(I take this as CGI being of course present, but taking a backseat to support the practical effects)

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    314 days ago

    I don’t understand why this would have to be a value at all. Give me a good script, a good story with good actors and as long as the effects aren’t horrible I won’t care how you did them. Loki or Wandavision have not been filmed in a more artisanal way, It’s just that their effects were not done in a crappy way and their stories were good (as were their actors).

    • @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      214 days ago

      It’s a value to people who like old Hollywood techniques. Sure, it’s a technical thing and 95% of the audience won’t care what technique was used as long as it looks good. But for film nerds it’s interesting that Marvel would actually do away from their usual greenscreen stages and build practical sets and effects.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        413 days ago

        Well okay, I consider myself a “film nerd” but I still don’t see what those “old Hollyvood techniques” contribute to the film, that is, the one who enjoys knowing it, great, but I think it adds 0 value to the product, not as an artistic work or as a commercial product.