"NO CGI" is really just INVISIBLE CGI (2/4) 

Some of my best friends are boar-men

Yep! And grateful to them for it.

same

Same

Me too😂🔥

Same

“Your mission; should you choose to accept it, involves a spaceship. This spaceship will be going whoosh or something, we’ll figure it out in post. You’ll be given some really bad plate footage with lighting that contradicts the visual effects we need. Also, be warned: lens flares will be involved! We do not know how many lens flares there will be on this mission, but it’s the trademark of this particular director. As always, should you or any…” Edit: I can’t spell…

@@DanteYewToobJJ has entered the chat.

@@DanteYewToob "This is a fixed bid..."

LOL!

Seriously temped to upload it in reverse now

​@@TheMovieRabbitHolePincer movement

@@TheMovieRabbitHole Heads up - Episode 1 still links to the old unlisted version of Episode 2 in its description. I only realized by accident when I went back to share your channel URL with friends before starting on 2.. :P

@@MotoCat91Thanks! Fixed

Are you sure youre not just a CGI bot

Part 5? Wow. I think the Nolan aspect got out of hand.

"_new_final_final2"

@@TheMovieRabbitHole(for real this time)

@@NithinJune sdhkshdksha

are you a programmer, because that happened to me all the time 🤣@@TheMovieRabbitHole

Your babe was busy with me last night. Let her sleep, bro

It does! Please watch episode 3 for a follow up on that

But when they say “no green screen”… they’re not wrong. Shhh. Don’t tell anyone.

I'll make it up to you

@@TheMovieRabbitHole Legend, keep up the great work!

@@danc42421 Reminder: Three Hours left🗣️🗣️🗣️

Nolan's movies are a great example of how the hatred for CGI can really hinder the experience sometimes. I've seen tons of people complaining about how the explosion scene in Oppenheimer was such a let-down visually and it would have been better if he just used CGI instead.

He also used cardboard cutouts without a shed of movement and didnt bother removing those obviously 21st century shipping cranes in the background.

Or the entirety of baby Yoda action scenes. Where CGI would've enhanced the performance

@@AbhiMoz That was an intentional callback to the OT Yoda puppet, not stubbornness to be practical

@@laurencsikistvan6630 couldn't they give the man a nuke ? They got plenty lying around.

“Movie” journalism? All journalism has been relegated to paid fan fiction about real life. One of the most undignified professions out there.

You think this only applies to movies? Movie journalism is not even near the worst of the worst, game journalism and paleo journalism is full of a lack of competency

Movie journalism has always had a smidge of propaganda and obfuscation, gossip and drama. So this smear campaign against cgi isn’t unusual. It’s just so focused I’m sure it’s purposeful. Pointed. Useful to oppress cgi workers and subcontractors, keeping them working long hours without union representation and protections. Useful for keeping contracts prices low.

@@alexman378Maybe in the US.

@@Martin-wx8gd No man, it’s wider than that. Maybe it originated there, but it’s certainly not alone.

“It isn’t CGI, it’s just digital wire removal.” 🤦‍♂️

A simple tactic of keep telling the lie enough til it becomes the truth. For the delusional at least.

it's not the filmmakers themselves, it's the media

Its how it should be and how it has been done in the beginning of it. Completely CGI scenes were left for Pixar movies only.

You don't need to compare uncomparable to paint yourself smart, also that just not true. Since comparisons only partly similar to the subject and not identical, they only good for basic education of six years kids. "300", "Transformers", "Jurassic Park", "Avatar", "The Irishman", "Godzilla Minus One" and many more films are exist solely because of CGI. This is exactly what these videos about, you don't need to trivialize something you don't understand.

But Disney said they made a "live action" remake of lion King. With a straight face no less. It is basically double speak.

Haha lol yes

There is a practical BB-8, though. Multiple ones (most obviously one that genuinely balances and another with a green exterior arm), which Hamill has seen. I’ve met the people behind them, and they’re lovely. That there’s *also* a fully VFX one for other shots isn’t something an actor should be expected to know. And yes, the VFX people are also lovely and talented as well. When people who don’t know the full workflow see a practical element on set, it’s totally reasonable they think what ended up on screen was practical. They’re not lying, they’re just wrong.

@@IainLambert @12:22 Accurate, and exactly my point. Except the fully CG BB8 wasn't just for "other shots", as you see - the practical was largely replaced with CGI.

@@IainLambert Yes, completely true, I was just noting the video's overall point of articles liking to take any indication that no CGI was used and run with it, even if it came from a person who ultimately wouldn't know.

@@IainLambert This comment needs to be pinned in the main thread. Yes, practical “stand ins” are seen on sets and actors may interact them intimately, even establishing an affection for these physically animated “co-stars”. Sure, there were practical effects and animated “stand-ins” on set. But an actor can’t be expected to know what decisions the director, DP, Set Directors, Effects Supervisors, etc…will make weeks or months down the line. And an actor may have already moved on to other projects even before actually seeing the finish film in a theater or screening. Even press junkets involving interviews of the stars can occur before the release date. One can’t assume everyone involved in the production has seen the finished product when they are interviewed about their involvement. Give the actors a break. It’s like expecting a plumber to know how all the electrical work went during construction of a building. They can only address the part of the project they personally were involved in.

I don't think he did, i think the interview video just edited the interview to seem like he was talking about something he wasn't. Because in ither interview he shows to not have a problem saying he used cgi. Atleast that's what i got from this video

@@ferociousrazordino3581 God, it should be illegal to do that. Splicing different clips together or mismatching questions and answers to blatantly misrepresent what they actually said.

VFX artist is a thankless job. You get pooped by everybody above the line from the inside berating your hard work to the outside (Ignorant morons crapping on CGI because PrAcTiCaL Fx RuLeS!" like trained seals by the medias).

The most interesting thing is Matt Damon just constantly lying for months. Lmao.

Nolan is not anti-CGI. He even points out here that he's one of the filmmakers most dependent on CGI out there. He does like to emphasize the use of practical effects because not only do they have a certain punch that CGI still has a hard time replicating, but they give the VFX artists so much more to work with as opposed to just green screens. Look at Disney's approach to using CGI in the past decade as opposed to Nolan's, and tell me which one delivers better results. The answer is obvious on the screen. The press has a tendency to sensationalize Nolan's emphasis on practical effects and make it appear as if he hates or never uses CGI, and it seems you've fallen for it. Also, you may resent Nolan's preference for emphasizing practical effects, but filmmaking is like a magic trick or illusion. The point is to immerse people into the film as much possible, to blur the lines between reality and fiction, to make your audience forget that they are watching something that is in reality, extremely fake. Part of the magic of film is often not fully knowing what was and wasn't real/done on camera. That ambiguity fundamentally makes it easier for audiences to buy into the world presented in your film. When you go around telling everyone that all of the coolest stunts in your film were done in a computer, it does inevitably break the illusion at least a bit. This doesn't just apply to VFX. I remember watching a video of David Leitch breaking down how they did the fight scenes in Atomic Blonde, and one of the top comments at the time was along the lines of, "wow, so this whole time, making fight scenes in movies have been the equivalent of quicksaving in a video game every 3 seconds. :/" Sometimes, being very upfront about how movies are made does come at the expense of your audience's immersion, even if it is informative.

@@windowsVD Great comment

@@VivekReddyMedapati-jj1hq He does. Just watch this video.

he is NOT an anti cgi filmmaker

@@blue_ig1 Nolan is castigating CG and fostering an anti-CGI sentiment in the medias that studios spread to please the internet whether he intends it or not.

Lol jurassic park was literally the movie that pioneered modern cgi

He's like : waaa??? 😂

He knows he wouldn't find any work in Hollywood if he said that, it would amount to blasphemy if he were to utter the wrong words about their new religion.

You are right, my bad. I was too quick finding it on the list, to realise it was a finalist, not a nominee. Thanks for watching! en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_Award_for_Best_Visual_Effects

I'm only human :D

@@TheMovieRabbitHole and an amazing one!

part two part three

Correct, I've been made aware. An embarrassing oversight on my part.