Just the sheer work and effort put into this by all the artists and puppeteers, and seeing how it moves and would have looked just makes me want to pull my hair out at the fact that they scrapped it for the final version. What a waste of amazing potential.
I can't believe this was replaced with cgi, it looks so realistic to point at 04:34 the head on the left looks like it's actually in pain like the character's expression was frozen when they were assimilated.
The fact that the end result was pure CGI was such a crime. What a wasted potential for greatness. All the more reason I'm looking forward to Harbinger Down.
It's just so much more moody, creepy, and scarier than CGI. The life in the eyes is amazing, too. It looked like there was an actual actor in there, looking out from makeup, even though it was all animatronic.
I guess it depends on the person. For me, both the cgi and the puppets look equally fake, just for different reasons. Cgi looked fake because obviously it had the uncanny valley effect. But then the puppets look too limited in their movement and that gives them away. So basically here: Puppets: Pros, its solid and works physically with light and surrounding because its actually there. Cons, too much limitation in movement, not enough fluidity in actions to be lifelike. CGI: Pros, fluid movements and expressive actions, makes it look alive. Cons, its not actually there, so it clashes with reality and whats real in the shot and doesn't fully co exist with the physics in the real world around it.
That's why they needed someone doing the filming and lighting who actually knew what they were doing. The lighting in this movie is terrible. The first movie, the creatures were perfectly lit and filmed and it made them look awesome. If we would have had that level of filming and lighting in this movie, even the bad CGI would have looked better. And the practical effects could have looked AMAZING. This is test footage so you really can't judge much by it as far as how it could have looked in final form with proper filming, lighting, and editing.
I think another con for both the CGI and the Practical is that neither of the faces really look like the actors who played them as humans. You could say its just because the faces are so molded and stretched together now, but even if that was an artistic choice, because they aren't as recognizable it takes away from the effect a little more.
If it doesn’t make enough money it’s not worth doing and you will save money by finishing and releasing as cheap as possible. It takes people with ambition on every front. Any and I mean ANY bad input offsets any output it’s science bitch
@gensokyo boyz I think my breaking bad quote gave what I said a negative connotation. The bad input would be the cgi Edit: The first part is me thinking like some executive that probably made the decision. I’m really bad at leaving comments lol
@@scottfrye Well they already paid the studio to make the practical effects and shoot it in the first place, so it seems like to me that the most money was wasted by getting these props made and then also paying a vfx team to cover it up anyway.
@@paulknifecombandmore1239 cause there is no specific term to refer it as.. should’ve called it an alien, but “the thing” makes it much more mysterious and can’t be fathom by someone else.
What a solid design. Despite the over reliance on CG, this part of the movie was so amazing. The part where the neck stretches and the one face fuses with the other face was terrifying
It's a shame because ADI put a lot of work into their practical effects, but the head jackoffs for this movie decided to remove a lot of ADI's practical effects by using CGI.
Yes when I 1st saw the movie i didn't understand why did they use cg all over the place. And after I looked up these stuff i made the biggest facepalm ever.
4:21 I mean look at that awesome practical effect man are you serious? I know it’s 10 years past now but i just feel like I was robbed of a moment in history that we’ll never get back... And the effects look AMAZING!!!
Honestly, this is amazing. I kinda feel like this could have been a better prequel with the original pilot and these effects. I won't be satisfied until I see a new cut of the film with these pit back in. I don't mind some cgi, but all this work should have been revealed in the final film and not on RU-vid!!!!!!
I hope that one day all the original footage will somehow leak online and the fans will just edit the real scenes into the official release of the movie instead of the fake scenes
The actual released movie didn't scare me. Everything looked so fake. But this...this would have terrified me! Practical effects for the win - you guys are awesome!
This was by far the creepiest moment in the movie. The movie was disappointing and mishandled but after hearing you guys talk about how the movie was managed, we can understand why. You guys can at least be proud everything you created was still top notch.
I don't know what was your budget on this guys, - but guessing modern Hollywood filmmaking, you had to build this from pennies - it is absolutely stunning to see what you have done, the sheer artistry of the sculpture, the paintjob, and the movements, I'm blown away! I'm just really happy that you at least have these videos, so we get a chance to see your work!
Tentacle Lights Its very sad when the 80s and 90s were considered the best in practical effects and were in 2016 with amazing technology and movies look shittier than ever lol. It doesn't help that movies only have a 3 production schedule when it used to be 6 to 9 months.. which is why films had quality back then because they were not rushed. It cost wayyy more to do CGI than practical lol I don't get studios, there clueless as to what fans really want or they just don't care and $ is the main force. The main reason they do cgi is cuz studios tweak movies so much and it's easier to tweak a visual effect and change it completely if they don't like it then to pay for practical animatronics just to pay more again in the end to out cgi over it. Its weird
@@mesmerized4life405 Actually dude, the 70's and the 80's were. By the mid 90's we were being fed a CGI shitfest - which was about to get 10 times worse!!!
They built all of these complex practical effects, sculpt these amazing creatures AND make them FULLY animatronic!... The director says its going to be a tribute to the original film and he will use as little CGI as possible, only when its necessary.... And what do we end up with? A VERY CGI-heavy film. What?!? WHY? Why the fuck did you spend all the time and money paying this big effects studio to make amazing and REAL looking practical fx just to replace it with shitty CGI? Practical effects always looks better (as this video shows). CGI should only be used to enhance practical effects or used when practical effects are literally impossible.
+Jeff King Which means despite the directors (and the films too) best interests, the Producer has final say since hes in charge of the money... I guess thats how it always been, but it still sucks that in most cases money comes before artistic vision! But with all that said, it still doesnt make sense that you would pay a studio to do all of these practical effects. (which also takes a lot of time which means it was included in the planning/preproduction of the movie), and then switch to CGI at the last minute? Which they also paid for, so theyre basically paying double for the effects in the film right?! Thats what doesnt make sense to me!
No its cool, thats just how RU-vid works ;) I didnt realize that happened and it only makes me more angry. Where do studios find these idiots? Seriously makes no sense to me. Its night and day which looks better. Id like to get in on one of these test audiences someday, but have a feeling people with good taste is exactly what they dont want lol.
I haven't seen the remake (or the full original), but if they did decide to go full CGI, then I won't be able to express waste of craft this work was. And the way it moved? My goodness, I know it cannot be mimicked with computer animation
In most people's view (including my own) the CG effects were the biggest let down in the movie, they looked really cheap, like they were from a crappy 90's video game cut scene. I wish I was joking, but there was only one CG shot in the movie that looked cool to me and that was on the helicopter. The rest was fucking awful and an insult to ADI.
I'm so upset with hollywood, You guys did an AMAZING incredible job. This is the creepiest creature I've ever seen. very nightmare worthy, And they ruined the movie by replacing it with cgi. They should have just added the things to the puppet work. The blinking eyes, and jaw movement look soooo life like. They need to learn that PFX should always be in the spotlight, and only use CGI to enhance. Now cgi is great for solid objects and vehicles. But Flesh, and living breathing creatures is hard to accomplish, and even with the best cgi today, you can tell there is nothing there.
actually what you saw in the movie is exactly the animatronic in the video. what they CGI'd was commonly the legs or feet to interact with the floor and facial expressions when looking at the actors. The wet skin look and the rest were all the practical effects which still amazes me until now
Joshua Aquino But in John Carpenter's The Thing, the alien was mostly animatronic and costumes, and they didn't have that kind of technology back then to CGI the alien. I just watched this scene and I didn't see it as an animatronic. The only time I saw an animatronic in that scene was when the camera was zoomed in on Kate's face, you can get a little glimpse of the Split Face Thing animatronic's arm.
hopefully you can see that as great too tho :D that it seems seamless to be practical. altho understand that the limbs were definitely CGI to let it's hands incorporate to the environment. but thats what i saw and understood in their BTS videos of the film tho. definitely CGI was near impossible back in the First Thing film xD
THIS is far more scary in every way than CGI monsters. Practical effects have a weight and creepiness to them that graphics just don't. CGI is awesome but in such an intimately horrifying movie, practical effects would have been more chilling and grotesquely unsettling.
I know I shouldn't be saying this on here, but why not release the workprint unofficially online but on a site where no one or no company would ever think to find? I wouldn't mind seeing the film without CGI considering it never needed CGI to be great in the first place. The prequel looks good compared to the impressive John Carpenter film. The acting was great, story was interesting and the practical effects were unique. I don't know who tampered with the footage, but whoever did it deserves to be blacklisted for ruining the film's potential to be a money maker for the studio and the film's creators. I hope the guy who mucked up the footage got punched in the face for making a mockery of the people who were making the film.
mannn so much beautiful work and effort that had to be covered by less-than-stellar cgi :/ so unfortunate. At least your hard work is being appreciated by us fans retrospectively.
Doesn't make sense they said they replaced the practicals because they hated it ( well the studio did ) its either that or they completely overlayed it with CG ( because the vid above looks good but in the actual movie it looks like crap CG... Iam pretty sure they said they replaced almost all practicals and had reshoots
That's where the CGI only should have come in. Made the mouth a little more open, screaming louder and eyes a bit wider. Instead the studio trashed EVERYTHING in favor of full CG creatures. What a shame.
Thing is, it was a bunch of idiots who saw an early screening of the movie, with practical effects that weren't even finished let alone colour graded, and complained about what they saw so much the studio panicked and decided to change it, so WHY isn't anyone actually blaming them???
you guys are wizards! I love everything about this creature BUT the heads. its the cheesiest most stupid reason to create the disturbingly grotesque splitface made by Bottin. If they remade the head to something original, discared that stupid idea of the thing suddenly "melting" skin instead of using tentacles and whatnot, this could have been a real new icon of horror. But as always you guys made an insanely great work of it nonetheless :)
I can't believe I just learned everything in The Thing prequel was practical effects...and they look amazing. Plus there was an alternate ending with the ship's original pilot...also practical effects. How do we make the practical director's cut happen?! The bad CGI ruined a good movie.
I wish there was a cheap version of that as one of those Halloween animatronics... I would have it lunge out at kids for a few squeals and even a yell from an adult...
