Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Pretty damn impressive for $1500. I'd say they blew on the first 30 seconds of CGI and then didn't pay their actors. ;-)

On balance I think I'd prefer to be fooled by really excellent CGI than to be skeptical to the point that I think anything fantastical must be fake. Truly I still can't see what people thought was unrealistic in the first video.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

If it is fake - it's great CGI. Either way - what a world we live in, eh?

I wonder if virtual reality would help with the psychological effects. Not gaming or pr0n, but just sitting or walking through a park, or down a busy city street. Not CGI, but 360 degree, 3D video.

They often choose scene lighting that makes it easier to do the CGI. So the CGI ends up looking fine and the scene is busy and technically sound but its no piece of art cinematographically. More like a cross between a video game and a TV production (even the thumbnail).

If its a good movie who cares. Im for a good story over nice pictures.

There are often far worse things in a movie than the CGI.

Yes, in the sense that "bad cgi looks awful" and "good cgi allows you to create scenes that are otherwise impossible and/or cost prohibitive".

*related=http://videosift.com/video/Why-CG-Sucks-Except-It-Doesnt

and @Gutspiller, it's easy to tell when you're shown this kind of comparison. You are subconsciously looking for the defects.

But I bet you didn't notice half the backgrounds in Fury Road when you first watched it.

Never really noticed before that the CGI Dug doesn't have nostrils.

They can do remarkable things with CGI these days.

the color grading is not cgi's fault, you're talking about creative decisions that George Miller made. If the goal was to keep the footage looking raw and documentary-style, they could have done the cgi that way.

Does this really belong in CGI ?

Most of this footage looks a lot better than the air-brushed, color-corrected and CGI'd end product.

It looks more like Road Warrior when it's this raw. Road Warrior felt like a movie, Fury Road, while great, felt to me like a theater play.

This is like saying a fork is better than a knife. Well sure... but at what?

I bet you couldn't pick out 90% of the cgi shots in films you watch, it's everywhere, not just the explosions (which are usually a mix of practical pyro and cgi, including mad max.)

No, they don't.

Fury Road and The Force Awakens were probably the two most hyped "hey we're doing practical effects" movies of the last year or two and both have a tonne of CGI, it's just hard to see.

Practical effects are great for some stuff, but good CGI allows for things that are simply impossible with practical effects.

Both have their place.

*related=http://videosift.com/video/Why-CG-Sucks-Except-It-Doesnt

*related=http://videosift.com/video/Behind-the-Magic-The-Visual-Effects-of-The-Force-Awakens

Real effects always beat out cgi.

Definitely cgi. You can tell at the speed in which it flies and turns. Nice try though.