6 ms·

The animation is cool, but I just wanted to note for Hackers fans and movie nerds that the scenes inside the "Gibson" that this animates were actually done via

The animation is cool, but I just wanted to note for Hackers fans and movie nerds that the scenes inside the "Gibson" that this animates were actually done via practical effects.

dylan604 7mo ago
I really love how kids today are so inundated with 3D CGI that when they see well done practical shots like this and my other go to favorite of the submarines in Hunt For Red October it is immediately assumed as CGI as well. Then again, adults are no less fooled either. The size of the sets is also surprising but makes sense when the size of a film cameras used defined the scales. The HBO intro is another example that makes the rounds.
- GJim 7mo ago
  > it is immediately assumed as CGI Remember seeing Raiders of the Lost Ark, watching Indiana Jones being dragged under a lorry by his whip and thinking "wow, that's a brilliant stunt"? Remember (or did you forget) seeing the latest Indiana Jones film with a CGI motorbike and a CGI Indiana Jones jumping onto a moving train? One will always be more impressive than the other.
  - Forgeties79 7mo ago
    I think it’s also important to remember that there are tons of terrible practicals out there, we just don’t think of them because they were bad and forgettable. Lots of great CG too that you likely never recognized as CG. Sicario is littered with examples. You’d be hard pressed to call out even most of them.
    - trentnix 7mo ago
      That's true on there being lots of terrible practical effects out there. The parent lauded Raiders of the Lost Ark for its practical effects. In contrast, Last Crusade was a great movie that had a few practical effects that were terrible. The scene with the tank going over the edge of the cliff is so bad and so fake that I could help rewind and pause to laugh at it when I was a kid.
      - xnorswap 7mo ago
        Isn't the very worst aspect of that very scene, the CGI part rather than the practical effects part? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Np4OojYGixI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Np4OojYGixI Sure, the tank rolling at the bottom looks a bit like a model, but it isn't nearly as jarring as the part where the shot of the guy in the tank looks like it came from another world entirely and has been badly edited in on top.
        trentnix 7mo ago
        It's the guy in the tank that breaks it. Pretty sure it's just a dummy.
      - dylan604 7mo ago
        The going over the cliff scene is a drop in the bucket to Raiders' melting faces or sticking with Last Crusade's fast aging scene
    - deleted 7mo ago
      [deleted]
    - autoexec 7mo ago
      Even terrible practical effects can be weirdly charming though.
      - Forgeties79 7mo ago
        No less immersion breaking though. Highly doubt “weirdly charming” is the objective for most poorly done practicals!
        autoexec 7mo ago
        True, but it really does hold up better than CGI. For example, a Dalek isn't really fooling anybody, but it's still far better than a CGI Scorpion King. I think it's easier for the brain to accept something as a representation of something it isn't when it's farther outside of the uncanny valley
        Forgeties79 7mo ago
        You’re not comparing the worst practicals to what is considered one of the single worst CG renderings of all time though. There is also a camp culture that the Daleks fit in to - they weren’t trying to sell it as “very real” even at the time, that was “the look” and the budget. CG in live action is generally either shooting for 100% realism or is for comedic purposes intentionally absolutely awful. There’s a lot less in between than with practicals.
jshier 7mo ago
The practical effects are immediately obvious in the 4K remaster, which looks amazing. Still look great though!

The animation is cool, but I just wanted to note for Hackers fans and movie nerds that the scenes inside the "Gibson" that this animates were actually done via practical effects.

dylan604 7mo ago

I really love how kids today are so inundated with 3D CGI that when they see well done practical shots like this and my other go to favorite of the submarines in Hunt For Red October it is immediately assumed as CGI as well. Then again, adults are no less fooled either. The size of the sets is also surprising but makes sense when the size of a film cameras used defined the scales. The HBO intro is another example that makes the rounds.

GJim 7mo ago
> it is immediately assumed as CGI Remember seeing Raiders of the Lost Ark, watching Indiana Jones being dragged under a lorry by his whip and thinking "wow, that's a brilliant stunt"? Remember (or did you forget) seeing the latest Indiana Jones film with a CGI motorbike and a CGI Indiana Jones jumping onto a moving train? One will always be more impressive than the other.
- Forgeties79 7mo ago
  I think it’s also important to remember that there are tons of terrible practicals out there, we just don’t think of them because they were bad and forgettable. Lots of great CG too that you likely never recognized as CG. Sicario is littered with examples. You’d be hard pressed to call out even most of them.
  - trentnix 7mo ago
    That's true on there being lots of terrible practical effects out there. The parent lauded Raiders of the Lost Ark for its practical effects. In contrast, Last Crusade was a great movie that had a few practical effects that were terrible. The scene with the tank going over the edge of the cliff is so bad and so fake that I could help rewind and pause to laugh at it when I was a kid.
    - xnorswap 7mo ago
      Isn't the very worst aspect of that very scene, the CGI part rather than the practical effects part? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Np4OojYGixI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Np4OojYGixI Sure, the tank rolling at the bottom looks a bit like a model, but it isn't nearly as jarring as the part where the shot of the guy in the tank looks like it came from another world entirely and has been badly edited in on top.
      - trentnix 7mo ago
        It's the guy in the tank that breaks it. Pretty sure it's just a dummy.
    - dylan604 7mo ago
      The going over the cliff scene is a drop in the bucket to Raiders' melting faces or sticking with Last Crusade's fast aging scene
  - deleted 7mo ago
    [deleted]
  - autoexec 7mo ago
    Even terrible practical effects can be weirdly charming though.
    - Forgeties79 7mo ago
      No less immersion breaking though. Highly doubt “weirdly charming” is the objective for most poorly done practicals!
      - autoexec 7mo ago
        True, but it really does hold up better than CGI. For example, a Dalek isn't really fooling anybody, but it's still far better than a CGI Scorpion King. I think it's easier for the brain to accept something as a representation of something it isn't when it's farther outside of the uncanny valley
        Forgeties79 7mo ago
        You’re not comparing the worst practicals to what is considered one of the single worst CG renderings of all time though. There is also a camp culture that the Daleks fit in to - they weren’t trying to sell it as “very real” even at the time, that was “the look” and the budget. CG in live action is generally either shooting for 100% realism or is for comedic purposes intentionally absolutely awful. There’s a lot less in between than with practicals.

jshier 7mo ago

The practical effects are immediately obvious in the 4K remaster, which looks amazing. Still look great though!