Over twenty years later and this is still one of my very favorite movies. It’s so epic, authentic, and adrenaline-pumping! And it was just so ahead of its time in every way possible O.o
Ye,not to mention the philosophical aspect of it, This movie is timeless pretty much. I still remember the day i watched it first time in the cinema back in 1999 when i was a teen. Good old times.
I don´t know who was it that said that the great albums sound like future, are timeless - Nevermind still sounds like the future of rock n roll. Matrix still looks and feels like the future of action movies.
Same! Thankfully I was able to find both Reloaded and Revolutions in a thrift store to collect and keep but unfortunately, I wasn't able to find the first movie
Such a passionate speech at the end about how bullet time / time slice rigs are going to be the future.. And then everything just went CGI :( This still looks way better
Right? I mean everyone uses CGI to mimic rotation animation and + 3D model of actor/actress. But this practical effects are still the best. Imagine what it would like if more advanced cameras used for this installation. I bet it would surpass best CGI effect.
You do realize that CGI _was_ used for this shot, right? There's nothing wrong with CGI. It's when CGI is improperly executed or excessively used that there's actually a big problem.
@@TrackpadProductions but the actor was still shot real time and his surrounding was CGI. its why the last matrix looked so much worse than the first one even though its an older movie. they replaced this rig with just CGI and had to do the whole actor as CGI and it was so uncanny valley. To this day the practical effects movies of yesteryear look better than today's CGI... though AI is probably going to change all that.
@@RyanLoetscher The practical effects movies of yesteryear _don't_ look better than today's CGI. They look better than today's _bad_ CGI. Creating convincing, realistic humans from scratch in CGI is one of the hardest things to do in visual effects _(even today, let alone decades ago),_ because people naturally have a good eye for it. It's the _exception,_ not the rule, and it's the reason it's almost never done. It's actually a perfect example of what I said: it's an _improper_ use of CGI. CGI is a tool like anything else. It's only _bad_ when it's misused.
where was this smart man on matrix resurrections?? I couldnt see anything of the original matrix on the new movie. The new effects are boring and simple. I miss bullet time on the new movie.
All this time and effort to shoot and create this amazing sequence, just to realize at the official movie-release date in the theatre, that you and your entire team of +60 visual artists and 3D designers have overlooked that Neo's gun on the floor was forgotten during the bullet-time scene... I can only imagine the heart-ache ...
Matrix came right in between the point where technology was good enough to make CG enhanced slow motion stop-motion type practical effects like these, and where CG became good enough to render practical effects obsolete. We will just never get these kinds of special effects for these types of shots ever again.
I wouldnt say practical effects are obsolete, with the increase in technology, also comes a higher standard for CGI, which means practical effects will ALWAYS look more real than CGI. The question is how much money do you want to spend vs how much "real" is enough
I have had so many people say that Film is "easy" and studying Film is "easy", these will be sales assistants and so on and they don't understand the mental work that goes into the simplest of Films and and definitely have not gotten into Film Theory. I don't think many jobs are "easy"
The Matrix began production in March of 1998. See the music video for a Helter Skelter by Meat Beat Manifesto, released in 1997. The director of that video, Benjamin Stokes, apparently has no relationship to the Wachowski's, The Matrix , etc. Although the Wachowski's use a Meat Beat Manifesto track in the fight scene between Morpheus and Neo.
Darn. I was hoping it was gonna b a full 6 minutes on the opening scene with Trinity. Hands down my favorite scene in the entire movie. I think I watched it over a 100 (possibly more) times once I got in on DVD.
Is it just me or is the motion of 0:49 smoother than the final result in Trinity's scene? The scene itself has a strange frame jitter at the start and then smooths towards the end. It's always bugged me when watching the movie.
I can't imagine how your eyes perceive the raw footage as "smoother". The final image uses interpolation to fill in the gaps in between cameras. There's no way that it could look smoother before the interpolation has been applied. Logically, your statement doesn't make sense. The "bullet time" sequences are of their time and it's a miracle how well it worked considering the entire scene is using 1999 CGI for all the inanimate objects.
@@ejkk9513 > Logically, your statement doesn't make sense. Logically, it does make sense. Maybe you can't pick up on the frame jitter (the interpolation part like you said), but Juke can. Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it's not there.
VR is not a new thing. There was a craze in the 90s for a while (albeit very rudimentary by modern standards but still hella lot better than the poor quality of metaverse)
@Bloody Pulp I guess I am a bit reliant on nostalgia, but isn't everybody. I'm hoping for them to take it to a whole new other level. I liked The Matrix as a stand alone movie, but my favourite by them has got to be V For Vendetta. I could watch that movie non-stop if I could.
360 cameras don't do this lol, and neither do those little cameras on a stick which spin really fast. This method actually freezes the action but allows you to give the illusion that the camera is spinning.
@@korhonenmikko yes and a fuckload of them. Then they take a few frames from each shot and stitch them together! Did you watch the video? And do you know how many hours that would take to edit? It's a metric fuckton of work for the editor.
@@JPBroadcasting maybe it was a little different then but i would imagine it was just played as an image sequence and then the keyframe interpolation smoothens or fills in the transitions between each frame with some form of motion blur i'm guessing. there would be zero editing. i regularly have to work with hundreds of frames from 3d renders and they're just imported as an image sequence. from the way they explain this the length between each image is decided by the distance between the cameras
No, it can't be. In the bullet time effect the virtual camera sweeps around the actors way too fast for an actual physical camera to be moved by any mechanism, hence the array of still cameras.
Drones can't move that fast, and even if they could, they could not capture all frames at exactly the same time, which is needed to do the effect you see at 1:02.
Not quite. Drones are not fast enough for the true "bullet time" effect. It needs to have the old style multiple camera rig to shoot frames at the exact same time for the effect to work.
Please remove the mention of the "Wachowski Brothers" from the description and replace it with "sisters", or at least just "the Wachowskis". Lily and Lana Wachowski are not bothers; they are sisters, and have been publicly for close to a decade now (over two in Lana's case). There are no "Wachowskis Brothers" in existence now that have written or directed the Matrix trilogy
The Wachowski Brothers is historical in context and is an accurate representation of who they were back Ithe 90's. They never made the production studios re-release the original matrix movies with a correction in the title and ending credits.
Doesnt matter, when the film was made, it was brothers. Also, you can call them whatever you want, dont be stopped by the lgbt trying to censor you. If you call them sisters, fine, if you call them brothers, its up to you since scientifically you're not wrong. Maybe not the most polite but with people trying to censor you all the time, no wonder people get tired of the bs
Over twenty years later and this is still one of my very favorite movies. It’s so epic, authentic, and adrenaline-pumping! And it was just so ahead of its time in every way possible O.o
Ye,not to mention the philosophical aspect of it, This movie is timeless pretty much. I still remember the day i watched it first time in the cinema back in 1999 when i was a teen. Good old times.
I don´t know who was it that said that the great albums sound like future, are timeless - Nevermind still sounds like the future of rock n roll. Matrix still looks and feels like the future of action movies.
Same! Thankfully I was able to find both Reloaded and Revolutions in a thrift store to collect and keep but unfortunately, I wasn't able to find the first movie
Such a passionate speech at the end about how bullet time / time slice rigs are going to be the future.. And then everything just went CGI :(
This still looks way better
It looks better because 10-20+ people worked on the shot. With CGI it would be 1.
Right? I mean everyone uses CGI to mimic rotation animation and + 3D model of actor/actress. But this practical effects are still the best. Imagine what it would like if more advanced cameras used for this installation. I bet it would surpass best CGI effect.
You do realize that CGI _was_ used for this shot, right? There's nothing wrong with CGI. It's when CGI is improperly executed or excessively used that there's actually a big problem.
@@TrackpadProductions but the actor was still shot real time and his surrounding was CGI. its why the last matrix looked so much worse than the first one even though its an older movie. they replaced this rig with just CGI and had to do the whole actor as CGI and it was so uncanny valley. To this day the practical effects movies of yesteryear look better than today's CGI... though AI is probably going to change all that.
@@RyanLoetscher The practical effects movies of yesteryear _don't_ look better than today's CGI. They look better than today's _bad_ CGI.
Creating convincing, realistic humans from scratch in CGI is one of the hardest things to do in visual effects _(even today, let alone decades ago),_ because people naturally have a good eye for it. It's the _exception,_ not the rule, and it's the reason it's almost never done. It's actually a perfect example of what I said: it's an _improper_ use of CGI.
CGI is a tool like anything else. It's only _bad_ when it's misused.
That last statement that he made was so ahead of it's time. I'd say it's still ahead of current time.
where was this smart man on matrix resurrections?? I couldnt see anything of the original matrix on the new movie. The new effects are boring and simple. I miss bullet time on the new movie.
All this time and effort to shoot and create this amazing sequence, just to realize at the official movie-release date in the theatre, that you and your entire team of +60 visual artists and 3D designers have overlooked that Neo's gun on the floor was forgotten during the bullet-time scene... I can only imagine the heart-ache ...
I love how the video duration is 5:55
555 is the model of a circuit board component which is a hobbyist's go-to for a basic timer chip.
useless info
@@jakt2440 Useless reply
el ne555! vaya detalle
@@phazonxl yup, 555 timer IC
@@jakt2440 be nice
Matrix came right in between the point where technology was good enough to make CG enhanced slow motion stop-motion type practical effects like these, and where CG became good enough to render practical effects obsolete. We will just never get these kinds of special effects for these types of shots ever again.
I feel like whenever there's a new tech updated/advanced there are these geniuses who knows how to use it at the best possible chance.
I wouldnt say practical effects are obsolete, with the increase in technology, also comes a higher standard for CGI, which means practical effects will ALWAYS look more real than CGI.
The question is how much money do you want to spend vs how much "real" is enough
I have had so many people say that Film is "easy" and studying Film is "easy", these will be sales assistants and so on and they don't understand the mental work that goes into the simplest of Films and and definitely have not gotten into Film Theory. I don't think many jobs are "easy"
The Matrix began production in March of 1998. See the music video for a Helter Skelter by Meat Beat Manifesto, released in 1997. The director of that video, Benjamin Stokes, apparently has no relationship to the Wachowski's, The Matrix , etc. Although the Wachowski's use a Meat Beat Manifesto track in the fight scene between Morpheus and Neo.
The prototype of bullet time featured on the uk tv program "tomorrow's world" in 1993. Called a 'time slice' film.
Darn. I was hoping it was gonna b a full 6 minutes on the opening scene with Trinity. Hands down my favorite scene in the entire movie. I think I watched it over a 100 (possibly more) times once I got in on DVD.
Is it just me or is the motion of 0:49 smoother than the final result in Trinity's scene? The scene itself has a strange frame jitter at the start and then smooths towards the end. It's always bugged me when watching the movie.
I can't imagine how your eyes perceive the raw footage as "smoother". The final image uses interpolation to fill in the gaps in between cameras. There's no way that it could look smoother before the interpolation has been applied. Logically, your statement doesn't make sense. The "bullet time" sequences are of their time and it's a miracle how well it worked considering the entire scene is using 1999 CGI for all the inanimate objects.
@@ejkk9513 > Logically, your statement doesn't make sense.
Logically, it does make sense. Maybe you can't pick up on the frame jitter (the interpolation part like you said), but Juke can. Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it's not there.
Crap this guy talking about VR cameras in 1999... That is having Vision!
VR is not a new thing. There was a craze in the 90s for a while (albeit very rudimentary by modern standards but still hella lot better than the poor quality of metaverse)
VR has yet to fulfill its promise. It’s been nothing but hype since the the early 90s.
@@Elayzee Yeah since Lawnmower Man.
@@Elayzee Play Half Life: Alyx on a decent VR setup then come back and reflect on your comment.
I CAN'T WAIT FOR THE MATRIX 4! 😄
(Edit: Not what I was expecting at all! What a let down. 😔)
They already had matrix 4
@@joshsutton9854 No it's coming out in 2021
@Bloody Pulp I guess I am a bit reliant on nostalgia, but isn't everybody. I'm hoping for them to take it to a whole new other level. I liked The Matrix as a stand alone movie, but my favourite by them has got to be V For Vendetta. I could watch that movie non-stop if I could.
@Bloody Pulp You're abosolutely right about that. Hopefully it's not as much a stinker as that one. 😂😂😂
Matrix resurrections
Che bei ricordi Keanu con Matrix. Super super bravissimo 💕💕💕💕💕👏👏👏👏👏👏👏💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯 ciaoooo da Roma 💕❤️❤️💕❤️💕💕❤️😘😘😘😘
I am pretty shure they used Inferno running at a silicon graphics oxyx system, for the comps! Good old times!
This is basically just stop-motion on steroids.
every movie is.
It’s not what you see, it’s what you get
Still back stage great love itt
So instead of playing a shot back in slow motion, it is multiple cameras packed together shooting almost at the exact same time. Kind of complicated
just beautiful
I hope there’s not a quiz on this later, because I don’t understand 99% of what he explained.
🤣
Canon 5’s ❤️
Interesting i like this Job!
this very good
Amezing shot great ! Wow! Ginuis! Art form! Award wining! Cenima photograpy
somehow sick too! But ok, they're doing what works! Good!!
fast forward more than two decades, we have 360 degree cams that can do this..
360 cameras don't do this lol, and neither do those little cameras on a stick which spin really fast. This method actually freezes the action but allows you to give the illusion that the camera is spinning.
so this is the guy who made it happend, while the wachowskis just give the orders
anyone knows who the person being interviewed is?
Thank you random stranger !
Галкин рассказывает о Матрице?!!! 😮
i would have hated editing these shots though... if you hand me 60 video files and say its one ten second shot.... im quitting my job right then! lol.
They're still cameras.
@@korhonenmikko yes and a fuckload of them. Then they take a few frames from each shot and stitch them together! Did you watch the video? And do you know how many hours that would take to edit? It's a metric fuckton of work for the editor.
@@JPBroadcasting maybe it was a little different then but i would imagine it was just played as an image sequence and then the keyframe interpolation smoothens or fills in the transitions between each frame with some form of motion blur i'm guessing. there would be zero editing. i regularly have to work with hundreds of frames from 3d renders and they're just imported as an image sequence. from the way they explain this the length between each image is decided by the distance between the cameras
Now with AI, frame interpolation it's as easy as a click of a button. How times change.
Ok first of all why did that barrel explode at 0:20 ?
why not?
these guys were really looking ahead of their time. now this can be achieved using drones
Drones where already made like in 90's or late 80's
No, it can't be. In the bullet time effect the virtual camera sweeps around the actors way too fast for an actual physical camera to be moved by any mechanism, hence the array of still cameras.
Drones can't move that fast, and even if they could, they could not capture all frames at exactly the same time, which is needed to do the effect you see at 1:02.
Not quite. Drones are not fast enough for the true "bullet time" effect. It needs to have the old style multiple camera rig to shoot frames at the exact same time for the effect to work.
And?
0:35
1:01
1:31
re interesante wacho
wachowski para ser más precisos, maestro... espectacular la técnica del "tiempo bala"
OK but why is he dressed like that?
Что там делает Максим Галкин?
Wooow
"everything begins with the simulation"
WRONG
everything begins with choice!
The original Matrix was groundbreaking , the sequels were watchable however
Matrix Resurrections is going to ruin the franchise for good.
Shut up.
It actually did.
Please remove the mention of the "Wachowski Brothers" from the description and replace it with "sisters", or at least just "the Wachowskis". Lily and Lana Wachowski are not bothers; they are sisters, and have been publicly for close to a decade now (over two in Lana's case). There are no "Wachowskis Brothers" in existence now that have written or directed the Matrix trilogy
Relaxxx
The Wachowski Brothers is historical in context and is an accurate representation of who they were back Ithe 90's. They never made the production studios re-release the original matrix movies with a correction in the title and ending credits.
bueno es como con wendy carlos, yo tengo unos vinilos en que sale el nombre walter, ya está escrito así y no le hace daño a nadie..
@@iLikeTheUDK well that's the thing, that video is not from "now" it's from twenty years ago, when they use to be know as Wachowsky brothers "
Doesnt matter, when the film was made, it was brothers.
Also, you can call them whatever you want, dont be stopped by the lgbt trying to censor you. If you call them sisters, fine, if you call them brothers, its up to you since scientifically you're not wrong.
Maybe not the most polite but with people trying to censor you all the time, no wonder people get tired of the bs
Ура я первый
Flip the us dollar
this guy should've received all most of the credit for the Matrix's fame, not directors.
Well the directors imagined the scene,made storyboards and he had to make it happen
It is a team achievement. In fact Gaeta acknowledges that he did not "invent" anything.
Pinto
1:31