montauta I also disagree with myself
This is all so fascinating! It isn't often that the people in the movie business take the time to explain the interesting details and specifics of how the movies we love come to be but when it happens, I always want to hear what they have to say. Explaining how movie magic makes it onto the screen is something these folks didn't have to do, and it would have been the easiest thing in the world for all of these busy folks to simply decline! But they took the trouble to sit down and explain a lot of the details of how Alien got made, and for that I wish to thank them profusely.
Absolutely brilliant, living this series. (10 years later )
I love all these outtakes that didn't make the final cut into the movie! I heard the initial screening for the studio execs (I think) was like 4 hours long. I would love to see that- warts and all!
I agree, models are better than CGI. I saw "Midway" and it looked like a video game!
Aliens was great but the original Alien,and the soundtrack is on the same level of brilliance as JAWS
Nice shots of Gerry Anderson's "Super Car" model in the back ground!
Great stuff and brilliant stories. Thx for the up
They could make a movie where they recover Kanes body still drifting in space.
They could clone him, but his genetics would be altered because of the egg that had been in his body.
@@sonnyroy497 he COULD land on Genesis and be ‘reborn’ as with Spock?
No CGI effects and everything looks much better and much close to reality.
Just a Brilliant movie from all aspects .. and the use of practical effects .. and care of camera angles and lighting .. and forced perspective ..and just attention to detail ..by everyone
@Vladdyboy Yes,alot of the CGI looking real, has to do with getting a favorable lighting environment. DIstrict 9 had many great looking shots that blurred reality.There's a scene in Terminator 2,where the t-1000 goes through the ceiling of the elevator like a giant rain drop,and reforms that even 20 years old looks amazing.CGI can be very convincing but not in all situations.
I completely agree with you mate. I'd say the same thing applies to pyrotechnics (there's nothing like a real explosion) and stuntwork which is still around, but is slowly pushed out by flying cgi ragdolls.
The model work on Moon was awesome. I think it showed you could make a modern sci-fi movie using just minatures. I hope Prometheus follows somewhat in this way :-)
Ok watching the movie for the billionth time ...lol
True Magic Making.
it s on YT for 13 years!! And I only see it now...
good point, although I feel those movies tend to be the exception that proves the rule and their use of CG effects was subtle and carefully considered (Terminator 2 uses a surprising amount of practical effects for the T1000 scenes).
But yes I agree 100% it's the talent and artistry that makes or breaks the effect regardless of it being miniature or CG or whatever.
I hear that ! We've already begun ! ..... But it's great to know we are not alone in the same goal ! Like Ridley said in a set of interviews - Just F*#@!ing do it !
Blade Runner and Alien same universe. Nice.
If I'm making effects for two different movies from two different production companies would it be considered same universe?
thats what i love abour real effects as apposed to CGI. Even if its crappy practical effects its still "real". There is SOMETHING there so its almost less insulting than CGI. And yes i know, movies are all visual and what is CGI but a visual tool. Its hard to explain but i get your point and i hope you get mine :)
I totally agree with Brian, CGI isnt a PATCH on a real detailed model and matte shots! I still watch Alien at least once a month and the effects for that era were outstanding! But I watch CGI films now and they just dont look as ‘real’ as models.
Yes, I was already big on Alien when my Father took me to the movies to see Blade Runner. I pointed the Lock and Purge part out to him when it came up. Another fun part from Blade Runner for me is when the big replicant (sorry, forgot his name) and Dekker are wrestling, He asks "What's my birthday?" He then answers with my Birthdate.
true.... but alien 3 was a rod puppet that was green screened in, not CGI :)
8:10
So that's where they got the idea of the Dead Space box art.
yes - when you actually think about it - there's probably ORDERS of magnitude more information in a physical model than is contained in a CGI shot - one way of verifying this is to compress a frame of each type (all other things being equal) - even a lowly computer will verify this fact...
There are exceptions. The original "Jurassic Park" was a game-changer, which incorporated CGI as well as animatronics. And yes, it was based on a novel, but lots of great films have a literary heritage.
I love the visuals so much but I never understood the christmas lights at 2:44. Was somebody in a rush? Why would they be so randomly scattered?
the problem with CGI, is that it enables to have stunning visual effects at low costs. So some movies have a lot of effects without a good storyline.
CGI looks very good...but real models have their own charme. Its nice that the industry go back to models like in star wars now
Explains why the Nostromo looked enormous in the film
👀😲
The guy at the end of this makes a great point. Allot of movies today (cough Micheal Bay) seem to make movies that relay on special effects vise having a good story to tell. Although I thought Prometheus was a very stunning movie visually it doesn't have the character development that Aliens had.
that's fine lol it doesn't really matter, i was just letting you know haha
it's like im an 8 yr old boy again
I am a great fan of pratical effects, and its not true that you need all CGI these, days, christopher Nolan with interstellar used mainly practical effects and sets.. yes of course there was some CGI, but very little green screen, and the movie was amazing in terms of the shots, because the actors were not relating to a green screen but actual scenery and this was shown by the acting. JJ with star wars seven has also resorted to use more practical effects in this movie. CGI needs to be used, these days because it can be used very effectively in some scenes.. but there has to be a balance!!
Ridley knocked off the top for a better 16:9 framing
What do you mean?
7:38 Is that the front part of a Y-wing??
4:56 - 5:16 I noticed it.
Uh oh, you have me doubting now.
I'm pretty sure all the creature shadow work was cg with the actual creature shadows removed in post which is why it has that obvious "pop" when you watch it now (I don't mean the greenscreen washout, I mean the actual shadows cast on objects).
Will have to look that up, I could be wrong. A3 was just a poor choice as an example, my bad.
@eimb1999 Indeed! Christopher Nolan understands this. He will use CG if there is no other way to do it, and when he does use it it isn't used to showcase a scene which takes the audience out of the movie. I miss hand made visual effects.
the problem with CGI is that u will always know that it's there no matter how realistic. It kills the magic. Its so boring. U know if u see a spaceship nowadays it will be cgi. But with a model u dont know really what to think. U dont know how big it is in reality, or maybe u ask urself... "how the fuck did they did that effect?"
That blonde guy, I don't know if he worked with Scott when he was a child or maybe he doesn't age.
I'm not talking about the alien, there's more fx in the movie than just the creature you know.
I'm well aware of all the visual effects techniques used, thanks. :)
The number one issue with CGI is it dates quite quickly, if you watch Aliens 3 they use CGI for a lot of the alien shots and it looked fine the first time I saw it but today it looks totally shit.
Look at the series Babylon 5... state of the art CGI ships at the time, today it looks incredibly lame.
Audiences learn to "see" CGI and as the technology improves older stuff looks more fake but models don't suffer from that which is why the ships in the original star wars still look awesome.
The craftsmanship and talent still exists, but it is done by indie and guerilla filmmakers that don't have the funds to get their films out to the world. To all you filmmakers that have a story to tell. Tell it with your own two hands. Your hard work and vision will translate better.
BIG TIMBER FILMS and we have Hollywood rubbish, they should move over
End music sounds a bit like it’s from E.T ? 🤷🏻♂️
what year was this made?
1978-1979. Production and start earlier or delayed and post-production can take a while before releasing it.
Jurassic Park, Toy Story. Checkmate.
I loved Prometheus, but i wonder how the model makers feel about him using CGI for the ship Prometheus? I mean, i give Scott a pass for using REAL (stunning) sets that actors can interact with.
Maestro Martin Bower?
The real models make the film authentic 😉
Jurassic park used models and animatronics, which supports xXdoctorXXGoNzOXx claims of carpentry superiority. Certain scenes in Jurassic park used CGI, especially in the mass quantity of dinosaur shots, however those were the weaker looking images, hence again proving this guys point.
Toy Story is a purposeful "animation" not meant to emulate real life, therefore is void of comparison.
Models still look better in terms of geometry and realism by far!
@Hallamfoebell
It wasn't CGI.
but as far as i know there was no CGI used other then the scene where the alien's head blows up?
CGI didn't exist back then.
Really can’t stand CGI effects - I can always tell their not “real”
Lucas when he did star wars destroyed it with CGI it was all so fake green screen
@@JP-uk9uc James Cameron too.
I agree
@@JP-uk9uc Lol, that's not even true. The prequels actually used miniatures extensively.
Do you mean CGI as in full 3D animation? Depends on skills and budget the rendering can be off like it's uncanny.
You make a decent point, but not an entirely true one. There are loads of films where the CGI holds up well. Jurassic Park, Terminator 2, The lord of the Rings (especially Gollum), Gladiator etc... A lot of model work dates badly too you know because you can clearly tell that they are miniatures. It is nothing to do with the technology but more to do with the talented artists that make the shots work.
7:15 No one loves CGI now a days more than the cartoonists at DISNEY! As a artist I recommend not following them cause cutting corners has always been their speciality. Anime is where the truly skilled artists are.
Absolutely right! CGI is utter shite, totally ruins the experience, look at the new Star Trek Series... waaaay to much CGI, just makes everything seem so fake, so respect to those that still do things the old way.
Not true at all. CG can be used to great effect. The thing about CGI is when it's done right you don't notice it all.
@@Skrenja editing can be a factor?
In 2019 CGI is the way to go let’s face it.
Oversaturation of CGI only breaks the immersion. I prefer CGI when it's needed. Save some time for rendering.
I love practical effects but all these CGI haters have no idea what they're talking about. There are times when CGI can be more believable than practical effects. There are countless examples of CGI so good that you can't even notice it.
CGI is best blended with practical. Combination of these two and lighting can hide even the bad rendering.
I disagree. I think CGI looks horrible 98% of the time. Even when it's well done in movies like Avatar, it still looks like you're watching a cartoon in my opinion(just a good one). CGI has killed modern movie-making. You said it yourself that models look more real than CGI can ever look........so that tells you all you need to know. Shooting things "in camera" is always better. But nowadays, that just doesn't happen.
BOO TO CGI!!!!!
Ich bin das ich schreibe diese SMS Darcho Jandreoski ich bin wirklich da im Weltraum mit Weltraum Raumschiff mit 4 Turbinen die Skizze skizziere ich morgen
---( )-----/ Cyborg Kampfroboter Roboter Arm ich schraube die zusammen nämlich in der Fabrik
I fucking hate CGI when it comes to real Animals ore it is overused like in the new Star Wars ore other Films.
Alien was so boring. AVP2 is the best Alien film. Anyone that disagrees needs to EDUCATE themselves on cinema.
THIS is filmmaking. James Cameron is not even worthy to gargle Ridley Scott's urine.