For NordVPN’s 11th birthday, go to nordvpn.com/accentedcinema to get the two year plan with an exclusive deal PLUS 1 bonus month free AND a bonus gift! It’s risk free with NordVPN’s 30 day money back guarantee!
I'll definitely will be watching this. In Portuguese they called it "Missão no Futuro" (Mission in the Future). Have you ever reviewed or approached the film Zeiramu from 1991? I'd love your take on it. ;)
I want actors to be safe, CGI explosions and jumps is preferable to me because of that. I think it's irresponsible to ask for live action over CGI just for your pleasure when safety is involved. Ppl keep praising Nate's actor ( from Euphoria) dedication, but the actor got a concussion from that intense meltdown scene. It was great at how unsettling it was, but knowing the actor was injured ruined it for me and I don't like it now. This should not be praised or encouraged in any way. He's a great actor, I want a long a prosperous career for him.
The female actress that played Maria is Sally Yeh, who was during the early 90s, the canto pop queen of HK. I was such a big big fan of her back then. So happy to see you discuss a movie about her 😊
shes still around shes in China with hubby, she still looks fine lol..... i still put on her coca cola song from time to time it was awesome and still is XD
I honestly miss these kinds of entertainment, and especially The old form of practical fx! these are magical, the floating Pen trick from 2001: A Space Odyssey still blows my mind though! (1968, that being it's almost 55 years ago!)
practical doesnt look shinny nor plastiquy, thats the real thing, an approximate to how it would look like in real life if it was real. Take for example the Flash trailer, scenes that should look as if the costumes and characters should have snow or dirt on them, do not have them and if they do, it looks as if the dirt was on a shinny rubber plastic. Then they go overly dramatic with the CGI, adding stuff over stuff over stuff to a scene, stuff that they can do on practical but they go and "paint it" with CGI over and over and over it and thats not how real life looks.
in I love María and 2001: A Space Odyssey, it helps both movies are films, this means film captures not only more colors than digital (I dont care if the camera maker says it captures more, I cant see them, the extra colors are not there) it also captures debris and smoke better, it gives the movies a more dramatic look. Digital is ok if you want cheap soap operas and cheap tv shows you dont care about but digital is an abomination for big theatrical movies.
When it comes to practical Hong Kong VFX of the 80s and early 90s two more i would recommend: A Chinese Ghost Story(1987), Peacock King and Saga of the Phoenix. Even a camp movie like Infra-Man has its charm.
i think thats also why kamen riders are still fun to watch even at its worst season, it all came down to a bunch of dudes fighting in horribly impractical costumes. also personal tangent here, even the with the "worst" season in the heisei era, i still consider some of them as the peak of kamen rider seasons. Real LED strips in Faiz suits so they stand out in the dark, Ryuki survive form reveal in a room thats actually on fire, the kind of things that makes you think the suit actors better get a raise. something the more recent seasons kinda lacks.
Forgot which KR but I think it was Black RX - in one of the episodes there were explosions so close to the actor and he actually said that an accident almost happened 😂
The Godzilla series (pre 2014) is another example of how fun and meaningful practical effects can be. The entire charm of those movies is believing in the fantastical yet still also very tangible reality that the effects sequences of those movies present.
Your comment about how difficult it is to understand CGI VFX reinforces for me how important channels like Corridor Crew are. Regrettable or not, as the ubiquity of CGI in the film industry becomes inevitable, it is up to audiences to educate themselves about the tricks of the trade; to understand at least what is difficult and what isn't, so that when CGI breakthroughs like Avatar 2 show up, we as audiences can more fully appreciate the craft that goes on behind them. Having a channel that breaks down the tricks of the trade really helped me appreciate CGI effects in movies even more, and gives me insight into the effects that didn't work as well for me. There was a time when people DID think magic was real, and magicians refused to reveal their tricks for fear or "losing the sense of wonder". It was most likely the same with movie practical SFX too. Now we live in an age where we can appreciate magic tricks BECAUSE we see how difficult it is to pull off. I think the same needs to happen to CGI.
100%. "It is too complex, so it feels like one trick." is such a copout. Spielberg still applied all kinds of tricks to sell the CG dinos, just like tricks used to sell the practical robots.
I really love how much, even in just a few short clips, you can really see the unabashed passion for science fiction that the filmmakers behind I Love Maria have. They wear their influences on their sleeves, and that’s just so deeply endearing (like the references to Metropolis and Bladerunner you mentioned, but also I’m 90% sure the robot’s design was pulled heavily from the Zaku from Mobile Suit Gundam). That passion is infectious, and it’s just nice feeling like there’s lots of other people like yourself who share in your interests.
I love both CGI and Practical FX, but each fits better with the genre used and time period it's in, in my opinion. Superhero blockbuster movies like the MCU using CGI that makes the impossible possible? Great. A horror mystery movie with gory and realistic creature FX like The Thing? Amazing. A blend of modern movie effects with practical stuntwork like Terminator 2? Excellent.
The problem nowadays is that film studios have begun to rely too much on CGI especially when it comes to explosions, CGI explosions just suck to be quite honest.... But then you get films like Mad Max Fury Road where practical effects were combined with CGI and it ends up being so much more of a brilliant spectacle.... I think that's what CGI should be used for, a tool to enhance the practical effects, even in shows like Game Thrones, much of the fantasy environment was filmed in real life locations, but then the CGI would be used to add to that real life location to make it more fantastical, so a mountainous region in Tibet now becomes a mystical temple hidden among the snowy peaks.... This was the initial purpose of CGI, but sadly big film studios have begun to overly rely on it and completely do away with the practical stuff
noones making you choose between one or the other fx.... they both exist to push the story or the idea of selling the movie forward, it exists to make the movie or the story of the movie, its knowing when to stop using digital fx.... why use a dodgy digital fake arnie when it looks rubbish when you can use a look alike with a mask etc..... deep fake and photoshop also exist so.... again it depends on whats important to movie.... im just blown away by how bad some of the modern digital vfx is
"A horror mystery movie with gory and realistic creature FX like The Thing?" And then you learn about why they replaced all the practical effects in the 2011 The Thing prequel with CGI...
I love this movie so much! A friend turned me on to it back it the 90s before the CGI way. Like you my mind was blow away on the level of Effects costumes and props. I've been trying to find a good copy on DVD for years.
CGI to filmmakers is like computers to graphic designers. Back in college professors told us to treat computers like a tool, that we should still rely mostly on hand crafting and use tech to merely better or deliver the final result.
My dad took us to see this when I was a kid. Thanks for doing this. At the time, Tsui Hark was very creative and he introduced a lot of new ideas into the so-called "mainstream" HK cinema. Robocop was there a year before but it was considered not for family viewing. We haven't watched it until the VHS rental came. "I love Maria" was a comedy for all ages. You may find the acting a bit cartoonish and the pacing was fast but that's understandable. Back then, we applaused at big explosions and cool hero moments. We laughed when the bad guys got their asses kicked. Practical effects made the audiences' waiting and rewarding process much more enjoyable simply because the filmmakers tried their best to design those impressive moments. CGI sequences do the same but we are all so fed up with that "the larger, the better" thing.
It's interesting how when I was young, I remember feeling uncomfortable with these unconvincing special effects in Hong Kong films, and preferred CGI. Now somehow I feel intrigued by these amazing efforts of trying to turn imaginations real when the technology was not there. There are always stories about how these practical effects were done, the struggle, the breakthrough, and how people at the end achieved the impossible with very limited budget.
In the first Jurassic Park they did use a large mechanical puppet T-Rex for many of the close shots involving it's head. It was created by the great Stan Winston and his studio.
Great to see you back man ! Practical effects are special, the obvious comparison to me is always the Lord of the rings trilogy vs the hobbit trilogy. There is such a huge difference between the two. Practical effects have a very tangible and timeless quality to them, something which CGI unfortunately can’t emulate ❤
Good CG effects makes themselves feel like they are part of the world, something with weight and interaction, like how you said about practical effect. Even if they don't look real, as long as they feel real, it won't take the audience out of it. The best example of how CG failed vs CG succeed are the two Pacific Rim movies. Both has CG giant robots fighting CG monsters in CG cities, but the first one feels more grounded, like the tokusatsu where camera shakes along with everything in the environment. The CG environment has imperfection of miniature sets. In short, the CG in the first one feels like they were shot practically. The second one on the other hand has everything feeling floaty and weightless. There is an usual newness to the environment that doesn't feel real.
I think the same also applies to Shin Godzilla. Instead of going for creature effect, Godzilla and the environment in that film mimics the old suitmation aesthetic, to a very delightful result.
Dune is also similar to what you are saying. In the cgi scenes, Villeneuve purposely used virtual camera placements/movements that a real camera could actually be placed at
Iirc the first Pacific Rim also has quite a bit of practical effects, i still remember the behind the scenes of Gypsy Danger's fist hitting a building, which was almost entirely done with practical effects
The first Pacific Rim is a well thought action blockbuster, the second is an after thought when some bloke just thought oh wait we can do a unneeded sequel with a crazy plot twist that shouldn't even happen & put children as pilots to somehow grab the younger audience & the made in china narrative of Michael Bay transformers in the mix...but putting half the effort the first one had in production.
There's also a scene where Dr Strange & Spidey are on a train and the environment is sunny yet both of them have no visible sunlit effect. It's like a non existent cloud shade was on them contradicting the background....iow the green screen wasn't translated to the actors lighting.
Personally, my favorite thing about practical effects is the experience of a few artists' personal touch. When I watch stop-motion in The Valley of Gwangi, The 7th Voyage of Sinbad, Jason and the Argonauts and so on, I can respect that the animation was done by one man, Ray Harryhausen, working alone in his own studio. When I watch CGI, on the other hand, I know that there are hundreds, if not thousands of software engineers and animators involved, at which point it no longer feels like art so much as it feels like science. CGI isn't inherently bad, but even at its best it will never achieve the intimate feel that practical effects have.
Amazing point of view, SFX are really a product of a creative vision. just pointing one thing, vinyl records are actually better sound sources than digital, for it being a physical analog to sound waves, not being a series of digital "sound frames". Besides that great video as whole, i love that era of film making. keep bringing this gold to the light.
talking about practical effects, one genre comes to mind that lives and dies on selling the illusion of the effects: horror for better or for worse, people like to talk about the amount of blood being spilled in certain horror movies (peter jackson's dead alive comes to mind), or how convincing it is to see someone being dismembered limb by limb. I guess I don't need to say how unconvincing and shoddy it would look like if all this was done through CGI I think that's the advantage practical effects have above CGI: it sells you the storytelling in the best way. horror with practical effects really get the fear and terror across. sci-fi/fantasy movies with practical effects sell the scale/worldbuilding. sure, you'd still be in awe when it comes to CGI, but often the moment is over before it even starts
Old practical effects become endearing as they get older. I love 80s effects films (the thing 1982, the blob 1988, the gate 1987) and the old effects are either stunningly good or charmingly bad.
I really liked the conclusion about creativity. That's also something I loved so much about the effects in Everything Everywhere all at Once. It didn't matter as much which effects were practical and which were CGI what mattered the most is how they were used, showing me things I had not seen before while at the same time working in the confinements of a relatively small budget
By the end I think you pretty accurately described why I love Nolan’s VFX. He only uses CG when he thinks there’s something that we haven’t seen before that can be done with it. Otherwise he does it practically since tactile known quantities are far more impressive when done for real.
This is an awesome video and a great discussion of the topic. I find that for whatever reason I am always able to suspend my disbelief and get into a film more when they use practical effects. I CAN believe the Muppets are real and I get a palpable thrill whenever The Wolf Man breaks through a door in the old Universal movies. The physicality of it always makes me excited. I can still enjoy the odd modern spectacle but usually the story has to match it, the modern Planet of the Apes films really worked for me as they combined a great story with modern spectacle.
Sometimes practical affects can look very bad, like hand puppets or prosthetic masks on actors. I think a middle ground is best, practical fx spiced up with cgi. Good examples imo include Mad Max Fury Road, Automata, Dark Crystal Age of Resistance, or even stop motion movies from Laika.
I don’t know how many others agree but I enjoy practical effects simply because in many ways it looks more “realistic” than CGI. Digital effects are highly advanced now but most examples seem to be very obvious when it comes to how the lighting, contrast, etc are just a little off to the point of us knowing it’s CGI. Practical effects look more visceral and blend in more naturally with the visual aesthetic of the film rather than being somewhat “plastic-y”. Until you put a CGI human next to a real human and no longer tell the difference, CGI is simply not photorealistic enough to overtake practical effects in terms of hard “tactile” realism.
As a person, who got himself into CG/VFX stuff, i got the exact same emotional resonance from appreciating tricks that went into making CG stuff. There is a lot of effort put to make everything made by hand - even when it's not really.
What I miss is the time when effects were a tool to tell the story -- not something you pull off only becaue you can. I have to think of a video on the channel "So Uncivilized", about the pratical effects in "Star Wars" when R2D2 was caught by the Jawas. The narrator says: "George Lucas did not do this to show a practical effect; he did this to show that R2 is in danger". In your example she does not pull out the lock to show a practical effect; she does it so that the audience knows how strong she is.
Agreed, and I think that affects how practical effects are used today. With CGI being so common, sometimes you get a movie that's the exact opposite of the "check out our fancy CGI!" movie that Avatar was -- instead, we get a case of "isn't it so cool we didn't use CGI?" movie, with all of the same problems, just inverted; still focusing on the special effects instead of the story.
I had this discussion with a friend who was an engineering student. He couldn't see beyond the idea that newer is always better, and I suspect a lot of people do think that way because it's how we look at society: as moving forward, not backwards. Art doesn't really work this way though. New technology just creates new tools to fuel creativity, and of course everyone likes a new toy to play with, but in the long run it just joins the variety of toys and tools available. Movies are at their best combining different tools and their respective strengths to create the best effects.
Excellently put. The malaise and indifference the casual moviegoer feels is a direct result of filmmakers abusing techniques that don't exist in the scene with the talent. CGI is, in many ways, the safe and predictable path. The path of least resistance and the path of least risk. But, it turns out, for a visceral experience that engages the audience, it's best to embrace risk, unpredictability (like a real explosion), and capturing real moment in time.
Practical and CG-generated FX are tools. A good film maker knows both tools weaknesses and strengths and will use them accordingly. Just like in magic, you remember the bad ones more so than the ones done seamlessly, just like when most people point to CG FX they point out the bad/noticeable ones. When done well you don't notice it just like a perfectly executed magic trick. One is nither better or more special than the other. They're all tools and in that sense depend on the artist/filmmaker on how well the tool is used to execute a scene.
the other thing about vfx is that you can always tell that its vfx because of how the lighting is applied and the animations, soon as a digital character or object moves you can tell it straight away since the motion is unrealistic
Director Tsui Hark used to be super-inspired in HK movie making. No idea what caused his creativity and final works went downhill in many levels after 2000s. He is probably the most versatile and courageous director tried to make every different theme of movies from ancient swordmen, modern gunfight to future cyberpunk in Asia filmmaking. He is fortunate to continue making movies but he no longer able to bring us awesomeness for many years. A respectful HK director who actually can acted very well too ~. He is a pure genius alive in our time.
Awesome video! As someone who absolutely loves practical effects I feel really silly that I never herd of this film until now lol. I would also love to see a modern film with their big 200 million dollar budgets be created 100% with practical effects today. I will definitely be checking out I love Maria too, thanks for sharing!
ahh i just watched i love maria, love tsui hark wildly jumping from all time classics like once upon a time in china and peking opera blues to extremely silly schlock like this (complimentary). my personal favorite hk practical effects come from lam nai choi's the peacock king, so many creative effects in that
This is kind of the principle people like Eiji Tsubaraya worked on; they didn't want to emulate the real world; they wanted people to enjoy the fantasy; that's why when Tsubaraya released Ultraman, he called it "a special effects fantasy series." We know they are people in rubber suits fighting in miniatures, but we don't care because the effort feels so genuine that you enjoy it
Oh dang Jackie Chan. Fave actor who does his own stunts. You not only perceive his stunts to be real but you also feel them to be real because they're done mostly by him with practical fx.
this is pretty relevant to the AI art and writing discussion too. art that is mass produced by copying other art rather than observing real life tends to be very superficial. contrast this to like photobashing or glitch art, which also use existing art but really put a lot of effort into making something new
Practical and digital effects are both tools for the filmmakers. The result depends on how they are used. Practical effects also has its limitations, either due to certain artistic style or simply impossible logistics. I don't know if "thrilled" could be the word, but there are CGI explosions I found remarkable and in awe of --- The destruction of planet Jedha in 'Rogue One' and the hyperspace ram in 'The Last Jedi'.
If you are fan of old-school Practical sci-fi action, I would recommend checking out more classic tokusatsu, especially the work of directors like Keita Amemiya(Kamen Rider ZO, Mechanical Violator Hakaider). It's full of stuff like this and an absolute joy to watch! I will definitely have to check out these films as well. Some great points made in this video about the immersion gained from how much more methodical practical effects have to be compared to computer, and the comment abt how VFX are too complicated to be fully appreciated by the audience is interesting to think abt.
Toei has its own live action tv version of Sōji Yamakawa’s Kenya Boy, which is still a beautifully unkempt predecessor not only to Goranger and JAKQ, but also to Super Sentai shows in general.
I Love Maria! Omg! I used to watch this as a kid on my Astro Wah Lai Toi TV! I’ll say this is pretty awesome considering that this is Hong Kong’s own Mecha show inspired by Japanese.
i was going just going to say the same thing , back int he early 80's gundam 79 series was very popular in Hong Kong, they probably used the Zaku desing ( with a two dot eye to differentiate for against copyright law sue from Japan )
I think in that part of Asia, it would be called a manhua, I don't know the Cantonese name so could be wrong. but they do have similar comic books to manga outside of Japan. Manhua in China and Manhwa in Korea.
I agree with the idea that we enjoy practical effects in the same way we enjoy magic tricks. Trying to imagine how they did it is so much fun, and while cgi takes a lot of work and is always evolving, behind-the-scenes videos for practical effects are so much more fun than bts for cgi because bts for cgi pretty much all looks the same. It takes videos like "VFX artists react" to explain why vfx scenes are impressive, because at a glance, cgi looks relatively similar, while practical effects always keep you guessing.
Totally agree. And I love Maria is one of my fav movie. Watched this one as a kid and the robots fight blew me away. When I re-watched this one, I still find this movie charming.
Man I’m so in love with this channel Recently I’ve been watching a lot of your videos and the only one missing for me is one where you talk about the video game SIFU from last year
I think for me a lot of the time the *design* is the most exciting part. I like to see what the robot looks like, and in that sense it always feels like the heights of CGI are higher than the heights of practical effects. I've never seen a practical robot that looked better than Gypsy Danger, although modern Transformers have always looked ridiculous to me as well. I'm not that story oriented, I've often thought I'd love to see smaller studios get license to just produce the fight scenes from a popular book series. Instead of trying to re-imagine the series for film, instead just provide a visual supplement to the books. I usually just want to see a convincing portrayal, and in many cases practical effects are better, but in many cases they are worse.
I remember this watching in 1994 as a 2nd grade kid loved the movie and music , the camera work is amazing in this movie , cool soundtrack, even today I'm searching for its soundtrack
I remembered watching this movie in Tv not cable somewhere in the earlies 90’s for those who are from Mexico I remembered watching it in a weekday in Imevision now TV Azteca. Awesome movie and great video, love your content!
But the movies that have great CGI is on par with the movies that use practical effects. Example is Avatar 1 & 2. My take is that we should have perfect mixture of CGI and Practical effects.
The reason why practical effects are so much more revered is that you know someone had to build and construct that damn thing you’re looking at. So she it looks amazing on film you’re left with a sense of wonder. Star Wars. The Thing ET American Werewolf in London Ghostbusters Back to the Future Are all great examples. When it’s built in a computers guts to fool the eye people can get caught up in the spectacle and lose the emotion, the weight of objects, the physics of the physical. Tom Cruise commented that if the Burg climb was done via green screen they would have missed the glass giving a little as he put his hand against it. CGI works best when it’s a tool to enhance not a crutch to balance on.
I had a vague memory from 30+ years ago about a movie I watched on tv about a female robot shooting a missile into a robots chest. Didnt catch the name of the film, but that scene stuck with me. THIS IS IT!!
I disagree, a great cgi doesn't need pre-production but it needs great and unique vision. It needs unique art design. It doesn't need heavy time. I agree with you that special effect has it's own magic but a good cgi would try to create similar type of feeling with great enough details to perplex you instead of it looking very similar and normal animation like. In fact, i would say a good mixture of special effects and cgi creates the best experience. A good example is that whale/dolphin scene in 'The Boys'.
This movie was made in the days of free Hong Kong as well, when people there could express their wildest dreams and visions in art of all fields without communist censorship. In many ways, 80's was the peak of human culture elsewhere too.
I do digital FX and it never occured to me that most people don't break down visual FX the way I do (omg how did they do that?) and that's absolutely true. In practical FX for most audiences they'll think "how can I do that?" while in digital I only think this after years of doing it!
Practical x Digital effects aside, i think a HUGE part of the problem is that "fix it in post" mentality. Older movies also had that, but CGI and tighter production and release schedules have made it a new normal.
Thank you for putting this together. I got introduced to this film in the 90s by a guy I knew who put out an Asian film review zine ( Asian Eye, Colin Geddes ) and to this day still thank him. It's just so good all the way to the last frame. Between this and the Mad Mission series, western films have a lot to make up for. Oversaturation and hyper-reality are mind blowing, but you can't beat the punch of bold simplicity, and a lot of heart. Subscribed. Please keep up the good work.
The question "do LPs sound better?" is kind of a trick question. A lot of the MP3s we downloaded from the 1990s (if you're old enough LOL) likely won't sound as good as a RUclips video of an LP playing. That's because a lot of those older MP3s were made with poor sound reproduction, possibly ripped off poor quality CDs using software that was considerably less sophisticated than something like Exact Audio Copy now. You won't catch it if you're playing it on a cheap MP3 player and cheap headphones, but place it in the computer compared to the same song in a lossless AIFF and you'll be able to tell which one is better Also, there is an audiophile fandom for particularly the extra noise added when you play audio on older formats like LPs, because they add an organic quality to recordings
Agree with your thesis 100%. I would also add that anyone who went out of their way to become a student of film, whether taking classes for this subject in any form (but especially in production), or pursuing this passion on their own from available sources at local libraries, the internet, or someone's personal collection on the subject, are far more likely to appreciate on a greater scale all that you covered here, and at the same time be more vocal about it in any medium in print or on screen. For the hand pushing through the "metal" door, pulling the lock through, do think it was foam rubber overlaid with something like aluminum foil to give the shot that "peeled back" metal effect? Thanks for this insightful video showcasing this fun film!
I love this channel, you always discuss amazing topics and feature awesome movies many people haven’t heard of 🥰 10:38 I’m glad you mentioned this, as i was wondering if this movie was a Metropolis homage, not just in the robot’s design, but also the name Maria (the robot’s human version in the 1927 film). The 1991 movie “Robotrix” you mentioned is also a name sometimes used for the Maschinemensch… coincidence? 🤔 Also, the big robot reminds me of a Votoms Scopedog, so that’s cool too 😄
For me, Godzilla Vs King Kong was an excellent and over the top monster mash cartoon brawl that happened to have some live action elements. Older films that showed mastery of practical effects are wonderful because, when they really nail it, they're some how much more believable than anything that is clearly cgi, even if it doesn't move correctly it draws me in much more than seeing an actor try to react to animated things that are not actually there before him.
When I was a little boy in the 80's I watched this and 'Yes, Madam' with Michelle Yeoh and Cynthia Rothrock.... All these years I never knew what the names of films were but I enjoyed them and searched for aaaaages. Thanks for finally giving me the name to this film.
For NordVPN’s 11th birthday, go to nordvpn.com/accentedcinema to get the two year plan with an exclusive deal PLUS 1 bonus month free AND a bonus gift! It’s risk free with NordVPN’s 30 day money back guarantee!
Nice. l would love to see you cover Fallen Angels
Im sorry is your Netflix pfp Diane from BoJack Horseman lol or was that stock
I'll definitely will be watching this. In Portuguese they called it "Missão no Futuro" (Mission in the Future). Have you ever reviewed or approached the film Zeiramu from 1991? I'd love your take on it. ;)
You should check also a Hong Kong movie Mad Mission series especially part 2. It includes similar practical effects.
I want actors to be safe, CGI explosions and jumps is preferable to me because of that.
I think it's irresponsible to ask for live action over CGI just for your pleasure when safety is involved.
Ppl keep praising Nate's actor ( from Euphoria) dedication, but the actor got a concussion from that intense meltdown scene.
It was great at how unsettling it was, but knowing the actor was injured ruined it for me and I don't like it now. This should not be praised or encouraged in any way. He's a great actor, I want a long a prosperous career for him.
The female actress that played Maria is Sally Yeh, who was during the early 90s, the canto pop queen of HK. I was such a big big fan of her back then. So happy to see you discuss a movie about her 😊
She’s also the singer in John Woo’s The Killer.
shes still around shes in China with hubby, she still looks fine lol..... i still put on her coca cola song from time to time it was awesome and still is XD
Is she still with Mr Mustache?
Sally Yeh is a descendant of regional nobility, isn’t she?
Down badders here
I honestly miss these kinds of entertainment, and especially The old form of practical fx! these are magical, the floating Pen trick from 2001: A Space Odyssey still blows my mind though! (1968, that being it's almost 55 years ago!)
It's hard to believe that movie was made before the moon landing.
Good thing we have people like Christopher Nolan
@@LeonardoKlotz and tom cruise.
practical doesnt look shinny nor plastiquy, thats the real thing, an approximate to how it would look like in real life if it was real. Take for example the Flash trailer, scenes that should look as if the costumes and characters should have snow or dirt on them, do not have them and if they do, it looks as if the dirt was on a shinny rubber plastic. Then they go overly dramatic with the CGI, adding stuff over stuff over stuff to a scene, stuff that they can do on practical but they go and "paint it" with CGI over and over and over it and thats not how real life looks.
in I love María and 2001: A Space Odyssey, it helps both movies are films, this means film captures not only more colors than digital (I dont care if the camera maker says it captures more, I cant see them, the extra colors are not there) it also captures debris and smoke better, it gives the movies a more dramatic look. Digital is ok if you want cheap soap operas and cheap tv shows you dont care about but digital is an abomination for big theatrical movies.
When it comes to practical Hong Kong VFX of the 80s and early 90s two more i would recommend: A Chinese Ghost Story(1987), Peacock King and Saga of the Phoenix. Even a camp movie like Infra-Man has its charm.
New Dragon Gate Inn and The Legend of the Swordsman are also great
journey to the west 1-3
Added to my list, cheers
dont forget shaolin soccer
@@hazimzufar3023 that's the age of digital effects, most of Shaolin Soccer's VFX is not practical.
i think thats also why kamen riders are still fun to watch even at its worst season, it all came down to a bunch of dudes fighting in horribly impractical costumes.
also personal tangent here, even the with the "worst" season in the heisei era, i still consider some of them as the peak of kamen rider seasons. Real LED strips in Faiz suits so they stand out in the dark, Ryuki survive form reveal in a room thats actually on fire, the kind of things that makes you think the suit actors better get a raise. something the more recent seasons kinda lacks.
Yea, I like to watch some old tokusatsu episode/ movie special where they only use practical effect. Feels more immersive than newer cgi effect
You looking forward to "Shin Kamen Rider"? I know I am!
Forgot which KR but I think it was Black RX - in one of the episodes there were explosions so close to the actor and he actually said that an accident almost happened 😂
The Godzilla series (pre 2014) is another example of how fun and meaningful practical effects can be. The entire charm of those movies is believing in the fantastical yet still also very tangible reality that the effects sequences of those movies present.
Your comment about how difficult it is to understand CGI VFX reinforces for me how important channels like Corridor Crew are. Regrettable or not, as the ubiquity of CGI in the film industry becomes inevitable, it is up to audiences to educate themselves about the tricks of the trade; to understand at least what is difficult and what isn't, so that when CGI breakthroughs like Avatar 2 show up, we as audiences can more fully appreciate the craft that goes on behind them. Having a channel that breaks down the tricks of the trade really helped me appreciate CGI effects in movies even more, and gives me insight into the effects that didn't work as well for me.
There was a time when people DID think magic was real, and magicians refused to reveal their tricks for fear or "losing the sense of wonder". It was most likely the same with movie practical SFX too. Now we live in an age where we can appreciate magic tricks BECAUSE we see how difficult it is to pull off. I think the same needs to happen to CGI.
100%. "It is too complex, so it feels like one trick." is such a copout. Spielberg still applied all kinds of tricks to sell the CG dinos, just like tricks used to sell the practical robots.
I hope to chat with you one day. You have been my favorite film analysis channels since 2020.
I spent a few days watching all of his videos，so favorite
I really love how much, even in just a few short clips, you can really see the unabashed passion for science fiction that the filmmakers behind I Love Maria have. They wear their influences on their sleeves, and that’s just so deeply endearing (like the references to Metropolis and Bladerunner you mentioned, but also I’m 90% sure the robot’s design was pulled heavily from the Zaku from Mobile Suit Gundam). That passion is infectious, and it’s just nice feeling like there’s lots of other people like yourself who share in your interests.
I love both CGI and Practical FX, but each fits better with the genre used and time period it's in, in my opinion. Superhero blockbuster movies like the MCU using CGI that makes the impossible possible? Great. A horror mystery movie with gory and realistic creature FX like The Thing? Amazing. A blend of modern movie effects with practical stuntwork like Terminator 2? Excellent.
The problem nowadays is that film studios have begun to rely too much on CGI especially when it comes to explosions, CGI explosions just suck to be quite honest.... But then you get films like Mad Max Fury Road where practical effects were combined with CGI and it ends up being so much more of a brilliant spectacle.... I think that's what CGI should be used for, a tool to enhance the practical effects, even in shows like Game Thrones, much of the fantasy environment was filmed in real life locations, but then the CGI would be used to add to that real life location to make it more fantastical, so a mountainous region in Tibet now becomes a mystical temple hidden among the snowy peaks.... This was the initial purpose of CGI, but sadly big film studios have begun to overly rely on it and completely do away with the practical stuff
Transformers: the magnificent marvel marriage of practical and CG
noones making you choose between one or the other fx.... they both exist to push the story or the idea of selling the movie forward, it exists to make the movie or the story of the movie, its knowing when to stop using digital fx.... why use a dodgy digital fake arnie when it looks rubbish when you can use a look alike with a mask etc..... deep fake and photoshop also exist so.... again it depends on whats important to movie.... im just blown away by how bad some of the modern digital vfx is
Gotta love gollum and tree beard also!! Maybe the undead pirates from Caribbean aswell pretty cool
"A horror mystery movie with gory and realistic creature FX like The Thing?" And then you learn about why they replaced all the practical effects in the 2011 The Thing prequel with CGI...
I love this movie so much! A friend turned me on to it back it the 90s before the CGI way. Like you my mind was blow away on the level of Effects costumes and props. I've been trying to find a good copy on DVD for years.
CGI to filmmakers is like computers to graphic designers. Back in college professors told us to treat computers like a tool, that we should still rely mostly on hand crafting and use tech to merely better or deliver the final result.
My dad took us to see this when I was a kid. Thanks for doing this. At the time, Tsui Hark was very creative and he introduced a lot of new ideas into the so-called "mainstream" HK cinema. Robocop was there a year before but it was considered not for family viewing. We haven't watched it until the VHS rental came. "I love Maria" was a comedy for all ages. You may find the acting a bit cartoonish and the pacing was fast but that's understandable. Back then, we applaused at big explosions and cool hero moments. We laughed when the bad guys got their asses kicked. Practical effects made the audiences' waiting and rewarding process much more enjoyable simply because the filmmakers tried their best to design those impressive moments. CGI sequences do the same but we are all so fed up with that "the larger, the better" thing.
Holy crap, how did I miss this growing up?! Thanks for sharing it!!
It's interesting how when I was young, I remember feeling uncomfortable with these unconvincing special effects in Hong Kong films, and preferred CGI. Now somehow I feel intrigued by these amazing efforts of trying to turn imaginations real when the technology was not there. There are always stories about how these practical effects were done, the struggle, the breakthrough, and how people at the end achieved the impossible with very limited budget.
In the first Jurassic Park they did use a large mechanical puppet T-Rex for many of the close shots involving it's head. It was created by the great Stan Winston and his studio.
Great to see you back man ! Practical effects are special, the obvious comparison to me is always the Lord of the rings trilogy vs the hobbit trilogy. There is such a huge difference between the two. Practical effects have a very tangible and timeless quality to them, something which CGI unfortunately can’t emulate ❤
Timeless? Looks outdated and janky to me.
Good CG effects makes themselves feel like they are part of the world, something with weight and interaction, like how you said about practical effect. Even if they don't look real, as long as they feel real, it won't take the audience out of it.
The best example of how CG failed vs CG succeed are the two Pacific Rim movies. Both has CG giant robots fighting CG monsters in CG cities, but the first one feels more grounded, like the tokusatsu where camera shakes along with everything in the environment. The CG environment has imperfection of miniature sets. In short, the CG in the first one feels like they were shot practically. The second one on the other hand has everything feeling floaty and weightless. There is an usual newness to the environment that doesn't feel real.
I think the same also applies to Shin Godzilla. Instead of going for creature effect, Godzilla and the environment in that film mimics the old suitmation aesthetic, to a very delightful result.
Dune is also similar to what you are saying. In the cgi scenes, Villeneuve purposely used virtual camera placements/movements that a real camera could actually be placed at
Iirc the first Pacific Rim also has quite a bit of practical effects, i still remember the behind the scenes of Gypsy Danger's fist hitting a building, which was almost entirely done with practical effects
The first Pacific Rim is a well thought action blockbuster, the second is an after thought when some bloke just thought oh wait we can do a unneeded sequel with a crazy plot twist that shouldn't even happen & put children as pilots to somehow grab the younger audience & the made in china narrative of Michael Bay transformers in the mix...but putting half the effort the first one had in production.
"Have you ever been thrilled by a CG explosion?"
Shows that famously bad explosion from Black Widow, lol 😄That got a laugh out of me dude
There's also a scene where Dr Strange & Spidey are on a train and the environment is sunny yet both of them have no visible sunlit effect. It's like a non existent cloud shade was on them contradicting the background....iow the green screen wasn't translated to the actors lighting.
Feel like watching Alita vs a Zaku.
I remember buying this DVD at a shop in Chinatown just on the cover alone. Was not disappointed.
Personally, my favorite thing about practical effects is the experience of a few artists' personal touch. When I watch stop-motion in The Valley of Gwangi, The 7th Voyage of Sinbad, Jason and the Argonauts and so on, I can respect that the animation was done by one man, Ray Harryhausen, working alone in his own studio. When I watch CGI, on the other hand, I know that there are hundreds, if not thousands of software engineers and animators involved, at which point it no longer feels like art so much as it feels like science. CGI isn't inherently bad, but even at its best it will never achieve the intimate feel that practical effects have.
Hm, would you say a choir or an orchestra is more science than art?
Amazing point of view, SFX are really a product of a creative vision. just pointing one thing, vinyl records are actually better sound sources than digital, for it being a physical analog to sound waves, not being a series of digital "sound frames". Besides that great video as whole, i love that era of film making. keep bringing this gold to the light.
talking about practical effects, one genre comes to mind that lives and dies on selling the illusion of the effects: horror
for better or for worse, people like to talk about the amount of blood being spilled in certain horror movies (peter jackson's dead alive comes to mind), or how convincing it is to see someone being dismembered limb by limb. I guess I don't need to say how unconvincing and shoddy it would look like if all this was done through CGI
I think that's the advantage practical effects have above CGI: it sells you the storytelling in the best way. horror with practical effects really get the fear and terror across. sci-fi/fantasy movies with practical effects sell the scale/worldbuilding. sure, you'd still be in awe when it comes to CGI, but often the moment is over before it even starts
Old practical effects become endearing as they get older. I love 80s effects films (the thing 1982, the blob 1988, the gate 1987) and the old effects are either stunningly good or charmingly bad.
I really liked the conclusion about creativity. That's also something I loved so much about the effects in Everything Everywhere all at Once. It didn't matter as much which effects were practical and which were CGI what mattered the most is how they were used, showing me things I had not seen before while at the same time working in the confinements of a relatively small budget
By the end I think you pretty accurately described why I love Nolan’s VFX.
He only uses CG when he thinks there’s something that we haven’t seen before that can be done with it. Otherwise he does it practically since tactile known quantities are far more impressive when done for real.
This is an awesome video and a great discussion of the topic.
I find that for whatever reason I am always able to suspend my disbelief and get into a film more when they use practical effects. I CAN believe the Muppets are real and I get a palpable thrill whenever The Wolf Man breaks through a door in the old Universal movies. The physicality of it always makes me excited. I can still enjoy the odd modern spectacle but usually the story has to match it, the modern Planet of the Apes films really worked for me as they combined a great story with modern spectacle.
Sometimes practical affects can look very bad, like hand puppets or prosthetic masks on actors. I think a middle ground is best, practical fx spiced up with cgi. Good examples imo include Mad Max Fury Road, Automata, Dark Crystal Age of Resistance, or even stop motion movies from Laika.
I don’t know how many others agree but I enjoy practical effects simply because in many ways it looks more “realistic” than CGI. Digital effects are highly advanced now but most examples seem to be very obvious when it comes to how the lighting, contrast, etc are just a little off to the point of us knowing it’s CGI. Practical effects look more visceral and blend in more naturally with the visual aesthetic of the film rather than being somewhat “plastic-y”. Until you put a CGI human next to a real human and no longer tell the difference, CGI is simply not photorealistic enough to overtake practical effects in terms of hard “tactile” realism.
As a person, who got himself into CG/VFX stuff, i got the exact same emotional resonance from appreciating tricks that went into making CG stuff. There is a lot of effort put to make everything made by hand - even when it's not really.
What I miss is the time when effects were a tool to tell the story -- not something you pull off only becaue you can. I have to think of a video on the channel "So Uncivilized", about the pratical effects in "Star Wars" when R2D2 was caught by the Jawas. The narrator says: "George Lucas did not do this to show a practical effect; he did this to show that R2 is in danger". In your example she does not pull out the lock to show a practical effect; she does it so that the audience knows how strong she is.
Agreed, and I think that affects how practical effects are used today. With CGI being so common, sometimes you get a movie that's the exact opposite of the "check out our fancy CGI!" movie that Avatar was -- instead, we get a case of "isn't it so cool we didn't use CGI?" movie, with all of the same problems, just inverted; still focusing on the special effects instead of the story.
I had this discussion with a friend who was an engineering student. He couldn't see beyond the idea that newer is always better, and I suspect a lot of people do think that way because it's how we look at society: as moving forward, not backwards. Art doesn't really work this way though. New technology just creates new tools to fuel creativity, and of course everyone likes a new toy to play with, but in the long run it just joins the variety of toys and tools available. Movies are at their best combining different tools and their respective strengths to create the best effects.
Excellently put. The malaise and indifference the casual moviegoer feels is a direct result of filmmakers abusing techniques that don't exist in the scene with the talent. CGI is, in many ways, the safe and predictable path. The path of least resistance and the path of least risk. But, it turns out, for a visceral experience that engages the audience, it's best to embrace risk, unpredictability (like a real explosion), and capturing real moment in time.
An excellent video essay on why older practical effects still ‘hold up’ and look magical. While older CGI often doesn’t.
👏
Even so, I still think Practical Effects are way better than CGI. Great recommendation, AC! Keep up!
Practical and CG-generated FX are tools. A good film maker knows both tools weaknesses and strengths and will use them accordingly. Just like in magic, you remember the bad ones more so than the ones done seamlessly, just like when most people point to CG FX they point out the bad/noticeable ones. When done well you don't notice it just like a perfectly executed magic trick.
One is nither better or more special than the other. They're all tools and in that sense depend on the artist/filmmaker on how well the tool is used to execute a scene.
the other thing about vfx is that you can always tell that its vfx because of how the lighting is applied and the animations, soon as a digital character or object moves you can tell it straight away since the motion is unrealistic
Director Tsui Hark used to be super-inspired in HK movie making. No idea what caused his creativity and final works went downhill in many levels after 2000s. He is probably the most versatile and courageous director tried to make every different theme of movies from ancient swordmen, modern gunfight to future cyberpunk in Asia filmmaking. He is fortunate to continue making movies but he no longer able to bring us awesomeness for many years.
A respectful HK director who actually can acted very well too ~. He is a pure genius alive in our time.
Awesome video! As someone who absolutely loves practical effects I feel really silly that I never herd of this film until now lol. I would also love to see a modern film with their big 200 million dollar budgets be created 100% with practical effects today. I will definitely be checking out I love Maria too, thanks for sharing!
ahh i just watched i love maria, love tsui hark wildly jumping from all time classics like once upon a time in china and peking opera blues to extremely silly schlock like this (complimentary).
my personal favorite hk practical effects come from lam nai choi's the peacock king, so many creative effects in that
This is kind of the principle people like Eiji Tsubaraya worked on; they didn't want to emulate the real world; they wanted people to enjoy the fantasy; that's why when Tsubaraya released Ultraman, he called it "a special effects fantasy series." We know they are people in rubber suits fighting in miniatures, but we don't care because the effort feels so genuine that you enjoy it
Oh dang Jackie Chan. Fave actor who does his own stunts. You not only perceive his stunts to be real but you also feel them to be real because they're done mostly by him with practical fx.
this is pretty relevant to the AI art and writing discussion too. art that is mass produced by copying other art rather than observing real life tends to be very superficial. contrast this to like photobashing or glitch art, which also use existing art but really put a lot of effort into making something new
Practical and digital effects are both tools for the filmmakers. The result depends on how they are used.
Practical effects also has its limitations, either due to certain artistic style or simply impossible logistics.
I don't know if "thrilled" could be the word, but there are CGI explosions I found remarkable and in awe of --- The destruction of planet Jedha in 'Rogue One' and the hyperspace ram in 'The Last Jedi'.
If you are fan of old-school Practical sci-fi action, I would recommend checking out more classic tokusatsu, especially the work of directors like Keita Amemiya(Kamen Rider ZO, Mechanical Violator Hakaider). It's full of stuff like this and an absolute joy to watch! I will definitely have to check out these films as well.
Some great points made in this video about the immersion gained from how much more methodical practical effects have to be compared to computer, and the comment abt how VFX are too complicated to be fully appreciated by the audience is interesting to think abt.
Ahhh yes Keita Amemiya greatness
Toei has its own live action tv version of Sōji Yamakawa’s Kenya Boy, which is still a beautifully unkempt predecessor not only to Goranger and JAKQ, but also to Super Sentai shows in general.
I Love Maria! Omg! I used to watch this as a kid on my Astro Wah Lai Toi TV! I’ll say this is pretty awesome considering that this is Hong Kong’s own Mecha show inspired by Japanese.
That big robot is giving me Zaku mobile suit vibes
i was going just going to say the same thing , back int he early 80's gundam 79 series was very popular in Hong Kong,
they probably used the Zaku desing ( with a two dot eye to differentiate for against copyright law sue from Japan )
Man, I was looking for this movie for like thirty years... Thank you so much!
I love practical effects! I'm always happy to see them in modern movies. The Mission Impossible series and the recent Top Gun come to mind.
I Love Maria is basically what happens when you adapt a manga panel 1 to 1 to live action with no limits on budget.
I think in that part of Asia, it would be called a manhua, I don't know the Cantonese name so could be wrong. but they do have similar comic books to manga outside of Japan. Manhua in China and Manhwa in Korea.
@@Jaheartsjonas They literally mean the same thing even down to the Kanji. In Cantonese it's called "man wa" and it's still the same thing.
I still love the clumsy, slowly walking Robocop.
I agree with the idea that we enjoy practical effects in the same way we enjoy magic tricks. Trying to imagine how they did it is so much fun, and while cgi takes a lot of work and is always evolving, behind-the-scenes videos for practical effects are so much more fun than bts for cgi because bts for cgi pretty much all looks the same. It takes videos like "VFX artists react" to explain why vfx scenes are impressive, because at a glance, cgi looks relatively similar, while practical effects always keep you guessing.
I love the practical robot in the Stallone Judge Dredd movie. That thing was just cool.
You had me at Tony Leung
The villain mech looks like a kit bash of the Gunpla "Type Zaku II" (mech's from Gundam series)!
Totally agree. And I love Maria is one of my fav movie. Watched this one as a kid and the robots fight blew me away. When I re-watched this one, I still find this movie charming.
Man I’m so in love with this channel
Recently I’ve been watching a lot of your videos and the only one missing for me is one where you talk about the video game SIFU from last year
this movie use a lot of sfx from robocop... I love you maria is such a gem.
Old Godzilla Movies>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>New Godzilla Movies
Wild to see Tsui Hark and John Shum in there. I have to see this film.
The VFX in Chappie is so good, I can forgive the story
I think for me a lot of the time the *design* is the most exciting part. I like to see what the robot looks like, and in that sense it always feels like the heights of CGI are higher than the heights of practical effects. I've never seen a practical robot that looked better than Gypsy Danger, although modern Transformers have always looked ridiculous to me as well.
I'm not that story oriented, I've often thought I'd love to see smaller studios get license to just produce the fight scenes from a popular book series. Instead of trying to re-imagine the series for film, instead just provide a visual supplement to the books.
I usually just want to see a convincing portrayal, and in many cases practical effects are better, but in many cases they are worse.
Just wait until Hideaki Anno showcase the practical effects awesomeness in Shin Kamen Rider this year
Two thumbs up. Excellent break down on a film audiences expectations. I for one agree.
I remember this watching in 1994 as a 2nd grade kid loved the movie and music , the camera work is amazing in this movie , cool soundtrack, even today I'm searching for its soundtrack
Always great videos. I see some Armored Trooper VOTOMS and Zaku from Gundam inspiration too.
Thank you so much for making a video about this movie, this looks like something i would've rented in my local video store when i was a kid
I remembered watching this movie in Tv not cable somewhere in the earlies 90’s for those who are from Mexico I remembered watching it in a weekday in Imevision now TV Azteca. Awesome movie and great video, love your content!
But the movies that have great CGI is on par with the movies that use practical effects. Example is Avatar 1 & 2.
My take is that we should have perfect mixture of CGI and Practical effects.
I saw film in my hometown when I was young. I forgot the title but the film is stuck in my mind.
Small error: you credited Roland Emmerich as the director of Glass Onion (2022).
10:38
Robot from Metropolis
Costume from Blade Runner
+
Giant mecha from Gundam (Zaku model)
The reason why practical effects are so much more revered is that you know someone had to build and construct that damn thing you’re looking at. So she it looks amazing on film you’re left with a sense of wonder.
Star Wars.
The Thing
ET
American Werewolf in London
Ghostbusters
Back to the Future
Are all great examples.
When it’s built in a computers guts to fool the eye people can get caught up in the spectacle and lose the emotion, the weight of objects, the physics of the physical. Tom Cruise commented that if the Burg climb was done via green screen they would have missed the glass giving a little as he put his hand against it.
CGI works best when it’s a tool to enhance not a crutch to balance on.
I had a vague memory from 30+ years ago about a movie I watched on tv about a female robot shooting a missile into a robots chest. Didnt catch the name of the film, but that scene stuck with me. THIS IS IT!!
Dude! The boss fight in Heroic Trio was freaking epic!
Holy Crap! How did I missed this one? I've seen lousier effects than this back in the days but this is actually amazing.
Steampunk Zaku!
I disagree, a great cgi doesn't need pre-production but it needs great and unique vision. It needs unique art design. It doesn't need heavy time. I agree with you that special effect has it's own magic but a good cgi would try to create similar type of feeling with great enough details to perplex you instead of it looking very similar and normal animation like. In fact, i would say a good mixture of special effects and cgi creates the best experience. A good example is that whale/dolphin scene in 'The Boys'.
This movie was made in the days of free Hong Kong as well, when people there could express their wildest dreams and visions in art of all fields without communist censorship. In many ways, 80's was the peak of human culture elsewhere too.
I do digital FX and it never occured to me that most people don't break down visual FX the way I do (omg how did they do that?) and that's absolutely true. In practical FX for most audiences they'll think "how can I do that?" while in digital I only think this after years of doing it!
Using an old Hong Kong sci-fi movie to talk about the Frankfurt School was not on my Accented Cinema bingo card.
Practical x Digital effects aside, i think a HUGE part of the problem is that "fix it in post" mentality. Older movies also had that, but CGI and tighter production and release schedules have made it a new normal.
Thank you for putting this together. I got introduced to this film in the 90s by a guy I knew who put out an Asian film review zine ( Asian Eye, Colin Geddes ) and to this day still thank him. It's just so good all the way to the last frame. Between this and the Mad Mission series, western films have a lot to make up for. Oversaturation and hyper-reality are mind blowing, but you can't beat the punch of bold simplicity, and a lot of heart. Subscribed. Please keep up the good work.
Thanks for awakening my childhood memory that I ever watched this! More 80/90s HK classic please!
Great video and great point about the uniqueness of a practical effect.
The question "do LPs sound better?" is kind of a trick question. A lot of the MP3s we downloaded from the 1990s (if you're old enough LOL) likely won't sound as good as a RUclips video of an LP playing. That's because a lot of those older MP3s were made with poor sound reproduction, possibly ripped off poor quality CDs using software that was considerably less sophisticated than something like Exact Audio Copy now. You won't catch it if you're playing it on a cheap MP3 player and cheap headphones, but place it in the computer compared to the same song in a lossless AIFF and you'll be able to tell which one is better
Also, there is an audiophile fandom for particularly the extra noise added when you play audio on older formats like LPs, because they add an organic quality to recordings
I was just watching a video of yours when I received a notification that you posted a new one! You know how to read minds.
Agree with your thesis 100%. I would also add that anyone who went out of their way to become a student of film, whether taking classes for this subject in any form (but especially in production), or pursuing this passion on their own from available sources at local libraries, the internet, or someone's personal collection on the subject, are far more likely to appreciate on a greater scale all that you covered here, and at the same time be more vocal about it in any medium in print or on screen.
For the hand pushing through the "metal" door, pulling the lock through, do think it was foam rubber overlaid with something like aluminum foil to give the shot that "peeled back" metal effect?
Thanks for this insightful video showcasing this fun film!
1:03 Lmao even Tsui Hark is in the cast
I loved the mad mission movies!!! Omg i have to look if they are online somewhere
Poetic and visual discourse by Zhang Yang. I think this youtube composition is beautiful and full of emotion.
Looks like a MS Zaku II!
My favorite special effects movie is Blood Debts, especially the ending!
Oh, that was special, no doubt about it...
5:35 seeing Chow became Steve really burst juice out of my mouth 💀 damnit, that guy comedy never gets old
I love this channel, you always discuss amazing topics and feature awesome movies many people haven’t heard of 🥰
10:38 I’m glad you mentioned this, as i was wondering if this movie was a Metropolis homage, not just in the robot’s design, but also the name Maria (the robot’s human version in the 1927 film). The 1991 movie “Robotrix” you mentioned is also a name sometimes used for the Maschinemensch… coincidence? 🤔
Also, the big robot reminds me of a Votoms Scopedog, so that’s cool too 😄
Thank you so much for bringing this movie into my life
For me, Godzilla Vs King Kong was an excellent and over the top monster mash cartoon brawl that happened to have some live action elements. Older films that showed mastery of practical effects are wonderful because, when they really nail it, they're some how much more believable than anything that is clearly cgi, even if it doesn't move correctly it draws me in much more than seeing an actor try to react to animated things that are not actually there before him.
When I was a little boy in the 80's I watched this and 'Yes, Madam' with Michelle Yeoh and Cynthia Rothrock.... All these years I never knew what the names of films were but I enjoyed them and searched for aaaaages. Thanks for finally giving me the name to this film.
I love "miniatures" in movies. My wife once said, "You can tell that is a miniature set". I said, "Exactly!'