Movie Magic HD episode 07 - Action Miniatures 

Hey go watch the movie Screwed with Norm McDonald and Dave Chapelle and Danny DeVito. NO CGI at all. Just classic old style comedy.

Skotaks?

If done well, not at all true.

​@@schultzeworksbahaha! 😂 You gotta be blind homie. The Marvel movies look like absolute sht in comparison to even just a muppets episode.. You're brain can tell what's 2d and what's 3d. By definition any CGI amongst real objects is 2d. Avengers looks like a flat image with green screened actors. And then there movies like roadhouse that use CGI fight scenes for no reason. CGI post Malone is cursed.

I think CGI definitely has its place, especially for enhancement of backgrounds or when oractical effects would be too difficult or costly. But I do NOT think it should be generally used as much as it is today.

@@daffers2345 100% agree. I think CGI is great for scene extensions and wire removal and stuff like that, but I've been watching a lot of old movies and I miss real explosions/stunts with real stuntmen and real squibs and muzzle flashes. It just feels different. Models, even when I can tell they're models, are still more "real" than a CGI vehicle that has no weight.

I never heard of _Heart and Souls_ before watching this episode today, in 2024. I'd like to see it now, even if it isn't a genre I don't normally enjoy. I like RDJ, and I would like to see him in movies I haven't seen, even older ones. Now I want to see the special effects too. :)

*even if it isn't a genre I normally enjoy (I can't edit for some reason, sorry for the confusing grammar there) :B

Another practical use for CGI is to eliminate wires and poles from practical effects. That still looks more convincing than to produce the entire shot in CGI.

This was the only show that our family of 5 ALL enjoyed watching. Sometimes my parents would rent a copy of of a movie that we saw featured so we could watch it together and see the special effects. I am hoping to see more practical effects as time goes on. I generally like them a lot better than CGI.

@@daffers2345 Agreed 100%. As someone who is working towards this type of production, whether through RU-vid or if I am eventually recruited by major production team (recently recruited and hired by a major media company), practical effects is my main focus. At worst practical enhanced by digital to make it look more real or to help with scale. I can't even watch 300, it looks like a video game from the early 00's.

They still are, but in not as many films. I hope to change that when I enter the professional film industry though. I’m going to use A LOT of miniatures in my productions.

@@trainlover16 I wish I hadn’t gotten discouraged when I was younger and wanted to be a filmmaker. Back in the 80’s and 90’s the whole world wasn’t nearly as accessible as it is now to a kid in the middle of America. It seemed impossible, and that’s exactly what people told me. I had no idea it would get to the point where we’d have every avenue, contact, industry at our fingertips 24/7…. No idea it would get to the point where so many hacks would be able to break in either, which frankly is what has happened. I was born at just the wrong time for what I wanted to do, and eventually I found myself doing other things. Wishing you well.

@@joen8529 Thank you so much.

Maybe because computer graphic effects are cheapier than miniatures.

@@ZeBlackRider Who cares if they are? If they look better, which they almost always do, use them. Also, many $200 million to $300 million budget tentpole films are flooded with CGI, and mostly look like dogshit, so there’s no excuse for not using miniatures just to save budget.

That is called an optical printer.

​@@dan_hitchman007ahh, my bad. Thanks for the correction.

Meddings had a hell of a career, going from Thunderbirds and other Gerry Anderson productions to the Bond films, where he delivered brilliant work through to GOLDENEYE.

I'm the only person I know that liked _Thunderbirds_ unironically. Always good to meet other fans. :)

yes on a scotchlite screen

It looks like dust or some sort of aerosol to affect the atmosphere in the scene. The models are made out of whatever they need for the result, can be wood, cardboard, foam, or plaster. If it needs to break up like rubble they might use plaster, sometimes weird and bazaar items are used because its the only thing we can get our hands on with the time restraints or a strange material that will give the desired result (i used to work in model making for film and tv and still do it as a hobby).

Nice to see his name, did great music, needs recognition for his contribution, especially t sounds from B5.😊

I never watched _Babylon 5_ but I love the _Movie Magic_ theme song. Maybe I should look up more of his work. :)

All these modern, (so called), SPFX artist will be getting thrown off to the side of the curve now that A.i will be doing all the FX combined real and computer generated.

I agree. CGI is good for enhancement. But too much is too much. I appreciate "real" effects much more. It's even more interesting if an accident makes it into film, such as the car failing to flip over properly when Loki blasts it in _Avengers._ Movie makers still need that "magic" and they still need to be creative and do workarounds when something unexpected happens.

@@daffers2345 Very true. Many happy accidents happen because the laws of chance apply in the real world. In a computer the director can get the preferred result of an explosion during the blast and after on a scale of 1 to 10, lol😄. Not good. Chaotic chance is obliterated by CGI.

This series is something like 25 years old.

Huh?

Sometimes all 3 in one film. I haven't liked Disney for years. I'm sure it's much the same with other companies, but I don't go to the movies much. :P