3 ms·

I don't know where you are getting that idea. The entire movie is soaked with cg from every angle. https://www.fxguide.com/fxfeatured/a-graphic-tale-the-visual

I don't know where you are getting that idea. The entire movie is soaked with cg from every angle. https://www.fxguide.com/fxfeatured/a-graphic-tale-the-visual-effects-of-mad-max-fury-road/ https://www.fxguide.com/fxfeatured/a-graphic-tale-the-visual...

croes 3mo ago
And now compare to an Marvel or Transformers movie where many shots don't have a single real thing in it
- CyberDildonics 3mo ago
  What the person up to said: In the last 20 years, everything’s just CGI. Movies like Mad Max: Fury Road and Fall Guy are few and far between. There is no world where naming a random longer movie with more effects makes mad max an example of a movie that doesn't use cgi. Something completely unrelated doesn't make a false statement true. There was some marketing that got people to believe this and it's an outright lie.
  - defrost 3mo ago
    Miller repeatedly stressed that the MM: Fury Road stunts were real and the physics was real world - that got turned into a false "quote" about less than 10% CGI .. and that became mythical when the MM: Furiosa trailer had obvious in your face digitally artificial characters, etc. Of interest, perhaps: * The 'Fury Road' Practical Effects Myth Is Hurting 'Furiosa' - https://textualvariations.substack.com/p/fury-fx-furiosa https://textualvariations.substack.com/p/fury-fx-furiosa [ * The visual effects of Mad Max: Fury Road - https://www.fxguide.com/fxfeatured/a-graphic-tale-the-visual-effects-of-mad-max-fury-road/ https://www.fxguide.com/fxfeatured/a-graphic-tale-the-visual... ] ( oops, my bad, I put the second link in not realising you had already referenced that up thread ) The distinction, for now I guess, would be "movies with real actors really moving on real props" versus "movies that are damn near fully generated including much of the actors (eg: lead actor speaks and provided body capture, doesn't actually appear "raw" at any point).

croes 3mo ago

And now compare to an Marvel or Transformers movie where many shots don't have a single real thing in it

CyberDildonics 3mo ago
What the person up to said: In the last 20 years, everything’s just CGI. Movies like Mad Max: Fury Road and Fall Guy are few and far between. There is no world where naming a random longer movie with more effects makes mad max an example of a movie that doesn't use cgi. Something completely unrelated doesn't make a false statement true. There was some marketing that got people to believe this and it's an outright lie.
- defrost 3mo ago
  Miller repeatedly stressed that the MM: Fury Road stunts were real and the physics was real world - that got turned into a false "quote" about less than 10% CGI .. and that became mythical when the MM: Furiosa trailer had obvious in your face digitally artificial characters, etc. Of interest, perhaps: * The 'Fury Road' Practical Effects Myth Is Hurting 'Furiosa' - https://textualvariations.substack.com/p/fury-fx-furiosa https://textualvariations.substack.com/p/fury-fx-furiosa [ * The visual effects of Mad Max: Fury Road - https://www.fxguide.com/fxfeatured/a-graphic-tale-the-visual-effects-of-mad-max-fury-road/ https://www.fxguide.com/fxfeatured/a-graphic-tale-the-visual... ] ( oops, my bad, I put the second link in not realising you had already referenced that up thread ) The distinction, for now I guess, would be "movies with real actors really moving on real props" versus "movies that are damn near fully generated including much of the actors (eg: lead actor speaks and provided body capture, doesn't actually appear "raw" at any point).