Top Practical Effects YOU SHOULD ALL KNOW | Pre Digital Age SFX vs CGI & the Clear Winner

Practical Effects sell the visuals and there were countless examples of this movie making magic in the best live action films during The GEN Xperience. Everyone should see and know about these TOP Practical Effects during the pre digital age VFX. Come Behind the scenes of the biggest best movies and how Practical Effects challenge today's CGI for greatest Visual SFX in film.

[@franken-pattern]

The Thing (80s version) was absolutely fantastic and was brilliantly executed!

[@GENXPERIENCE]

The tension, the story, the mystery, the action, the gore...the SCI FI...LOVE IT

[@mikerohlfs2836]

I look back at Willow as one of the "benchmarks" of CGI, and Young Sherlock Holmes, but the only reason the effects were used was because all attempts at a practical effects were exhausted. Now it's all about how fast is the turnaround, there is never guess work with CGI, and simple lack of creativity. I was a big fan of CGI especially after Jurassic Park, but that's when it was a tool, not a means to an end. Keep it up, love the channel!

[@GENXPERIENCE]

There are definitely great examples of good CGI, but now I see the rush job they have veered towards. I still like when they enhance or add to something, but when the entire effect is DIGITAL and COMPUTER it loses any real emotion of fear, tension or excitement. You just don't' believe it.

[@jpthompson]

Oh wow! I really enjoyed this one and learned a lot. Thank you for being my Guide through this trip back in time!

[@GENXPERIENCE]

You bet. Thank you for watching and commenting, but more importantly for enjoying it...and you got to learn something.

[@jodyjonas5263]

7:25 Many of my favorites here;AAWIL,The Thing,The Terminator,Clash(1981),Poltergeist,Raiders,etc. Fantastic video;well researched comparisons,my friend !

[@GENXPERIENCE]

Thanks for watching. Seriously a lot of fun, and I just loved all the practical realism. Thanks for the comment, too.

[@DougPalumbo]

YES, Robocop and The Thing!

[@GENXPERIENCE]

So many good ones.

[@peacewillow]

i prefer the old school special effects, for sure. one of the reasons i haven't seen any of the disney remakes is their heavy use of cgi in their "live action" versions. there's also something to be said for that hands on artistry, rather than simply sitting at a keyboard typing in instructions for a computer program to follow. it would be okay, i guess, if the art forms lived side by side, but, sadly, one always seems to replace the other, usually for monetary reasons.

[@GENXPERIENCE]

The live action Disney movies usually make me sad as the animation is classic. There is way too much CGI in those too. I love the artistry as well. I believe that some digital animation is perfectly suitable, but has to be intgegrated well. Thanks for the watch and comment.

[@davidpyott3710]

Amazing video mate Great script and editing Thanks I d love more videos discussing this topic 🤘😎

[@GENXPERIENCE]

So happy you watched this. It is isn't what brings in the views, but I LOVE THE TOPIC

[@holliberry9778]

So much excellent gross stuff comes from these practical effects. Hopefully the industry will be better at using them WITH CGI.

[@GENXPERIENCE]

It is true that is was gross....but practical effects just sold it better, right?

[@jordanodwyer6552]

Praying for the comeback of practical effects 🙏🏻

[@GENXPERIENCE]

I don't mind a little CGI to help out, and mostly for non living things...but not for my peeps or creatures: Too obviously fake, am I right?

[@mikerohlfs2836]

Oh man do miniatures, I love me some good miniatures!

[@GENXPERIENCE]

Miniatures and Concept Art are like my top loves of Movie Making Magic. Thanks for watching.

[@ArtDocHound]

Actually, Thriller is a documentary. It really happened!

[@GENXPERIENCE]

Cute...I WISH, lol

[@Titleknown]

I will say, to get a bit political, the reason CGI keeps replacing practical even when practical looks better is that; thanks to VFX studios not being unionized when practical effects people are; the studio can underpay them while forcing them to constantly twiddle things due to market research in a continual state of overworked crunchtime. The flipside is, if you want more practical effects in movies, support the unionization of VFX artists so that we can get that proper balance you speak of. Tho, that aside, there are some folks doing some amazing practical effects work on KZbin even on an indie scale/budget that're worth looking into, Bluworm and Will Mcdaniel immediately come to mind!

[@GENXPERIENCE]

Thank you. I think this was a wonderful comment and I appreciate you sharing. THere is a lot to dig into there, and I think it is worth saying.

[@barryaloisi7397]

Has me pining for 1980s gore.

[@GENXPERIENCE]

That's the spirit. They've taken the edge off today, especially on PG, lol.

[@barryaloisi7397]

@@GENXPERIENCE Brian De Palma, David Cronenberg. They don't build 'em like they used to.

[@Thomas-VA]

there are a lot more bad cgi effects but there is also a large enough percentage of bad practical effects, based in part on budget, talents involved, time allocated, care of duty and intent. There is a place for both, whereas one or the other may better serve the aforementioned. Over time, even brillant practical for its time can be pointed out as an effect that is starting to age. In my vote, yes do practical, it often looks live to the world vs the uncanny valley that cg can often be, but let's not let the studio and its talents off for not putting their best foot forward in either use vs hating on one so easily.

[@RetroDaze]

Even the obviously fake stuff like stop motion and poorly executed props have a certain charm and appeal that even the best CGI lacks. Except Dick Jones falling out the window at the end of RoboCop. That’s just bad. 😆

[@GENXPERIENCE]

Yeah, they were all good, but there is that tactile real type of thing from Practical, am I right?

[@jonasirw1]

If everyone generally agrees that analog practical effects are orders of magnitude better than digital vfx, then why the hell doesn't a major studio make a new movie with mostly practical effects? It's certainly not due to costs since movies budgets have only grown like crazy over the last 10yrs..There have got to be hands on artists and craftsman still around who know how to do this stuff.. Over reliance on digital has mostly destroyed both music and the art of movie making. This is why nobody goes to the theaters anymore unless they are playing older stuff from the 80-90s again, which is becoming more and more common.. Hollywood gradually became completely disconnected from what the people want and they don't see to realize how bad its gotten .

[@GENXPERIENCE]

Disconnected...you hit the nail on the head. You'd like to say right away that it is cost, but as you mentioned...HARDLY. Movies' are astronomically more expensive now.

[@richmanz447]

CGI allows some directors imagination to ruin a movie. The limitations of practical effects kept some scenes from being outright ridiculous. CGI may have ruined the original Superman and Superman II movies if it was available then.

[@GENXPERIENCE]

I really like how you put that. There are huge imaginations and CGI can assist with some of that, but when they outright use it to tell/show the most outlandish effects, results, scenarios, it takes me right out. I don't want anyone to "improve" the OG Supes with CGI.

[@OaksArmorial]

CGI blows

[@GENXPERIENCE]

Ha ha. Much of the time, ABSOLUTELY