Hacker News Reader

Comment by trentnix | Hacker News Reader

The animation is cool, but I just wanted to note for Hackers fans and movie nerds that the scenes inside the "Gibson" that this animates were actually done via practical effects.

View on HN

I really love how kids today are so inundated with 3D CGI that when they see well done practical shots like this and my other go to favorite of the submarines in Hunt For Red October it is immediately assumed as CGI as well. Then again, adults are no less fooled either. The size of the sets is also surprising but makes sense when the size of a film cameras used defined the scales. The HBO intro is another example that makes the rounds.

> it is immediately assumed as CGI

Remember seeing Raiders of the Lost Ark, watching Indiana Jones being dragged under a lorry by his whip and thinking "wow, that's a brilliant stunt"?

Remember (or did you forget) seeing the latest Indiana Jones film with a CGI motorbike and a CGI Indiana Jones jumping onto a moving train?

One will always be more impressive than the other.

I think it’s also important to remember that there are tons of terrible practicals out there, we just don’t think of them because they were bad and forgettable. Lots of great CG too that you likely never recognized as CG. Sicario is littered with examples. You’d be hard pressed to call out even most of them.

That's true on there being lots of terrible practical effects out there. The parent lauded Raiders of the Lost Ark for its practical effects. In contrast, Last Crusade was a great movie that had a few practical effects that were terrible. The scene with the tank going over the edge of the cliff is so bad and so fake that I could help rewind and pause to laugh at it when I was a kid.

Isn't the very worst aspect of that very scene, the CGI part rather than the practical effects part?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Np4OojYGixI

Sure, the tank rolling at the bottom looks a bit like a model, but it isn't nearly as jarring as the part where the shot of the guy in the tank looks like it came from another world entirely and has been badly edited in on top.

It's the guy in the tank that breaks it. Pretty sure it's just a dummy.

The going over the cliff scene is a drop in the bucket to Raiders' melting faces or sticking with Last Crusade's fast aging scene

Even terrible practical effects can be weirdly charming though.

No less immersion breaking though. Highly doubt “weirdly charming” is the objective for most poorly done practicals!

True, but it really does hold up better than CGI. For example, a Dalek isn't really fooling anybody, but it's still far better than a CGI Scorpion King. I think it's easier for the brain to accept something as a representation of something it isn't when it's farther outside of the uncanny valley

You’re not comparing the worst practicals to what is considered one of the single worst CG renderings of all time though. There is also a camp culture that the Daleks fit in to - they weren’t trying to sell it as “very real” even at the time, that was “the look” and the budget. CG in live action is generally either shooting for 100% realism or is for comedic purposes intentionally absolutely awful. There’s a lot less in between than with practicals.

The practical effects are immediately obvious in the 4K remaster, which looks amazing. Still look great though!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com