Comments on: Discuss: Can Special Effects Still Impress? ILM Creative Director Dennis Muren Says They “Aren’t Special Anymore”

By: Brian Dzyak

Brian Dzyak — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:12:57 +0000

ï¿¼ï¿¼Special Effects: creating practical illusions that actually occur on set such as wind (fans), rain (rain bars, water truck), snow (foam and blowers), and fire (flame bars, explosives).

Visual Effects: taking the film shot on set and enhancing it later in post-production with computers or optical processes.

Two different departments. Two different career paths.

By: Brian Dzyak

Brian Dzyak — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:12:57 +0000

ï¿¼ï¿¼Special Effects: creating practical illusions that actually occur on set such as wind (fans), rain (rain bars, water truck), snow (foam and blowers), and fire (flame bars, explosives).

Visual Effects: taking the film shot on set and enhancing it later in post-production with computers or optical processes.

Two different departments. Two different career paths.

By: droop

droop — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:12:57 +0000

remember the 2001, star wars, the thing? models still look better

By: Alan B

Alan B — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:12:57 +0000

"mere quibbles to give James Cameron pause for thought before he charges back to the CG environments of the âAvatarâ sequels?" No, not actually. If there is one thing that Cameron knows, it's how to create special effects that feel completely new and distinct to the audience. With the possible exception of Lucas, Spielberg and Zemeckis, no other living filmmaker has been responsible for as many iconic special effects images. In other words, Cameron will be just fine.

By: Rob

Rob — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:12:57 +0000

I'll take clay-mation over CG any day. The physicality is what is missing. You see the CG image and know nothing is there, in every sense. But no matter how many times I watch the speeder bike chase in "Return of the Jedi," I know they are puppets, and I know they aren't real, but I know that something was physically present at one point to create that cinematic trickery. When someone sees special effects nowadays, no one asks "How did they do that?" Because everyone already knows. The magic is absent.

By: Ray H

Ray H — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:12:57 +0000

"The name may be unfamiliar…."

What? Anyone who grew up in the 70s, 80s, or 90s and cares enough about movies to visit a movie news website on a regular basis should know who Dennis Muren is. The dude has more Oscars than any other living person.

By: tristan eldritch

tristan eldritch — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:12:57 +0000

I mostly hate the CGI era of effects, and think the decline of blockbuster/fantasy films pretty much coincides with the end of practical/in camera effects. That said, I thought AVATAR was a remarkable achievement.

By: Hmm

Hmm — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:12:57 +0000

Forget about the state of CGI–how about the state of journalism? Neither you nor the site you link these quotes from mention the source these quotes came from.

By: MAL

MAL — Fri, 13 May 2016 10:12:57 +0000

I am generally unimpressed by SFX today but there have been a few exceptions, most notably when they are integrated with practical effects. The Lord of the Rings/The Hobbit come to mind but the most impressive effects I have seen in recent years — the one that truly wow-ed me and made me wonder "How the heck did they do THAT!" — was in Inception. In particular, the zero gravity fight was truly innovative and awesome in its execution.