Get 50% off your first order of CookUnity meals - go to cookunity.com/corridorcrew and use my code CORRIDORCREW50 at checkout to try them out for yourself! Thanks to CookUnity for sponsoring this video!
*Stop saying "practical."* Every time someone says _practical effects,_ JJ Abrams gets director points towards a future horrid remake of a beloved classic.
This segue was by far the best thing I've ever seen in a long while, best promo video, funny, engaging, I can't even buy the thing but was so nice! Back to the episode now...
The shot where the girl touches the tall Barbie, was her touching a large scale model of the legs and lower torso (about 18 ft tall) and we did a split comp shot for the Margot piece!
The "too salty" schtick was inspired! I'm calling it now. At some point we will see a video that starts with Sam raising a finger, inhaling, then cuts strait to the "too salty" card, and cuts back and forth between Sam and the card as he gets just a few syllables in each time.
It's so refreshing to actually hear Niko express the fact that they have to be careful with what they say rather than them just pretending lol good stuff 💯
If Corridor can keep up with the level of artistic directing just as with their sponsor segment on this episode, I'd never skip a sponsor segment ever again.
The nod to Twin Peaks episode 8 was great. I remember going out of the theater after Oppenheimer thinking about that exact episode, and how it had felt so much more impactful than the one from the movie.
this is the worst take of all time. what you saw in twin peaks was a completely different event from what was in oppenheimer. the trinity test is vastly different from the actual hiroshima bombings that you saw in twin peaks and youre tooo slow to realize that even lol
@@aka_15 Made me check - Twin Peaks is the Trinity Test as well, the location and date are explicitly written on the screen. Besides that, I cannot say how accurate either one is, but the point still stands that one is extremely impactful while the other looks like a weirdly framed close up of a fireball.
It looks incredible however it doesn't look like a nuke, there is no mush room cloud. I was a bit underwhelmed how Christopher Nolan done it, not going to lie but I get his motive, he done it small but with the mushroom cloud too and that was effective with close up shots he done, if he made a huge explosion with a massive shockwave and mushroom cloud too it would of being possible but the dangers are there when filming it and im sure he wanted to avoid that especially when you could only do that once.
I want to see the salty sam series where he just honestly rips stuff apart. Let it fly! Let him say his piece! It doesn't need to be all hype, all the time.
Fr, honestly can’t wait to see it in black and white too considering they completely re-rendered the scenes instead of just slinging a mono-filter on it
@@dionsmith2405i wonder what kind of difference that makes... Probably they had to adjust the different renderingpasses for visibility of some colours or so
There were a lot of cool scenes in the movie but the dust after his firebreath was so underwhelming / nonexistant that it completely took me out of the movie.
The nuke in Twin Peaks: The Return is especially impactful because so many effects in that series are simple and/or janky (intentionally so). Then we’re shown this massive, slow, beautifully crafted nuclear explosion that feels frightening.
That scene is impactful in large part due to the score. The visuals are slow and deliberate while the music is frantic and terrifying, the high pitched strings emulating the screams of thousands rapidly silenced. Sound design can transform scenes in insane ways.
I was WAY too swept up in the drama and context, I think 90% of audiences were. It’s an artistic representation of a nuke, and that was more than enough for me. Maybe I’ll be less impressed on a second viewing, after seeing this
Guys, the sponsored segment of Cook Unity was excellenty executed. When you blend it in with the current video theme, it makes it much more worth watching.
At 8:38 you can clearly see a giant blue light is turned on from the left of the shot. Also the car should NOT be illuminated as it's facing the opposite to the explosion. The car's side facing us should be darker
Yes, in many shots preceding the explosion we can see several giant flood lights set up everywhere in the area, some of which were blue. They were testing it in the middle of a desert at midnight you need the lights.
@@MayankKumar-ch8pq I dunno, you may be right... but these things can be done in other ways I'm sure. I for one am an absolute EXPERT at eating my dessert without the aide of flood lights, even at midnight!
Oh wow! I’ve actually been trying to re-find that clip at 6:31 for years now, but could never put in the right search terms XD it’s not just a TNT detonation, it was a bunch of UXO (unexploded ordnance) being disposed of sometime in the early 2000’s from memory. Thats why you can hear the distinctive sound of something ricocheting off the ground or something shortly afterwards. At least if I’m remembering correctly :p
8:21 Even tho I agree with everything you've said, this light is coming from a Thunderstorm. There were lightnings because of a storm occurring at the time. In the movie it's even a point of conflict (well, more like a build-up of tension but yeah) the fact that the experiment could be interrupted by the storm
@@gurratell7326 Well not just because, I think even though mushroom clouds do happen in smaller non-nuclear explosions you can't really replicate the same visual a viewer would have (from real far) without using an enormous amount of explosives that would probably be illegal even for movie companies, so CGI is the only way. I remember some of Mythbusters's top explosions and even those didn't look nuclear. Actually RED SIDE's "EXPLOSIONS Size Comparison" video has good ones done in UE5.
@@mf-- yes that is indeed the joke. "fixing" implies Oppenheimer was going for literal realism with the explosion. Which it clearly isn't, it's an artistic representation of the experience of those watching the triniry test. My comment is to compare that to wanting a realistic version of a Proto-Expressionist painting. Thank you for visiting the joke explainers
12:43 you can also tell this car is cg because those tires are leaving an absolutely pristine road behind. No rubber from the slide being left on the road
It’s soooooooo much better than the Oppenheimer one. That explosion was unforgivably trash for a movie that was basically entirely about the explosion. Nolan really shit down his own legs with that ‘no cgi’ nonsense
@@pearce05 Relatively speaking, he is far better than most, I get what you're saying, but the NBA aren't going to hire the 5'6" 105lbs man in place of Shaq
I will admit, as good as Oppenheimer is, I was a little underwhelmed by the nuke scene, and they did a good job helping me understand why it doesn't feel as epic and awe-inspiring as it was built up to be
Same. I waited a year for that and was quite let down. It just looked like a big gas explosion. It would have been fun as hell to be on the team that was trying to simulate the nuke.
That was my only disappointment with the film. I even like the effects Wren said looked flat because of the stylistic choices. But man did that comp scene look bad, it looked like it wasn't meant to be a comp scene even but got changed last minute. Then that "shockwave" looked like a standard fan made it.
Yeah, it was really the only part of the movie I cared about and it had great tension and build up and then I was like "that's it?" It's literally the only thing I can here for.
@@dash4800 tbf if you went to see a 3 hour movie about a person and the only thing you cared about was the explosion that we've had real footage of since the 40's, kind of on you.
@@billbill6094 I wanted to see a movie about the creation of the bomb and a huge part of that is actually seeing it go off. Nobody wanted to see a movie about a guy monotonely sitting in hearings and conference rooms.
14:55 we had that issue on a shoot. Our screens weren't that great so we ended up shooting at double the framerate and the screen would alternate frames between the CGI background and a greenscreen. In post we used the frames from the greenscreen to create a matte for the frames with the CGI background. Effectively removing the background but keeping the actors with the proper lighting and then we comped in the CGI background
Oh dang, that's a clever approach. I knew there were modes that put green just where a tracked camera is looking, but alternating frames lets you skip the realtime tracking too. I do wonder if the effective change in shutter angle has a noticeable effect on motion blur, though
I think the best thing LED screens do for movies is give proper lighting and if it's not perfect they give the ability to have real world references that are.
True that, its a great tool for lighting and The Mandalorian comes to mind: Even in scenes with replaced backgrounds, his helmet always had accurate reflections (because they were real!)
Can I just say that was the best sponsored segment in a YT video I have ever seen. Granted, I usually skip through these, but this one was so well done with such high production values that I couldn't look away.
Really enjoyed the analysis of the visual effects in these two vastly different films! Your insights into the authenticity of creating the miniatures for Barbie even though they end up being recreated digitally is spot-on. Respectful and well-thought discussion as usual!
The Stand - Explosion in the last scene !!! It has quite frankly AAA VFX for a tv show, the explosion is really sweet and there's some funny deaths right before :)
Darren Aronofsky 's "The Fountain " has underrated practical special effects as well. The movie itself was overlooked due to it's confusing narrative but the visuals, and performances are mind blowing.
Right on! Love The Fountain and the effects are beautiful. I'd say the same about Terrence Malek's "Tree of Life" - fairly obscure movie but one of my favourites and the practical effects they use to make cosmic events are gorgeous.
Get Bill Pope on the couch to discuss the miniatures, puppetry and VFX of Team America. They you could possibly talk about the Matrix, Spiderman, Jungle Book, etc.... 😁
Yes, the same Nolan who can get a thousand extras on the streets of Gotham and make it feel like a very badly choreographed and absolutely obviously fake fight. P.S. I love Nolan's movies. But those poorly done moments especially stand out when pretty much everything else is done so masterfully. Same with the explosion. The movie was still one of the best cinematic experiences for me, but those visuals just pulled me out of the movie.
They really should have just used the nuclear test footage itself.. that would have been the best option. Also educational, and people will be shocked and talking about it later; "Oh was that a real nuclear explosion oooh blabla"
Yeah im not a fan of the blind Nolan praise. I loved Nolan’s movies growing up but I’ve found some significant flaws in recent movies. Not even small ones, in interstellar, i was so put off and annoyed by the consistent poking that when the credits rolled, i thought, wow, im kind of annoyed. I shouldn’t feel annoyed after finishing this revered movie. And by “poking” i mean little things (and some big ones) CN did throughout the movie that made viewers annoyed/angry on behalf of the character or the situation. There’s a level of suspense and dramatic irony which is useful for engaging viewers. Too much, and it becomes annoying. Another major gripe is how he writes women, especially very important female characters. His ego bothers me a bit because its clear all this praise has gotten to him and he really takes himself very seriously, when any good artist should be able to acknowledge things they can improve on instead of assuming they are the best at everything. Also at many points his need to have A list celebrities, takes away from the illusion. I dont want to get into it too much maybe ill make my own video cuz I’ve been thinking about this for a while 😅
For me, it wasn't the look of the explosion that sold me in that scene, it was the cinematography and acting that really hit it home for me. Yeah I wish the nuke was a little more mushroom-cloudy and realistic to an actual nuke, but in the end, that scene is still my favorite for being the gut punch that it is. You can really see it in Cillian Murphy's face when he realizes what force of death and destruction he has created.
I think the movie explosion was closer to what Trinity looked like than they gave it credit for. Trinity was a relatively small nuke and didn't have a very pronounced mushroom cloud.
@@pnwmeditationsNope. Just look up the real Trinity explosion footage on UA-cam and it gives relatively enough visible mushroom cloud like the 1 kiloton TNT in this video
Trinity was a 25 kt nuke, which is small for a nuclear explosion, but it’s 25 times bigger than the one in the example that they showed. The Oppenheimer explosion looks like a gas bomb went off, not like a nuke. They weren’t wrong about anything.
The problem of shooting a practical explosion for the atomic bomb test in 'Oppenheimer' is that they had to shoot it in IMAX, which limits filmspeed and exposure levels, they should have used a cloud tank, like the shots in 'The Beginning or The End' (1947), which hold up pretty well and could have been further improved with modern lighting and technology. Also, a little correction about the 'Dawn of Man' shots from '2001: A Space Odyssey"; it used Front-Projection (which you have covered in your video about the 'IntroVision' process) which allows for a brighter in-camera image and larger projection field.
I immediately skipped the ad, but after reading comments about it I had to go back and watch it and I agree. 100% perfectly executed and integrated.👏 The rest of the video was pretty great too.
"It's not easy wrangling data, but there's no life like it. When you ride into town and you haven't lost a single datum, it's the best feeling in the world."
I’m not sure where the guys heard that people were claiming Barbie was done without VFX. Greta Gerwig talked about the older more practical techniques the used but no one has said they didn’t use VFX. That was Nolan and Oppenheimer.
My grandfather was at a nuclear test sight and said that even with his head down and arms covering his eyes the explosion was so bright he could see through his arm like an x-ray
The greatest trick Nolan ever pulled was getting butts in seats by promising, "Practical effects disciple makes movie about nuke guy. We had to dust off an esoteric recording format just to fully capture his vision. See it on the biggest screen you can," only to produce a three-hour talking movie with an underwhelming explosion. But by the time you realize you've been had, you've seen enough to know you're watching a legit masterpiece of cinema, and you leave the theater in awe anyway.
I remember a few people talking about how it was kind of weak when the movie first came out, but honestly it was fucking TERRIBLE and I think people just wanted to overlook it because the rest of the movie is so great
I was underwhelmed by the whole movie. Great cast and cinematography, but it's soooo pretentious and bland. "Fat Man and Little Boy" with Paul Newman, John Cusack and Dwight Schultz is a better movie.
Very minor thing; ISTR 2001 used front projection for the Dawn of Man scene, not rear projection. They used a very reflective screen, the projected images were too dark to show on the actor.
When you are talking about the nuclear explosion and the atmospheric impact, it reminded me of the Jericho missile test in Iron Man! They killed the vfx with regards to atmospheric impact
For the record I humbly admit I usually skip over the sponsor ad rolls BUT the ad in this episode is top notch! I always appreciate and look out for people that put extra creative energy into making ads their own form of entertainment “ 😂👍🏾❤️
100% felt as salty as Sam when I saw the explosion in the Dolby theater. The scene didn’t bring the feeling of the impact for me like you get seeing the real test footage.
Agree. Nolan could have just used the real footage and it would have been perfect. I still can't believe he thought that shot of that pathetic semitruck-sized gasoline explosion was worth putting into an otherwise masterpiece of a movie.
I thought it would be the climax of the movie. Was anticipating it so hard. The silence and everything was great only the explosion was underwhelming. I remember thinking "ok any second now" and "thats it?"
@@haridaspalleeri6765 cant even count how many people I have had to point this out to. But for other reasons. "why did they not show the bombs in Japan"
I definitely agree on the Nuke thing. Like, the real video of that nuke exists, and the movie looks like just a big explosion. they almost should not have actually shown us the explosion. It was just so ridiculously small for what it was supposed to be portraying.
@@redadamearth One of the greatest depictions of fission detonation scale. Oppenheimer fell flat on it's face to depict how extremely terrifying trinity test was to everyone.
@@mezzb idk if I'd say it's dogma, Chris has used CG before and has in nearly all his films, even in other movies when making a nuclear explosion. I think if anything it was poor planning on that part. I mean even the comp shot looks as if it wasn't intended to be one, remove the nuke stitched in the background and it looks powerful. I'm glad that a 3 hour movie on the life of the most important physicist of all time was given enough respect not to risk the story for wonky CG. I genuinely think that's where he was going with it, and I can understand why a 2 minute scene that precedes an hour more of story seems like a risk to involve CG. But with so much budget saved I do think he could've produced something that looked more respectable than a Marvel flick.
Also at worst its a genuinely irresponsible portrayal of one of the worst things we've ever created, so having a gigantic budget and not being able to create the sense of sheer awe and horror that youtubers are able to in their backyards ... dad what are you doing??
@@darthmalicos9973Meanwhile, Corridor here puts the actual footage from the Trinity test as reference footage. They’re not wrong. A gas explosion using perspective angles can’t be sold as well as archival footage.
@@darthmalicos9973 Ok? But Nolan failed miserably at that lol. I remember them hyping it up so much, having to sit through the most boring 3 hours of my life, and then being utterly disappointed when seeing the actual nuke go off. They would've been better off not even showing it and just rely on lighting and fake pressure waves along with the reaction from the actors.
I think it was Tom Scott who had a fantastic breakdown of the difference between a gasoline and a TNT explosion, and I've developed a good eye for it ever since. Just like you, the nuke in Oppenheimer stood out to me for being all gasoline. The sound design sells it, though - being punched in the chest in IMAX was pretty fun.
I worked for the vendor that did the car chase in Barbie. Only the blue car is CG (and parts of the divider it jumps over), but it is full CG in all but 2 or three shots. It had to be replaced because they shot the scenes with a '23 gasoline model and GM wanted a '24 EV in the movie.
When I saw the bomb, i was underwhelmed tbh. It didn't feel like a nuke. It just felt like a gas station caught fire. There are certainly ways to capture the feeling of a nuke in CG without making it look MCU-esque. If Avatar 2 can create an entirely CG movie, creating a convincing nuclear explosion seems almost trivial in comparison (not discounting the work required to do it practically, but it'd certainly be a lot easier and look better in CG).
Surprised they didn't drop ink in a tank for the nuclear explosion like the did in "The Day After" The upside down mushroom cloud is full of texture goodness
I remember feeling so underwhelmed in the theater and also immediately thinking of the twin peaks nuke and feeling a bit angry at nolan "no cgi" posturing.
The explosion actually looks pretty accurate though. Nolan said he wanted to recreate the actual explosion of Trinity that we have footage of, and the movie did a pretty good job at it. People were probably just expecting something bigger like the Bikini Atoll footage we have which isn't really comparable to Trinity.
@@SquadPoopy Definitely not anywhere close to the orignal footage of the trinity test. Christopher Nolan had really missed the mark by avoiding CGI for this one part of the movie that really should have had it
The sell this episode for the corridordigital site went pretty hard ngl, almost convinced me hahah. The boss music right at the end as Sam struggles to contain himself.
I am grateful for an unbiased opinions of an actual professionals, who are not afraid to point out shortcomings in Nolan movies. Truly refreshing, I thought I was going insane. 😊
I haven't seen the movie, but yeah, watching the footage from it here, that's bad... like really bad. What exactly were they thinking with this? As they said, the blast looks nothing like an actual explosion, the lighting on the actors lying on the ground is so off, it's just, ugh. That right there removes any of the implications and weight of what that moment really represents in reality and that actually kind of pisses me off.
@@13374me its supposed to be the explosion from oppies perspective. Remember almost the whole coloured movie is HIS past. Its supposed to be representative of the destruction he remembers and how he remembers it as. It has exactly the weight it needs, because it's all in his head anyway because it's a look into his past from his perspective and he's not exactly the most reliable narrator. He observes the explosion as such, because who cares what it looked like, when his thought process is exclusively focused on the fact that he immediately knows what he has done.
@@thechaoticmultistan9141 So Oppenheimer saw it as a piddly little gas explosion? I feel like that's directly antithetical to his feelings on it, super weird take.
Just to add a correction, Stanley Kubrick used Front Projection (not Rear Projection) with large format stills taken from a 2nd Unit Crew who visited Africa to get the background plates. Check Cinefex issue 85 for Don Shay’s article about the making of the movie.
The nuke scene should have just been the slow mo stuff from the beginning of the film. Then, just a mushroom cloud from a smaller traditional explosion. It would make sense too bc a nuke is too bright to see.
OK that was by far the best sponsored video segment yet. It's about time- you guys are so creative!! I hope more companies let you experiment like that!!!
13:30 - That's actually insane they clocked the blue car in Barbie as being CGI. That was not at ALL obvious in the movie, and I'd say 99% of people would have thought it was real too. So basically, REALLY well done CGI.
I think the last couple of videos have been a bit to "zoomer edited" with fast zoom ins, sound effects to show that they are surprised and so on. Not enough to make me dislike the video but it makes it feel a bit artificial and unauthentic.
I just rewatched Valerian and the city of a thousand planets. Not the best cgi in the world but i feel like there may be some shots worth checking out i especially enjoy the intro sequence of the construction of the spacestation.
Honestly, the fact that the nuke scene was underwhelming shows that VFX is still an important part of filmmaking. It shows that while doing all visual effects is not a good thing, going all practical is not necessarily a good thing either. VFX should be used as a tool to *help* with improving shots. Not being used to completely create the scene you want, but to add details and effects to elevate your scene.
Just an hour ago I returned from the cinema after watching Oppenheimer and may I say it was completely different from everything I have ever seen. No other movie has been so efficient at keeping me in suspense the whole time.
Thank you!! They keep saying rear projection. I think they made the same mistake for Close Encounters which also used front projection for the hill top car scene.
Genuinely impressed how well they managed to capture that feel. I never owned barbies, since i grew up in that exact "eugh barbies are for gorls >:P" era (im not like that anymore) but i remember watching how much my sisters loved playing with them.
I was telling friends about oppenhiemer this movie does not need to be seen in the theater for the visuals... But maybe for the intensity of the audio design.... But mostly its a 3 hour historical drama so just wait to watch at home.
Finally someone said it. The Creator had a much better nuclear explosion than Oppenheimer. (Why haven't Corridor Crew covered The Creator, outside of the trailer controversy, shot on a $4000 camera with amazing ILM visual effects.)
Absolutely agreed on Oppenheimer's Bomb scene. I feel that was the most underwhelming scene in the movie. People were expecting to see a mushroom cloud and there wasn't any.
Love the content you all keep putting out! Keep up the good work! Also, I was just watching "Ghost Rider" (2007) and was taken back by some of the effects (good and bad). I couldn't find a video of you covering it, and I think it would be a great movie to do a deep dive into. Again, love your guy's content!
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Get 50% off your first order of CookUnity meals - go to cookunity.com/corridorcrew and use my code CORRIDORCREW50 at checkout to try them out for yourself! Thanks to CookUnity for sponsoring this video!
*Stop saying "practical."* Every time someone says _practical effects,_ JJ Abrams gets director points towards a future horrid remake of a beloved classic.
YYEAAAAHH CookUnity!! Been with them for months, excellent meal plan. Super delicious. :)
This segue was by far the best thing I've ever seen in a long while, best promo video, funny, engaging, I can't even buy the thing but was so nice! Back to the episode now...
@@c64cosmin Yeah I liked it too- the only other Sponsored Segment I watch is in Ze Frank's videos
8:21 lol
Wren brings that one year old lab/retriever vibe and Sam brings that 15 year old house cat vibe 😂
Niko is the pet owner that just says “you know how animals are.”
Sam is Garfield and Wren is Odie.
They’re all the animals from Homeward Bound.
Hahaha
Wren is nine feet tall
The shot where the girl touches the tall Barbie, was her touching a large scale model of the legs and lower torso (about 18 ft tall) and we did a split comp shot for the Margot piece!
What did you do in the movie?
Thanks. And the CGI Barbie is the POV shot up against the sun, right?
I thought it was a great movie personally. Seen it three times.
@@LuisSierra42 I was one of the onset VFX Data Wranglers!
@@sfurules I’m glad you enjoyed it! It was a tonne of fun to work on!!
The "too salty" schtick was inspired!
I'm calling it now. At some point we will see a video that starts with Sam raising a finger, inhaling, then cuts strait to the "too salty" card, and cuts back and forth between Sam and the card as he gets just a few syllables in each time.
i was gonna say the same thing... this is not funny dude
Would be super cringe if they keep a rant behind a paywall lol
April's fool joke maybe?
It's so refreshing to actually hear Niko express the fact that they have to be careful with what they say rather than them just pretending lol good stuff 💯
Can't wait for them to start just uploading 2 minute previews for the episode (which is of course exclusive to the website)
If Corridor can keep up with the level of artistic directing just as with their sponsor segment on this episode, I'd never skip a sponsor segment ever again.
It was awesome, first one that caught my eye and leave it all. Cool ad!
Exactly. especially if it was tied in to a movie they'd be discussing.
The nod to Twin Peaks episode 8 was great. I remember going out of the theater after Oppenheimer thinking about that exact episode, and how it had felt so much more impactful than the one from the movie.
Agreed. It’s pretty horrifying. In a good way.
this is the worst take of all time. what you saw in twin peaks was a completely different event from what was in oppenheimer. the trinity test is vastly different from the actual hiroshima bombings that you saw in twin peaks and youre tooo slow to realize that even lol
this is the worst take of all time . twin peaks is hiroshima , this is the trinity test lol you’re slow
and the trinity test in the film is completely accurate to the actual trinity test just look at footages and compare , you can’t be this slow 💀
@@aka_15 Made me check - Twin Peaks is the Trinity Test as well, the location and date are explicitly written on the screen. Besides that, I cannot say how accurate either one is, but the point still stands that one is extremely impactful while the other looks like a weirdly framed close up of a fireball.
I love how the editor is giving us some insight into Sam's descent into madness. 👨🍳😘
Yes!
Sam's descent into saltiness.
Corridor crew never fails to rip my limb apart one by one as I scream in excrutiating pain and agony meanwhile my consciousness slowly fades away
Are you okay man?
Relatable
Very creative
Feel ya man
felt
the collision of shock waves from the TnT explosion looked incredible 🤯
It reminds me of the Mythbusters blowing up the cement truck. Just sheer raw power you can feel through the tv
"You see, I'm a guy of simple taste. I enjoy dynamite, and gunpowder, and gasoline! And you know the thing they have in common? They're cheap."
It looks incredible however it doesn't look like a nuke, there is no mush room cloud. I was a bit underwhelmed how Christopher Nolan done it, not going to lie but I get his motive, he done it small but with the mushroom cloud too and that was effective with close up shots he done, if he made a huge explosion with a massive shockwave and mushroom cloud too it would of being possible but the dangers are there when filming it and im sure he wanted to avoid that especially when you could only do that once.
I want to see the salty sam series where he just honestly rips stuff apart. Let it fly! Let him say his piece! It doesn't need to be all hype, all the time.
i don't know who was doing the editing of this episode, but they were ON POINT. the little insert made me laugh so much! Great content, great editing!
Godzilla -1.0 has one of the best nuclear explosions in any movie I've seen (I don't know how accurate it is). It looks so destructive and terrifying.
I'd recommend going to atomcenteral on youtube and looking at all the real footage of fission weapon detonation.
fr! I saw that one in theaters and im glad i saw it in imax instead of oppenheimer in imax. It was so much better!
Fr, honestly can’t wait to see it in black and white too considering they completely re-rendered the scenes instead of just slinging a mono-filter on it
@@dionsmith2405i wonder what kind of difference that makes... Probably they had to adjust the different renderingpasses for visibility of some colours or so
There were a lot of cool scenes in the movie but the dust after his firebreath was so underwhelming / nonexistant that it completely took me out of the movie.
The nuke in Twin Peaks: The Return is especially impactful because so many effects in that series are simple and/or janky (intentionally so). Then we’re shown this massive, slow, beautifully crafted nuclear explosion that feels frightening.
You ever watch HBO's Carnivále? There's a vision of the Trinity explosion and plays a key moment in the series.
and that music bro
That scene is impactful in large part due to the score. The visuals are slow and deliberate while the music is frantic and terrifying, the high pitched strings emulating the screams of thousands rapidly silenced. Sound design can transform scenes in insane ways.
100% agree on the bomb scene. The moment I saw it in theatre, it broke all the immersion, and I was like, "Yeah, that's just a gasoline explosion "
And it frustrates me because of how they replicated the slow motion shot in the beginning
I was WAY too swept up in the drama and context, I think 90% of audiences were. It’s an artistic representation of a nuke, and that was more than enough for me. Maybe I’ll be less impressed on a second viewing, after seeing this
before i saw the movie, i thought they would use a BLEVE explosion, because those can look similar. But no, they decided to blow up gasoline.....
100%. shit was totally wack and a waste of my ticket cost
@@dontyouworryaboutit_Its your mistake if you went to a 3 hour movie just to see an explosion 10 seconds long ☠️
Guys, the sponsored segment of Cook Unity was excellenty executed. When you blend it in with the current video theme, it makes it much more worth watching.
1:56 This is a Filmento level sponsorship segment. A brilliant and smart script! Masterclass.
"Salty Sam" is too funny! 😄
And they use the soundtrack from the acid trip sequence in 2001:A Space odyssey which makes it even better
not!
He getting grumpy in his old age
That final shot was inspired.
At 8:38 you can clearly see a giant blue light is turned on from the left of the shot. Also the car should NOT be illuminated as it's facing the opposite to the explosion. The car's side facing us should be darker
Yes, in many shots preceding the explosion we can see several giant flood lights set up everywhere in the area, some of which were blue. They were testing it in the middle of a desert at midnight you need the lights.
@@MayankKumar-ch8pq I dunno, you may be right... but these things can be done in other ways I'm sure. I for one am an absolute EXPERT at eating my dessert without the aide of flood lights, even at midnight!
the thing is that yeah you notice that after rewatching those 3 seconds in slowmo 14 times but in the actual movie it does not matter AT ALL
I learned so much about what explosions actually look like from Mythbusters. Glad to see them on your show.
Oh wow! I’ve actually been trying to re-find that clip at 6:31 for years now, but could never put in the right search terms XD it’s not just a TNT detonation, it was a bunch of UXO (unexploded ordnance) being disposed of sometime in the early 2000’s from memory. Thats why you can hear the distinctive sound of something ricocheting off the ground or something shortly afterwards. At least if I’m remembering correctly :p
8:21 Even tho I agree with everything you've said, this light is coming from a Thunderstorm. There were lightnings because of a storm occurring at the time. In the movie it's even a point of conflict (well, more like a build-up of tension but yeah) the fact that the experiment could be interrupted by the storm
You guys should do a “fixing Oppenheimer’s explosion scene video!!!” I would truly enjoy that.
"You guys should do a video fixing the scream by Edvard Munch where you make it look more realistic"
Yeah and do it with CGI, just because ;)
@@gurratell7326 Well not just because, I think even though mushroom clouds do happen in smaller non-nuclear explosions you can't really replicate the same visual a viewer would have (from real far) without using an enormous amount of explosives that would probably be illegal even for movie companies, so CGI is the only way. I remember some of Mythbusters's top explosions and even those didn't look nuclear.
Actually RED SIDE's "EXPLOSIONS Size Comparison" video has good ones done in UE5.
@@conorknoxy if Oppenheimer's style is realism, it has much to improve on
@@mf-- yes that is indeed the joke. "fixing" implies Oppenheimer was going for literal realism with the explosion. Which it clearly isn't, it's an artistic representation of the experience of those watching the triniry test. My comment is to compare that to wanting a realistic version of a Proto-Expressionist painting. Thank you for visiting the joke explainers
12:43 you can also tell this car is cg because those tires are leaving an absolutely pristine road behind. No rubber from the slide being left on the road
Especially when they show the next scene and the skid marks on the pavement from previous takes.
And the SUV is way too shiny heh
Also the fact that the AWD function of the actual car wouldn't give that kind of slip angle
@@yano5865 Also, it went sideways way too quickly for such a big and heavy car. Not even pro drift cars transition so quickly.
The twin peaks explosion scene deserved a little more screen time and a chat because it's SO much more threatening/unnerving
This 👍. Such a wild scene
It got its own episode a while back.
They actually talked about how great it is in another video. I think that's why they only showed it briefly here.
It’s soooooooo much better than the Oppenheimer one. That explosion was unforgivably trash for a movie that was basically entirely about the explosion. Nolan really shit down his own legs with that ‘no cgi’ nonsense
You ever watch HBO's Carnivále? There's a vision of the Trinity explosion and plays a key moment in the series.
So grateful for Sam being the one guy on youtube to call out the effects on this movie.
It's the equivelant of a 5'6" 105lbs man calling Shaquille O'neal bad.
@@bobross9370 You don't have to be tall to recognize that Shaq was a terrible free throw shooter
@@pearce05 Relatively speaking, he is far better than most, I get what you're saying, but the NBA aren't going to hire the 5'6" 105lbs man in place of Shaq
@@bobross9370your comparisons are off ad they sound lame.
I will admit, as good as Oppenheimer is, I was a little underwhelmed by the nuke scene, and they did a good job helping me understand why it doesn't feel as epic and awe-inspiring as it was built up to be
Same. I waited a year for that and was quite let down. It just looked like a big gas explosion. It would have been fun as hell to be on the team that was trying to simulate the nuke.
That was my only disappointment with the film. I even like the effects Wren said looked flat because of the stylistic choices. But man did that comp scene look bad, it looked like it wasn't meant to be a comp scene even but got changed last minute. Then that "shockwave" looked like a standard fan made it.
Yeah, it was really the only part of the movie I cared about and it had great tension and build up and then I was like "that's it?" It's literally the only thing I can here for.
@@dash4800 tbf if you went to see a 3 hour movie about a person and the only thing you cared about was the explosion that we've had real footage of since the 40's, kind of on you.
@@billbill6094 I wanted to see a movie about the creation of the bomb and a huge part of that is actually seeing it go off. Nobody wanted to see a movie about a guy monotonely sitting in hearings and conference rooms.
14:55 we had that issue on a shoot. Our screens weren't that great so we ended up shooting at double the framerate and the screen would alternate frames between the CGI background and a greenscreen. In post we used the frames from the greenscreen to create a matte for the frames with the CGI background. Effectively removing the background but keeping the actors with the proper lighting and then we comped in the CGI background
haha genious
Oh dang, that's a clever approach. I knew there were modes that put green just where a tracked camera is looking, but alternating frames lets you skip the realtime tracking too. I do wonder if the effective change in shutter angle has a noticeable effect on motion blur, though
I think the best thing LED screens do for movies is give proper lighting and if it's not perfect they give the ability to have real world references that are.
True that, its a great tool for lighting and The Mandalorian comes to mind: Even in scenes with replaced backgrounds, his helmet always had accurate reflections (because they were real!)
Can I just say that was the best sponsored segment in a YT video I have ever seen. Granted, I usually skip through these, but this one was so well done with such high production values that I couldn't look away.
Really enjoyed the analysis of the visual effects in these two vastly different films! Your insights into the authenticity of creating the miniatures for Barbie even though they end up being recreated digitally is spot-on. Respectful and well-thought discussion as usual!
The Stand - Explosion in the last scene !!! It has quite frankly AAA VFX for a tv show, the explosion is really sweet and there's some funny deaths right before :)
Salty Sam is a keeper. More please.
I feel it’s less that Sam is salty… it’s more like too many people are wearing rose tinted glasses. He’s just being honest and stating facts.
Agreed@@piratebtf9506 , and look forward to more.
Darren Aronofsky 's "The Fountain " has underrated practical special effects as well. The movie itself was overlooked due to it's confusing narrative but the visuals, and performances are mind blowing.
Right on! Love The Fountain and the effects are beautiful. I'd say the same about Terrence Malek's "Tree of Life" - fairly obscure movie but one of my favourites and the practical effects they use to make cosmic events are gorgeous.
I was thinking of that film too when they were talking about the compositing for Oppenheimer!
Get Bill Pope on the couch to discuss the miniatures, puppetry and VFX of Team America. They you could possibly talk about the Matrix, Spiderman, Jungle Book, etc.... 😁
You’re welcome for that shot @ 13:11 😉
Love to see it!
3:57 exactly. I felt the exact same way. But everyone I told this to was like, dude it's Nolan. What are you saying!!!
Yes, the same Nolan who can get a thousand extras on the streets of Gotham and make it feel like a very badly choreographed and absolutely obviously fake fight.
P.S. I love Nolan's movies. But those poorly done moments especially stand out when pretty much everything else is done so masterfully. Same with the explosion. The movie was still one of the best cinematic experiences for me, but those visuals just pulled me out of the movie.
Agreed!! So underwhelming
They really should have just used the nuclear test footage itself.. that would have been the best option. Also educational, and people will be shocked and talking about it later; "Oh was that a real nuclear explosion oooh blabla"
Yeah im not a fan of the blind Nolan praise. I loved Nolan’s movies growing up but I’ve found some significant flaws in recent movies. Not even small ones, in interstellar, i was so put off and annoyed by the consistent poking that when the credits rolled, i thought, wow, im kind of annoyed. I shouldn’t feel annoyed after finishing this revered movie. And by “poking” i mean little things (and some big ones) CN did throughout the movie that made viewers annoyed/angry on behalf of the character or the situation. There’s a level of suspense and dramatic irony which is useful for engaging viewers. Too much, and it becomes annoying. Another major gripe is how he writes women, especially very important female characters. His ego bothers me a bit because its clear all this praise has gotten to him and he really takes himself very seriously, when any good artist should be able to acknowledge things they can improve on instead of assuming they are the best at everything. Also at many points his need to have A list celebrities, takes away from the illusion. I dont want to get into it too much maybe ill make my own video cuz I’ve been thinking about this for a while 😅
For me, it wasn't the look of the explosion that sold me in that scene, it was the cinematography and acting that really hit it home for me. Yeah I wish the nuke was a little more mushroom-cloudy and realistic to an actual nuke, but in the end, that scene is still my favorite for being the gut punch that it is. You can really see it in Cillian Murphy's face when he realizes what force of death and destruction he has created.
I think the movie explosion was closer to what Trinity looked like than they gave it credit for. Trinity was a relatively small nuke and didn't have a very pronounced mushroom cloud.
@@pnwmeditationsNope. Just look up the real Trinity explosion footage on UA-cam and it gives relatively enough visible mushroom cloud like the 1 kiloton TNT in this video
@pnwmeditations it definitely doesn't look like Trinity. Just Google trinity and take a look for yourself.
Trinity was a 25 kt nuke, which is small for a nuclear explosion, but it’s 25 times bigger than the one in the example that they showed. The Oppenheimer explosion looks like a gas bomb went off, not like a nuke. They weren’t wrong about anything.
TKS captain obvious
The problem of shooting a practical explosion for the atomic bomb test in 'Oppenheimer' is that they had to shoot it in IMAX, which limits filmspeed and exposure levels, they should have used a cloud tank, like the shots in 'The Beginning or The End' (1947), which hold up pretty well and could have been further improved with modern lighting and technology.
Also, a little correction about the 'Dawn of Man' shots from '2001: A Space Odyssey"; it used Front-Projection (which you have covered in your video about the 'IntroVision' process) which allows for a brighter in-camera image and larger projection field.
The sponsored section of this video was actually amazing
It was a short film
That's how sponsor spots should be done. I watched all the way through it only because it was original and told a story. :P
right?! first time I watched it whole :D what a great job
I immediately skipped the ad, but after reading comments about it I had to go back and watch it and I agree. 100% perfectly executed and integrated.👏 The rest of the video was pretty great too.
The Oppenheimer nuke looks like a universal studios tour backlot pyrotechnic. Worst part of the whole movie honestly.
Well, it's accurate
you’re sped. it was an accurate representation of the trinity test. is the movie supposed to not be accurate?
@@aka_15 Yes. Make it good, it's a movie not a documentary
@@aka_15it looks nothing like trinity lol. Just Google actual Trinity footage
@@aka_15 DId you watch the video. The explosion was not at all accurate to a real nuclear explosion.
The sponsor segment was amazing. I skip through them. But I watched that one twice lol. Amazing Job!
Same, it was a masterpiece
If you skip through them, how did you get to watch this one and find out it was amazing? I call your bs.
The most haunting and cinematographic nuke shot I've ever seen is from David Lynch's Twin Peaks: The Return
You ever watch HBO's Carnivále? There's a vision of the Trinity explosion and plays a key moment in the series.
@@Earlierfour My guy, why are you like this?
Another good one (from the 80's & practical) is the end of Return Of The Living Dead from 1985.
Check it out...
I worked on Barbie as an Onset VFX Data Wrangler.. there was a tonne of 2D and 3D VFX work…
"It's not easy wrangling data, but there's no life like it. When you ride into town and you haven't lost a single datum, it's the best feeling in the world."
I’m not sure where the guys heard that people were claiming Barbie was done without VFX. Greta Gerwig talked about the older more practical techniques the used but no one has said they didn’t use VFX. That was Nolan and Oppenheimer.
Hey Nick! I was the lead tracker at framestore. good job, you got us all the right data. This movie was a breeze. Thanks a lot :)
what did you do
I was one of the Onset VFX Data Wranglers
My grandfather was at a nuclear test sight and said that even with his head down and arms covering his eyes the explosion was so bright he could see through his arm like an x-ray
The greatest trick Nolan ever pulled was getting butts in seats by promising, "Practical effects disciple makes movie about nuke guy. We had to dust off an esoteric recording format just to fully capture his vision. See it on the biggest screen you can," only to produce a three-hour talking movie with an underwhelming explosion. But by the time you realize you've been had, you've seen enough to know you're watching a legit masterpiece of cinema, and you leave the theater in awe anyway.
I'm glad I wasn't the only one who was underwhelmed by the nuclear blast in Oppenheimer.
Yeah, the scene leading up to it was better than the actual nuke explosion.
I remember a few people talking about how it was kind of weak when the movie first came out, but honestly it was fucking TERRIBLE and I think people just wanted to overlook it because the rest of the movie is so great
I was underwhelmed by the whole movie. Great cast and cinematography, but it's soooo pretentious and bland. "Fat Man and Little Boy" with Paul Newman, John Cusack and Dwight Schultz is a better movie.
@@Jigsaw407you’re not the only one who was underwhelmed by the movie. As a Nolan fan I found it really boring.
Very minor thing; ISTR 2001 used front projection for the Dawn of Man scene, not rear projection. They used a very reflective screen, the projected images were too dark to show on the actor.
Yes. That's also why the live animals' eyes glowed in some shots.
That’s correct, and the dark ape suits also reflected so little light that it wasn’t a problem.
They've gotten this wrong at least twice
I was coming down here to say this.
When you are talking about the nuclear explosion and the atmospheric impact, it reminded me of the Jericho missile test in Iron Man! They killed the vfx with regards to atmospheric impact
For the record I humbly admit I usually skip over the sponsor ad rolls BUT the ad in this episode is top notch! I always appreciate and look out for people that put extra creative energy into making ads their own form of entertainment “ 😂👍🏾❤️
I still think the nuke should've been done with CGI, as it stands right now, it just looks like a highspeed gasoline explosion. lol
100% felt as salty as Sam when I saw the explosion in the Dolby theater. The scene didn’t bring the feeling of the impact for me like you get seeing the real test footage.
Agree. Nolan could have just used the real footage and it would have been perfect. I still can't believe he thought that shot of that pathetic semitruck-sized gasoline explosion was worth putting into an otherwise masterpiece of a movie.
Ditto. Saw it in an IMAX, and was massively underwhelmed and honestly confused by that "nuclear" pop.
I thought it would be the climax of the movie. Was anticipating it so hard. The silence and everything was great only the explosion was underwhelming. I remember thinking "ok any second now" and "thats it?"
@@kattpuzn why would that be the climax? the movie wasnt titled "The Nuke" , its titled Oppenheimer.
@@haridaspalleeri6765 cant even count how many people I have had to point this out to. But for other reasons. "why did they not show the bombs in Japan"
I definitely agree on the Nuke thing. Like, the real video of that nuke exists, and the movie looks like just a big explosion. they almost should not have actually shown us the explosion. It was just so ridiculously small for what it was supposed to be portraying.
god i cant agree more with the nuke. it felt like a wet fart in comparison to actual trinity test footage
Now go watch what David Lynch did with the Trinity explosion - it's incredible.
@@redadamearth One of the greatest depictions of fission detonation scale. Oppenheimer fell flat on it's face to depict how extremely terrifying trinity test was to everyone.
I was thinking of the Twin Peaks scene too. I'm glad you showed it.
I saw Oppenheimer in IMAX on the biggest screen I could find and I have to agree with Sam about that explosion.
I watched the T2 explosion right after the Oppenheimer one and was satisfied.
I'm glad I'm not the only one that was underwhelmed by the explosion in the movie.
@@mezzb idk if I'd say it's dogma, Chris has used CG before and has in nearly all his films, even in other movies when making a nuclear explosion. I think if anything it was poor planning on that part. I mean even the comp shot looks as if it wasn't intended to be one, remove the nuke stitched in the background and it looks powerful.
I'm glad that a 3 hour movie on the life of the most important physicist of all time was given enough respect not to risk the story for wonky CG. I genuinely think that's where he was going with it, and I can understand why a 2 minute scene that precedes an hour more of story seems like a risk to involve CG. But with so much budget saved I do think he could've produced something that looked more respectable than a Marvel flick.
Also at worst its a genuinely irresponsible portrayal of one of the worst things we've ever created, so having a gigantic budget and not being able to create the sense of sheer awe and horror that youtubers are able to in their backyards ... dad what are you doing??
i'm glad they were honest with the explosion.
I knew that the explosion was unsatisfactory but I couldn't tell why. Now I know.
Ngl, I think they missed Nolan's point which was recreating the exact footage of the Trinity Test rather than the average nuke
@@darthmalicos9973Meanwhile, Corridor here puts the actual footage from the Trinity test as reference footage. They’re not wrong. A gas explosion using perspective angles can’t be sold as well as archival footage.
@@darthmalicos9973 Ok? But Nolan failed miserably at that lol. I remember them hyping it up so much, having to sit through the most boring 3 hours of my life, and then being utterly disappointed when seeing the actual nuke go off. They would've been better off not even showing it and just rely on lighting and fake pressure waves along with the reaction from the actors.
@@RealEllenDeGeneres if you think Oppenheimer was 3 hours of boring I just feel like you're probably a kid
I think it was Tom Scott who had a fantastic breakdown of the difference between a gasoline and a TNT explosion, and I've developed a good eye for it ever since. Just like you, the nuke in Oppenheimer stood out to me for being all gasoline. The sound design sells it, though - being punched in the chest in IMAX was pretty fun.
I worked for the vendor that did the car chase in Barbie. Only the blue car is CG (and parts of the divider it jumps over), but it is full CG in all but 2 or three shots. It had to be replaced because they shot the scenes with a '23 gasoline model and GM wanted a '24 EV in the movie.
How is the sponsor segment so good? They keep getting better and better, I love it
When I saw the bomb, i was underwhelmed tbh. It didn't feel like a nuke. It just felt like a gas station caught fire. There are certainly ways to capture the feeling of a nuke in CG without making it look MCU-esque. If Avatar 2 can create an entirely CG movie, creating a convincing nuclear explosion seems almost trivial in comparison (not discounting the work required to do it practically, but it'd certainly be a lot easier and look better in CG).
Surprised they didn't drop ink in a tank for the nuclear explosion like the did in "The Day After" The upside down mushroom cloud is full of texture goodness
Props to whoever put Lux Aeterna over the shots of Sam disassociating, absolutely immaculate 2001: A Space Oddysey vibes
Some (most) of your complaints are correct from a typical VFX perspective, but the final results of the scene are actually scientifically correct
Thank you!
Everyone after the movie was like "yeah explosion was great"
I was like "Wtf Nolan, that was the best you can do?"
I remember feeling so underwhelmed in the theater and also immediately thinking of the twin peaks nuke and feeling a bit angry at nolan "no cgi" posturing.
The explosion actually looks pretty accurate though. Nolan said he wanted to recreate the actual explosion of Trinity that we have footage of, and the movie did a pretty good job at it. People were probably just expecting something bigger like the Bikini Atoll footage we have which isn't really comparable to Trinity.
Same bruh, but I didn't say anything because I didn't want to anger anybody
@@SquadPoopyreally doesn't resemble the original footage, you can definitely tell the scale is completely off
@@SquadPoopy Definitely not anywhere close to the orignal footage of the trinity test. Christopher Nolan had really missed the mark by avoiding CGI for this one part of the movie that really should have had it
I've never seen a better sponsorship segment. Bravo!
Breaking down cgi from MrBeast videos would be interesting
The sell this episode for the corridordigital site went pretty hard ngl, almost convinced me hahah. The boss music right at the end as Sam struggles to contain himself.
I am grateful for an unbiased opinions of an actual professionals, who are not afraid to point out shortcomings in Nolan movies. Truly refreshing, I thought I was going insane. 😊
I haven't seen the movie, but yeah, watching the footage from it here, that's bad... like really bad. What exactly were they thinking with this? As they said, the blast looks nothing like an actual explosion, the lighting on the actors lying on the ground is so off, it's just, ugh. That right there removes any of the implications and weight of what that moment really represents in reality and that actually kind of pisses me off.
@@13374me its supposed to be the explosion from oppies perspective. Remember almost the whole coloured movie is HIS past. Its supposed to be representative of the destruction he remembers and how he remembers it as. It has exactly the weight it needs, because it's all in his head anyway because it's a look into his past from his perspective and he's not exactly the most reliable narrator. He observes the explosion as such, because who cares what it looked like, when his thought process is exclusively focused on the fact that he immediately knows what he has done.
@@thechaoticmultistan9141 that's a poor excuse for the shitty explosion
@@thechaoticmultistan9141 So Oppenheimer saw it as a piddly little gas explosion? I feel like that's directly antithetical to his feelings on it, super weird take.
@@thewisewolf768 sure lol if thats how you wanna take my comment sure
Just to add a correction, Stanley Kubrick used Front Projection (not Rear Projection) with large format stills taken from a 2nd Unit Crew who visited Africa to get the background plates. Check Cinefex issue 85 for Don Shay’s article about the making of the movie.
I still remember the flak that Wren got on twitter because of his thoughts on the explosion. Poor guy.
from corridor fans or from hollywood VFX artists?
I think honestly just the twitter crowd in general.@@FablestoneSeries
The nuke scene should have just been the slow mo stuff from the beginning of the film. Then, just a mushroom cloud from a smaller traditional explosion. It would make sense too bc a nuke is too bright to see.
OK that was by far the best sponsored video segment yet. It's about time- you guys are so creative!! I hope more companies let you experiment like that!!!
So glad they called it out, the movie was great, but so many people said the nuke was amazing and I was still waiting for it after the movie was over.
Sam's driveway must be ice-free from all that salt
13:30 - That's actually insane they clocked the blue car in Barbie as being CGI. That was not at ALL obvious in the movie, and I'd say 99% of people would have thought it was real too. So basically, REALLY well done CGI.
Something tells me you guys have a new editor, the editing is definitely different stylistically.
It was super distracting. I don't know how I feel about it.
@@jacquescoetzer-au yeah, I think the 'salty' parts were a bit jarring
I think the last couple of videos have been a bit to "zoomer edited" with fast zoom ins, sound effects to show that they are surprised and so on. Not enough to make me dislike the video but it makes it feel a bit artificial and unauthentic.
Yeah childish and annoying editing, really hope they won't continue with it!
Could just be them trying out a different editing style to see how the audience responds
I’m not sure whether to thank you or hate you for pointing out the explosions… I won’t be able to unsee it
Sam is making me laugh and appreciate him since forever. Thank you Sam!
that sponsor segment though, *chef's kiss* (pun intended)
This is the sam we need on every vfx react 😂
I cracked up so bad with this sponsored segment 😂😂 that’s pure gold, well played guys, well played
I know! This one was the first I dint skip
I just rewatched Valerian and the city of a thousand planets. Not the best cgi in the world but i feel like there may be some shots worth checking out i especially enjoy the intro sequence of the construction of the spacestation.
Honestly, the fact that the nuke scene was underwhelming shows that VFX is still an important part of filmmaking. It shows that while doing all visual effects is not a good thing, going all practical is not necessarily a good thing either. VFX should be used as a tool to *help* with improving shots. Not being used to completely create the scene you want, but to add details and effects to elevate your scene.
Just an hour ago I returned from the cinema after watching Oppenheimer and may I say it was completely different from everything I have ever seen. No other movie has been so efficient at keeping me in suspense the whole time.
Quick note: Space Odyssey intro was shot using FRONT projection not REAR
Thank you!! They keep saying rear projection. I think they made the same mistake for Close Encounters which also used front projection for the hill top car scene.
I love Sam's saltiness in this episode
The nuke in Oppenheimer was so disappointing. Thank you for bringing this up!!
Thank you so much for covering Barbie! It was no doubt loaded with visual effects. I mean, Barbieland had to be represented somehow. :3
Genuinely impressed how well they managed to capture that feel. I never owned barbies, since i grew up in that exact "eugh barbies are for gorls >:P" era (im not like that anymore) but i remember watching how much my sisters loved playing with them.
One of my favorite sponsor sequences I’ve seen in a long time 😂
I was telling friends about oppenhiemer this movie does not need to be seen in the theater for the visuals... But maybe for the intensity of the audio design.... But mostly its a 3 hour historical drama so just wait to watch at home.
The thing about the Oppenheimer explosion was that it should’ve gone boom but it went bam instead
What
It needed a Don Martin-sound effect. KA-SPROING!
My favorite part of Barbie was the Chevrolet ad halfway through
the oppenheimer white blue light looks to me that it is being projected from the left of the picture - thats the biggest thing that stands out to me.
They didn’t even time it with the explosion either, it explodes and the flash happens slightly afterwards
Finally someone said it. The Creator had a much better nuclear explosion than Oppenheimer.
(Why haven't Corridor Crew covered The Creator, outside of the trailer controversy, shot on a $4000 camera with amazing ILM visual effects.)
We’re saving it for a very special reason 😉😉😉😉😉😉 stay tuned
@@SirWrender"VFX Artists React to the Oscars Best Visual Effects Nominees", got it😉
Absolutely agreed on Oppenheimer's Bomb scene. I feel that was the most underwhelming scene in the movie. People were expecting to see a mushroom cloud and there wasn't any.
Love the content you all keep putting out! Keep up the good work! Also, I was just watching "Ghost Rider" (2007) and was taken back by some of the effects (good and bad). I couldn't find a video of you covering it, and I think it would be a great movie to do a deep dive into. Again, love your guy's content!
Love the spice. MORE OF IT PLEASE