In Chris Pratt's recent interview he covered a few topics
for Jurassic world Fallen Kingdom,
And one of the topics covered was that of animatronics used in Jurassic World Fallen Kingdom.
Even though the last Jurassic World movie had minimal animatronics,
this one seems to be doing the old Jurassic Park film justice for the utilization of much more of them.
Chris Pratt had mentioned that many of the dinosaurs would be in stationary modes where they're not particularly active
which makes them feel more alive, such as the Apatosaurus that Owen and Claire where holding as it died in Jurassic World.
There are fully animatronic versions of Blue and Rexy,
and as Chris mentioned, is easier for an actor to react to those things which gives them a deeper connection.
This also makes the dinosaurs a lot more terrifying.
Jurassic Park did a very good job a portraying CGI dinosaurs on the screen to make them look as realistic as possible.
No one can evaluate, particularly with the animals,
because people aren't as familiar with the animals as they are with the other human beings,
but it helps drive how the convincing display of terror of trepidation on screen
where there's a live object with teeth moving in front of your face
like a shot we saw the Indoraptor cornering someone in his cage.
It is real for the audience as well because we can detect the solidity of the creature.
The reason why CGI works so well in the old days is because of its complimentary use.
Now that many movies are using 90% of CGI versus animatronics it's easier for people to spot the fake or to hone in on it.
This seems to happen in the complaint for Jurassic World,
but the truth is using CGI is cheaper than the alternative.
Christopher Kingery, a film editor, mentioned that
it is generally cheaper to shoot a car on a sound stage with a green screen behind it
than it is shooting a moving car unless there's no dialogue in a scene.
He went on to explain that the reason for this was that, and I quote:
"If you have the engine off and are toying the car off screen,
that movement down the road creates enough noise
that you're likely going to have to ADR the dialogue."
and he explained that ADR is when you bring the actors into the studio to rerecord their lines,
and that can be difficult and time consuming
which means that you have to pay them extra money and then you have to take the costly time to since up those lines with the picture.
He said: "I've actually been on the productions that have tried both
and when you figure in salaries the cost to do the green screen was a lot cheaper as well as faster."
The point is that using CGI has a better yield in terms of
how quickly people can produce films, and it seems to be more cost effective in the long run in certain cases,
but not all.
The point of the matter is it depends also what the CGI is.
As someone mentioned, as for the Jurassic World dinosaur animatronics, the pre-production cost of
building the animatronic, carrying it on set having to use just choreographic perfectly, and fitting this into
often messy shooting schedules, along with other things makes for a very cumbersome workload
as opposed to just animating everything.
Many people today are of the mind that animatronics were only deemed with better advantage for studios
when it financially made sense and that CGI is a cheaper alternative overall.
The use of CGI is seen a being much easier than using practical effects because instead of
building everything, shooting on a location, and hiring a stunt man, as practical effects requires,
using CGI you can basically shoot the entire movie on a sound stage with a green screen
and CG everything in post-production.
Of course the con of this is that it trades in for realism.
Practical effects really do have their place, like Rexy's scene from out of Jurassic Park when she was
on top of the car trying to get to Tim and Lex and Alan came up to her with a flare,
or Owen petting blue in Jurassic World Fallen Kingdom.
But we want to hear from you guys. Do you think that mostly CGI should be incorporated,
or here's a better question: If it would take longer for Jurassic World to get out another movie
because they were using more practical effects, would you prefer the very long wait as opposed to having
a movie come out quicker with the use of CGI effects?
There seems to be a mix review concerning this topic.
We heard from Chris Pratt's point of view that it's easier for the actors,
but as the audience how do you feel about the use of CGI and/or practical effects in Jurassic World?
This has been Alteori, and this time, we ask, you answer.