VFX Artists React to Bad & Great HALLOWEEN CGi 

Good night 🤣

100% agree

I had forgotten about its existence. Why you gotta do me like this man!

So not superman's top lip ?

Even scarier is the version where all the cats have buttholes.

That is the scariest movie of this decade

Wait, really?

AWESOME

@@madarauchiha-lt3mz Yep, that's me. I worked on Indy Mogul for many years. That video was part of a series of interstitials we made for Epix, that were eventually put on the youtube channel.

@@nooneimportant77 that's pretty cool, did u work on any other big projects

@@madarauchiha-lt3mz I worked on almost every Indy Mogul from like 2008 to... 2013? Hard to remember exactly. I worked on lots of other videos made by Next New Networks at the same time as well. Not sure I'd call much of it "big" though haha.

amalgamated has upload some of them here on RU-vid including some footage of the actual end scene with "the pilot"

Yeah poor practical effects the greedy producers hid them away from humanity.

Watch the movie Harbringer Down, the same team made the effects in that one. Not the best movie, but the practical effects are awesome.

they should recat to the flim/movie miss peregrine's home for peculiar children.

Release the practical cut!

That's producers for you. They're the Karens of film.

@@halvarianknight4477 even from a corporate standpoint tho. the stuff is already done, the money is already spend. noh make it again....for the same amount.... just stipid tho xD xD

Yeah to be honest watch the film the CGI actually looks bad like really bad like take into account that they had it easy because they had reference models to go by but even then like you can tell it was done quick and fast , I felt if they would still used the shots with practical effects and just enhanced the film with some CGI it would of been amazing

That studio should have done the Practical effects release as a dvd special combo pack.

@@unherolike They still might now that people want it.

I watched it at a friends house when I was 10 and had to go home at 2am. Then I couldn’t sleep in my own bed for 2 weeks. But now I don’t get scared by movies so 💁🏻‍♀️

It scarred me for years as a kid. If I was alone in a room with a CRT TV and it was turned off, I could scare myself to death thinking about it turning on, the image of the well, and the little girl crawling out of the screen. Day or night, didn't matter. The mere horror of the thought made me quake with fear. CRT televisions scared me to death for a long time. While it wasn't as good as the first one, the opening scene of the second Ring movie was just as terrifying.

I still can't turn the light off in my room lol and I'm 17. It was after my mum showed me the 1st and 2nd ones as a little kid.

@@wa6280 sry but ur mom is afwul

Every time I lost reception on my cable I shit a brick because of that film. Static became terrifying.

Except the 2011 the thing was not a remake, it's a prequel

@@Bluenosedwill1 to be fair. Did he say he watched it?

Nice. Japan trading effects and choreography with the US.

I guess it was just cheaper. 😉

Original so good

Whoa,thanks for info!;)

Ringu Sadako scared me more than the US Version..but my husband said the US version is scarier (in terms of jumpscare..I guess I can agree) but that Sadako crawling out of the well seriously traumatized me😭😅

Hit us up with some movie recommendations Damien. If you found The Thing as an inspiration, I'm sure I will appreciate your taste in film. Anything come out in the past ten years you thought was really good?

​@@jackallenproductions As far as practical body horror goes I can't think of much in the past 10 years that hits the spot. "Annihilation" from Alex Garland has some great body horror moments and a lot of interesting themes. "Life" is a solid Alien/The Thing love letter but doesn't break much new ground. Other movies like "RAW" and "Possessor" are great but a bit too experimental for some. There's also an upcoming sci-fi horror from Neill Blomkamp ,"Demonic", that looks promising. Unfortunately the days of practical effects-heavy movies are mostly gone. Sure recent movies like "The Void" and "Harbringer Down" exist but I didn't think they were particularly good outside the creature effects.

Clint knows a lot of Hong Kong actions films.

Lmaooo true

Lol it’s because these are actually good movies 😆

@@garretta4911 he hasn't seen Marvel movies.....

Be fair - he's usually seen *some* of the films. He just doesn't do marvel (/comics?) movies, he's allowed to like what he likes!

or 5G

It would be really nice if they would actually release it with the practical effects put back in.

The thing 2011 Is not a remake it is a prequel

@@megababybackrib its almost the same as the '82 film, plot is nearly identical

@@RYNO2511 Have you watched the full film? Because the ending makes it perfectly clear that it's a prequel and it's not even supposed to be a twist.

they should recat to the flim/movie miss peregrine's home for peculiar children.

Wait where was 173 in the shot I need to see this

is it confirmed? looks too vague for me

I love the fact that one of the insect aliens from starship troopers is in it

Yahoo D2

why does toadtrooper sound like something sexual

Do you know what happens to a Toad when it gets struck by lightning?

Captain Toad

Or....wait for it. .. LaserToad

I thought he looked like Elmer Fudd from “What’s Opera Doc” (Kill the Wabbit)

He's the good knight 😂

@@STormnNormn2027 qq

They should’ve did in invisible man in 1930 the first one That one blew my mind how they made him and has a invisiblein 1930

I can relate to his costume, in fact just yesterday on my twitch RPG table halloween sort of special, I was a "generic adventurer" hahaha.

No, its a meta breakdown of horror as of all. It depicts a company making different horror scenerios involving sterotypical horror characters (like a stoner and final girl) with a stereotypical monster in order to please the gods. In the scenario the movie follows two people manage to get to the company. Its basically a breakdown of what audience demands from a horror movie.

Yeah basically

Cool

@@kjone5086 yes yes everyone knows that. we also know is that its the closest thing to an SCP movie. So yes, its basically an SCP movie regardless of intention.

@@ihaveaplan.ijustneedmoney.9777 Nah, the closest thing to an scp movie is literally any SCP fan film.

Forget the Snyder Cut, we need the Amalgamated Stitch!

Same, that movie existed because they demoed it to a test audience

Here's to hoping for a third remake with lessons learned.

​@@MattJett ..that would make sense if the 2011 version was a remake, Except it was a prequel to John Carpenter's movie

And a hipster beard.

Looks Pewd to me XD

@@dlbutters7164 What makes a beard 'hipster' though? It just looks like a normal beard to me.

@@shirosenshiesq You're a hipster.

@@dlbutters7164 How do you figure that?

A knight of very few words

yes

Ned Kelly

I wouldn't pay, but I would like to see (hear) it.

Yoooooo

Lord of the Rings has to be in there especially the Balrog audio effect

Yooooo that would be great

i wanted to give you an upvote but it's at 420 and who am i to mess around with that

Honestly, I would love to see a practical cut of the thing 2011

@@jackmazeika5594 Same here

#releasethepracticalcut

I know, it's almost like the studio heads are doing way too many drugs to make rational decisions from one day to the next.

@@eroticpanda1 i think that about so many decisions , not just cinema, also video games, tv series.. etc etc.

Exactly my thought when seeing it.

If they were into bondage at all they'd know how to tie a knot that didn't collapse down on the limb when pulled on. You don't need special ropes for that.

Weren’t there no camera men tho. I read that she reacted to a dude in the distance wearing longjohns.

That's a myth. The actual way they made the film was having the actors use the actors. Originally they would've cut to a shot made of CGI where they show the Blair witch in post production, however they decided it would be a stupid idea because it would kill the ambiguity of the fil.

They definitely should do that

yessss

YES

yeah they should

Agree ^^

Exactly. Well said.

The fans have had theories about that. One is that The Thing exposes itself in some spots to create chaos and force them to split up. Usually, when it exposed itself, there were too many people huddled together, making it impossible to perform the imitation process. Another one is that people theorize that The Thing wasn't use to humans yet. It was learning their patterns. It was trying to figure out what is the best way of going about assimilating this race. So when it finally came to the camp in the '82 movie, it was a bit more experienced.

That does make a little sense though, it as it feeds back into the 1982 version that the thing has realised it's got to be more cautious this time round. Not defending the 2011 version as the 1982 version is clearly superior. I remember watching it about 12/13 years old I think when it came ITV one night as a premiere (anyone remember Late Night Late?) recording it on VHS ,actually being afraid of something on the telly for the first time ever and then watching it all day on VHS the next day freeze framing where certain shots were just to appreciate how damn awesome it was.

Perhaps the Thing learned from it's mistakes, so by the time ol' Kurt Russell and friends unleashed it again, it was more sneaky.

@@LLEntertainmentChannel Was just rewatching clips from the 2011 version and my god the people are really stupid too.

to much of an 80's movie therefore their work was rendered inferior... sad day for them... its a literally spit on Johns carpenters version considering it has hit the legendary standard of practical effects. would only imagine how the movie would've looked without so much CGI. And I have to disagree with corridor on this that the CGI looked good lol

i literally yelled "WHAT?!" when i found out/saw the video that practical effects were initially intended for the prequel, especially after seeing how insanely good they were. finding out why the studio went with the CG direction broke my heart. i can only imagine how the practical effects artists felt when they found out.

Oooh a robot episode would be cool! They need to do the 2018 lost in space robot too

RealSteel is an awesome movie

They've already done pacific rim

Have they reacted to I am Mother?, if not that could go into the robot vfx/practical as well

I would cry

Right? Like being on set of the thing 1982 would be fucking horrifying or being on set of aliens, you come back from a coffee break and a literal giant alien is there, sure it’s fake but it’s real and it looks horrifying

That movie still haunts my nightmares

Math algoritms for CG simulations, although improving year by year, are still far from perfectly replicate how things behave in reality. Things like real ambience illumination, subtle minuscule skin and muscle movements, liquids, smoke, hair flow, cloth creases and deformations, etc. Etc. Meanwhile the human eyes and brain are perfectly tuned to pick apart all these little details and immediately tell unconsciously when something is off.

Never underestimate the ability of Hollywood execs to be totally out of touch

whats sad is how good the practical effects looked....damn man

The remake of the 80's movie that was a remake of a 50's movie. This was the law of diminishing returns in full force.

Please god tell me there’s a practical release

@Blue Fox under socialism, if the film industry even existed, it would be controlled by the government. Does that sound like a better option to you? And those indie studios you say show the flaws of capitalism? Under socialism they would be illegal.

JC's Thing is hands-down my favorite horror movie of all time with CITW 2nd. That the 2011 remake actually had practicals only to be replaced with CG because the studio thought it looked too much like one of the most revered scary movies ever only serves to illustrate that the studios have no idea what they're doing. Three words: Disney Live-Action Remakes. (Maybe that's four words...) Indie is where it's at.

@@pdahandyman well I think you might have the best director in the world, do practical effects, but if it is expected to be a blockbuster, you always are going to have tons of suits and investors and shareholders pushing their dumb agenda and force a director to replace practical effects "because it look cooler yo". To clarify your statement, It s not blockbuster directors that suck, or indie directors that are better, it s the blockbuster industry that is rotten and indie industry that is sane. Look at all them shitty "girls only remakes". Another shareholder idea of a good movie. No sane director with talent would want to direct that. Two words. Cash grabs

It's another great example of how Hollywood producers aren't artists, they're businessmen.

Yes, the scene feels very grotesque and unsettling, but once you watch it a couple of times you realise that it doesnt make much sence. Generally there are plrenty monster scenes that do not feel that much consistant or cohesive, but you still appreciate the movie for all the practical effects and for it's age...

Yeah, same, that would imply that the guy ripped his own arms with his own strength which I believe is impossible to do even if you're clamped. But it's very convincing visually nonetheless and that's what art is all about.

I had nightmares for weeks when I first saw that as a kid

I still don't like it cause I hate horror shit Idk why I'm watching this video

@@nighpaw4651 FACT

You aren’t the only one.

it's a remake of the original Japanese film.

Just want to emphasize this comment. The ENTIRE franchise grossed $890M.

"Ackchewally....."

@@aidanbrown7795 Are you mocking me for pointing out a mistake and trying to fix it?

@@NicKeLas Yes, yes he is. Welcome to the internet.

@Daniel Hall I am one of them and I kind of do. So yeah.

Oh yea it smells like him

hahaha, yep, feels like his style. As good as they all are doing stuff, they're as good picking nice and talented people, and with Peter they hit the spot.

That's literally the first thing that came to my mind. Has to be him.

Oh hi Ciarán

Peter's not a bird, silly.

The remake of which movie though?

Er, sorry - prequel-remake from 2011. Sorry.

@@andrebrynkus2055 what movie though -_-

@@SahilP2648 Argh, I failed again. The Thing. I guess I didn't think about it with the context.

@Baxi Tabaxi Yeah, because I totally said "Modern thing bad". Read my comment again and revise your claims. "It looks too much like an 80s movie" is an attack on other methods of filmmaking. What I said about that attack has nothing to do with modern methods. If you want to make the argument that I criticized computer generated imagery, then you're the one who's wrong. I was only saying that it is disrespectful and unfair to put aside the craftsmanship that went into making the practical effects just because it resembles the source material too much. By immediately interpreting my words as "Blah blah blah", you're deluding yourself into the impression that I disapprove of CGI, which I don't. You just can't seem to actually listen to those with reason.

@@user-lynKx i felt that the producers wanted to catch that "WOW" factor the 82 The Thing caught with their practical effect but it's CG like, "yeah you like that? guess what its CGI!! No practical" and i guess it didnt work out

@Baxi Tabaxi The VFX artists on this channel said in this very video that the practical effects of the '82 Thing were better than the CGI in the 2011 remake and even talked about how good the discarded practical effects of the 2011 film were. They went on to say that CGI at the end of the day is a high quality "cartoon" The best thing would be a balance between practical and digital based on what the two methods are best at, cost effectiveness and what produces the most realistic result. Like real world fire wind, explosions, miniatures, rear projection, stunt work and squibs for blood spurts...models and prosthetics for things that are supposed to be alive and gore etc. The Transformers movies are really good at balancing practical and digital. Here's a good article that says that the battle between practical and digital isn't even a real thing anyway....lwlies.com/articles/cgi-practical-effects-hollywood-filmmaking-techniques/

@Baxi Tabaxi Get over your insecurities.

@Baxi Tabaxi Projecting, making assumptions and making a fool out of yourself. Learn reading comprehension next time. You made a lot of assumptions there, and looked like an ass I'm the process

Yeah those fucking producers smh

criminal was not using the real props because they looked reaal nasty, i dont think thats a terrible movie, its just not good as the old one

They screwed themselves by making it CGI. It didn't even make back it's own budget.

They advertised it everywhere as an authentic 80s style practical effects movie, wimped out last minute and replaced it all with CGI, people went to see it expecting one thing found another, told everyone it was crap, and word of mouth stopped others coming. Deserved really.

Yep, really dumb decision. And it´s a pity, the movie is pretty enjoyable. The practical effects would tie to the original way better plus help the public get immersed in the movie.

Seriously, they literally saw the single greatest selling point of the film as a weakness. Absolute stupidity. Those physical props and puppets looked incredible.

@@The_Curious_Cat I actually thought the script was good, really respectful to the original and very cleverly thought out, if you can get past the worst really obviously fake effects (and at times not brilliant acting), the story is great.

@Little White Rabbit true, but as a prequel I think it perfectly connected to 2 films

@@macscars115 It did well at showing how and where things happened like how the axe was in the wall. Other than that it's a pretty meh movie especially compared to the first. They were making a sequel to one of the best movies for practical effects and completely didn't understand the audience. Also the story is trash. People still analyse the first movie trying to figure out when and what order people were assimilated and whether Childs and Macready were assimilated. They had none of that in the sequel. There was no tension or misdirection.

@Смерть ОМОНа в Беларуси Stfu

@@MrDayday112 you don't just got a point, you got THE point, Carpenter's The Thing had tension. The prequel was meh, with meh writing, meh FXs and meh acting. But to be fair, the steaks were too high, they could not deliver the quality expected and here we are. Pretty much what happens to a lot of sequels/prequels for a classic movie.

Super 8 was pretty good but the train crash scene was awesome

Thanks for the recommendations internet stranger. Love the Chemical Brothers and those videos are fantastic. Wide Open is just a beautiful piece of art.

Prequel actually so ya know... even more reason to be 80s

I'd fcking pay to watch a finished practical version of that movie.

💯💯💯

@@cessare2467 FUCKIN, SAME

I seriously don't get why there seems to be so many producers and studio higher ups that seemingly don't get movies or give a crap about them. Want people to go and watch you movie? Make it stand out! Hollywood has made this mistake so many times in the past and they never, ever learn. It's just so frustrating....

WORD !

That helicopter scene with the cgi face has to be the most garbage thing I’ve ever seen in a movie

I felt like that either the helicopter face split our the double-person amalgamation would've easily matched the belly-cavity scene from the original, had they kept with the practical and minorly enhanced with VFX

Yeah if I were the practical effects team I'd have been pissed. All that work for nothing.

Yeah that was an unnecessary fail. It wasn't even a bad film generally.

It's a classic

Ah yes the classic "OH I LOVE HORROR MOVIES BUT I DONT WANNA BE SCARED BY THEM"

@@somethingwithultra7231 Some of us prefer to rationalize this phenomena as "I appreciate horror's artistry and ability to evoke strong emotions, but I value being able to fall asleep more"

I’m watching it tonight

@@somethingwithultra7231 Also, this commenter didn't indicate they like horror movies to begin with. I don't like horror movies, but I watched the video because I like their breakdowns.

The internet has ruined me because reading “niko” all I can think of is “nico nico neeeeeeee”

@@LaLloronaVT All i can think is Nikon Camera xD

Its 'Mika' not 'Niko'

@@CanisCattusMuris yeah, I thought so too

@@tobiasmattsson9285 yeap. It's Mika.

I've always wondered how much that added to the budget. It couldn't have been cheap to replace all of those effects, especially in 2011.

@@Celticelery It's got to suck to put in all the time, effort, planning, and heart into a project just to have your work covered up because 'we're going to have to use CGI anyways to blend it in, so lets just use all CGI'. I felt so bad for those guys. They did a whole video about how they got screwed. The film had so much potential.

Even in this video, the short clips of the actual practical effects of the new The Thing are incredibly unsettling; then seeing the actual movie with CGI crap all over, gets no reaction out of me. It's so upsetting, that they did this to the movie.

You should have seen his quarantine hair. It looked like a freaking weeping willow.

Tom Holland but a VFX artist and Wren.

Hol up

No joke should check it out^^

I came here to write this myself.

fancy seeing you here c:

Well Well Well. The monto man himself. It’s an honor sir.

Yes, definitely. Done by the same folks that did the practical effects (that got thrown away) in the Thing remake.

Wait he's dead???

@@austinlove8821 Died just today. Peacefully, in his sleep. Very, very sad day.

Needs more upvotes!

@@shirosenshiesq He was in the Bahamas with his whole family, he had dementia

Though the 2011 movie was a prequel.

Troin it is

@@adamdasilva5061 Good thing you know (no pun intended).

The remake wasn't that good

They ruined the 2011 prequel when they took all the great practical effects out, just my opinion

whats sad is that the people who worked on the film actually wanted to use practical effects, but the studio pushed them into using cgi

That low budget really shows though.

@@GeminiWoods I don't think they even had $250k for the hole thing, so I'm honestly amazed at what they did. But I guess it does make a point that ONLY practical effects might not be the answer either.

Seconded. That show was insanely well put together. They clearly put a significant amount of thought into what they could do for real and what would be better served by CG.

Yes, absolutely loved that show.

Desperately hoping the series gets picked up by another studio, the effects were literal art.

Absolutely!!!! Dark Crystal: Age of Resistance is the perfect example of blending practical and CGI. Finding the right balance between the two is difficult, but worth it!

and yet Netflix cancelled it and keeps Cuties on air.

ok guys, theres 200 bucks missing from the budget and i see an asian dominatrix asleep on the couch. Anyone willing to explain this? Uhmmmmm, it's.... foooooorrrr..... this scene i just came up with. Yes, that's it.

Great point. The film makers really did miss a trick by replacing the practical effects.

@@TruueMetal Not the filmmakers, the studio (as usual). The filmmakers went into a great lengths to recreate the abandoned research site that we get to visit in the original movie and put a lot of effort into the practical effects too. Then the studio came, plastered CGI over everything and changed the ending too at last the second (hence why it's CGI is pretty bad if you've seen it). It still pisses me off because as, clearly not a fan of remakes and sequels 30 something years later, this one was actually pretty solid.

@@nicemimomisu Completely agree with what has been said in this thread. Also, the special effects studio made a movie where they reused the props from the thing and improved on some of the ideas, but it's a b-series movie with good practical effects. Hope someday they release the "practical effects cut version" and I'll gladly rewatch it. It's one of the few modern continuations of old IP's that I like.

@@painfield what movie did they make with the props? I'd love to watch

@@tomt7986 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harbinger_Down#Background Not a great movie but good enough, even if just for the theme, effects, and as a plus Lance Henriksen's in it

Well said good sir. The 2011 thing added some great context being a prequel but the CGI really took me out of it where the OG thing was far more intense.

now just imagine if they used the awesome practical effects they already had ... somewhere in some damn vault there is nearly finished version of this film with MUCH better effects that would just need a little CG touch up to re-release ... and they wont do it simply because it would show jsut how MORONIC the decision to use rushed bad looking CGI to cover those awesome practical effects over ...

@@Asghaad yep, and from what I read, the special effect people found out about the change when they saw it in the movie opening. The SE studio made a movie where they reused the props from the thing but it's a b-series movie with good practical effects. The substitution of the practical effects with CGI was a great fuckup, as a fan of the Carpenter's The Thing hearing that the change was due to looking too 80's it's painful as I like the new version and the first thing that comes to mind to improve it is to get rid of most of the CGI and keep it more 80's effects. Funny thing is as a kid I was a big fan of what CG could bring, specially when the first Jurassic Park came out, and not so fond of certain practical effects, but with the overuse of CG nowadays they make me appreciate more the practical effects I dismissed back then.

The remake get too much hate. It was good.

He looks like he's from Monty Python and the Holy Grail .

Sam: And I am the day!

He is obviously Pippin

Rob Bottin is a god damned genius.

React to it again!!!

Yea same

Spooky!

Go watch Harbinger Down, it's not The Thing but it was the prosthetics from the 2011 movie remade into another one by the effects guys.

What's SCP?

@@liquidsnake321 google 'scp wiki'. It's a community driven repository of many made-up creatures

@@ella4406 made up?

@@megaflyization they're not real

@@ella4406 That's what they tell the public…

To the person that's reading this:you're very intelligent and adorable human! Stay healthy during quarantine 🌈☁️My dream is 1k. I been struggling to get there any help is appreciated❤️❤️

@@Shadays_hair_nails_care the bots are getting crazy

@@Shadays_hair_nails_care lol nice copy paste on multiple comments #ibegforsubs

@@Shadays_hair_nails_care *BEGONE*

Matrix Man

Hahaha no joke me too. I totally forgot I had done that until I saw it in the edit and I burst out laughing. Such a funny visual

Yo our man’s here