Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom (2018)

[Himmel]

Source: Jurassicworld2movie

[Cremildo]

I don't mind the reliance on CGI dinos as long as the CGI is top-notch, which wasn't the case in either JPIII or JW.

[Batman1980]

I liked the CGI in Jurassic World, it was definitely spotty in III though.

[brooks101189]

There was a few hiccups with the CGI in Jurassic World (mostly dealing with how they lit the dinosaurs at times), but I didn't mind the reliance on fully CGI dinosaurs in that one. It was bound to happen in one of these films.

[esteban²]

The CGI-related problem in JW was how they didn't blend in with the background and the surrounding light, something Jurassic Park was simply amazing at. Hope it's better this time. Looking forward to it.

[Wildcat2000]

I thought the CGI in JW was great.

It’s very strange that people are really split on the CGI. Some think it was good and others say it looked horrible.

Opinions on the movie aside how are people seeing 2 totally different types of CGI?

I get the feeling some just don’t like that it was mostly CGI and knowing that psychologically skews thier view.

[esteban²]

That last part makes no sense at all my head. Since it's the very fact that the CGI feels a bit off at times that makes you aware of the CGI itself, never the other way around. Uncanny Valley ... When our mind is aware of something not being real. It has been tested in groups of people (trying to find the title of that docu) and a certain percentage has trouble spotting that. A minority. So instead of thinking it must be something psychological with the people who do notice, the question rather is why some are not able to notice anymore? I'm saying 'anymore' cause it was explained that the cause is that we are easier to fool now in comparison with only a decade ago. Which sound contradictive because we were once 'scared' of a giant ape that was a stop motion puppet. But it's really not like that. All very interesting. Okay, I'm wondering of now ...

I'm in the middle btw. The D-Rex was simply fantastic. But the raptors had a huge problem feeling real -for example- during the training scene in the beginning. Just like the T-Rex had at times. JP almost never had that problem. There are some YouTube videos explaining the exact reasons for that, it's often a combination of things and they are spot on. It all has to do with HOW it's used. The trick is to avoid the problematic issues. JP was great at that. People stating JW CGI was really terrible however, are extremely exaggerating.

Edit: This article is quite good at explaining some elements in a simple way. coincidence, they used JW as an example. Ps: I don't agree with all the choices used for illustration.

http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-reason...ecial-effects/

[AaronJ]

Honestly, I'm more there more for Chris Pratt and BDH -- if they look real, I'm OK.

[tigertron]

The over-reliance of CGI in JW spoilt it for me.

[StarWarsIsAwesome123]

Originally Posted by Himmel

Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom Trailer Will Be Attached to ‘The Last Jedi’



Source: Bloody-Disgusting

It was confirmed a month ago that the trailer arrives on December 13th.

[esteban²]

Talking about the visual effects, I have a lot of faith in Bayona when it comes to that. This guy understands how to use it the right way. In 'A Monster Calls', a cartoonish (kinda) tree felt just as real as the environment and actual people surrounding him during his appearance at school, blending in just fine. And all that thanks to the fact of knowing how to do that the right way. Hopeful for 'Fallen Kingdom' now.

[Wildcat2000]

Originally Posted by esteban²

That last part makes no sense at all my head. Since it's the very fact that the CGI feels a bit off at times that makes you aware of the CGI itself, never the other way around. Uncanny Valley ... When our mind is aware of something not being real. It has been tested in groups of people (trying to find the title of that docu) and a certain percentage has trouble spotting that. A minority. So instead of thinking it must be something psychological with the people who do notice, the question rather is why some are not able to notice anymore? I'm saying 'anymore' cause it was explained that the cause is that we are easier to fool now in comparison with only a decade ago. Which sound contradictive because we were once 'scared' of a giant ape that was a stop motion puppet. But it's really not like that. All very interesting. Okay, I'm wondering of now ...

I'm in the middle btw. The D-Rex was simply fantastic. But the raptors had a huge problem feeling real -for example- during the training scene in the beginning. Just like the T-Rex had at times. JP almost never had that problem. There are some YouTube videos explaining the exact reasons for that, it's often a combination of things and they are spot on. It all has to do with HOW it's used. The trick is to avoid the problematic issues. JP was great at that. People stating JW CGI was really terrible however, are extremely exaggerating.

Edit: This article is quite good at explaining some elements in a simple way. coincidence, they used JW as an example. Ps: I don't agree with all the choices used for illustration.

http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-reason...ecial-effects/

Thats funny I thought the JW raptors looked best out of all them.

Anyway no movie has had perfect cgi but I still think JW is one of the best. The moments where it’s flawed are nowhere near as bad or cartoonish as that article says. Other movies yes but not here imo.

I know about Uncanny Valley but I still think that knowing something is CGI (just knowing how it’s done) regaurdless of the quality sets a psychological barrier between the viewer and the action....oh well that’s clearly not a physical object in the real world because no animatronic like that exists.

I think people need to stop looking at the cgi and just watch the movie. For other movies too.

[esteban²]

I disagree. That last sentence feels totally wrong. People are watching movies. It's so-so use of CGI that takes them out of it. Not otherwise. You're only aware of CGI when it's not used in the right way.

We're not going to agree on this.

[AaronJ]

Originally Posted by esteban²

I disagree. That last sentence feels totally wrong. People are watching movies. It's so-so use of CGI that takes them out of it. Not otherwise. You're only aware of CGI when it's not used in the right way.

We're not going to agree on this.

Well, to play along with Wildcat here, I sort of have to agree with him. There are always going to be people -- and they are almost always the loudest ones -- who go with the intention of coming back and saying how bad it was, and how it took them out of the movie, and how blah blah blah.

Some people just go wanting to dislike the CGI, or whatever element there is.

[levcore]

I know someone who thinks that CG looks bad if it's used for anything organic, so people, animals, monsters etc. No matter how good it is, they think it looks bad. The only CG they say looks great is stuff like transformers or where the fx are just used for non organic things like vehicles perhaps.

We all see stuff differently.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by levcore

I know someone who thinks that CG looks bad if it's used for anything organic, so people, animals, monsters etc. No matter how good it is, they think it looks bad. The only CG they say looks great is stuff like transformers or where the fx are just used for non organic things like vehicles perhaps.

We all see stuff differently.

CGI is a tool and without it, some films wouldn't be possible. There should definitely be limits to how much it's used in film, especially since it seems to be at the root of a lot of budget issues.

[esteban²]

Originally Posted by AaronJ

Well, to play along with Wildcat here, I sort of have to agree with him. There are always going to be people -- and they are almost always the loudest ones -- who go with the intention of coming back and saying how bad it was, and how it took them out of the movie, and how blah blah blah.

Some people just go wanting to dislike the CGI, or whatever element there is.

But in that case you are talking about the unreasonable minority. And that's not really the case with what was talked about here. I'm certainly not one of those. Hèhè. No. JW is -at times- a (modern) classic example of when CGI is circling with the uncanny valley area. So close to doing it right, it's unfortunately very clear to point out why it's not in certain scenes. Are there movies that have CGI that's way worse? Absolutely. The majority of that year, no doubt. I would say JW has great CGI all together at least half of the time, but used wrongly here and there. It just has the disadvantage of having a 20+ year old example that was successful in doing everything right when it comes to the use of it. One that's still more convincing after all this time and makes it very obvious when JW is not nailing it. It's just such a shame, cause we know they can do it. Fingers crossed for Fallen Kingdom.

[Cremildo]

I should add that I'm not a CGI hater (on the contrary). I was just being sincere when I mentioned that I consider most of the CGI in JPIII and JW - both are movies I otherwise enjoy - subpar. My main problem with them is the texture, which isn't believable to my eyes. However, for whatever reason, there are some scenes that work just fine. The Pterodactyls in JPIII look pretty good, and I'm reasonably impressed by the final battle between the T-Rex and the Indominus in JW.

[Riddhi2011]

Originally Posted by Cremildo

I don't mind the reliance on CGI dinos as long as the CGI is top-notch, which wasn't the case in either JPIII or JW.

JPIII CGI was not good? Apart from the Brachiosaurus' on the bank, all CG animals were rather indistinguishable to me from their animatronic counterparts.


JP3_Spino Reveal Full height lowrez.jpg

JP3_Spino_VFX.jpg

JP3_Pteranodon_VFX lowrez.jpg

Jp3_vfx Raptor smoke hrez.jpg

Jp3_vfx surrounded 3.jpg


These do not look top-notch to you?

Don't look at the horrible magenta-blue tinted DVD or Blu-ray because it's not the original colour-timing of the films. All three movies were timed warm, with a golden-brown look. There's a beauty with photochemically timed films that is just not there with DI'd movies. Compared to these, JW CG dinosaurs look much more fake and unconvincing.

[Riddhi2011]

More -

tbs-jurassic-park-3 lowrez.jpg

jurassic-park-still1 lowrez.jpg

Jp3_vfx surrounded 2.jpg

Jp3_vfx surrounded.jpg

I don't know about you guys, but with the original warmer timing, the VFX in JP3 feels the most organic and realistic to me. There are scenes when in the same shot there's an animatronic animal and a CG one. I couldn't tell which from which until I saw the behind-the-scenes clips.