Let's Be Practical! - Reaction Shots Discussion Topic July 2017

Practical effects!  Gore, guts, rotating sets, forced perspective!  We're not here to argue if practical is better than CG (everything in moderation is good I say!) but we're here to celebrate the beauty of wonderful physical effects.

Practical effects are special effects that are created, real, and filmed in camera and not modified by computers.  This can range from building a set with crazy dimensions, having the Hobbits sit far away and Gandalf sit close to the camera making the Hobbits look small, all the way to a torso opening up with teeth and biting someone's arms off!

Some films that contain great examples of practical effects: The Thing, Pan's Labyrinth, 2001, Jaws, Lord of the Rings, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Scanners, Apollo 13, Terminator 2, Star Wars, Independence Day, Raiders of the Lost Ark, The Fly, Jason and the Argonauts, Inception, The Dark Knight, Alien, Jurassic Park, Mad Max: Fury Road, American Werewolf in London, Tron, The Dark Crystal, Slither.

There are a lot of films that use Practical effects, which are your favorites?

Pan's Labyrinth mixes intricate makeup and creature effects with digital effects, like keying out legs, or digital eyeballs in physical hands, how successful are the effects in Pan's Labyrinth, do they stand the test of time?

Many films make great use of mixing practical and digital effects like Pan's Labyrinth, or Mad Max: Fury Road (compositing, etc.), do you find this effective or is it jarring to mix the mediums?

Practical effects are often lauded as superior to CG, why is that do you think?

Some directors go out of their way to remain practical, is it worth it?

What advantages do practical effects have over CG?

What advantages does CG have over practical effects?

Stan Winston.

Pan's Labyrinth is a film that mixes practical effects with digital effects, how does it feel different from or similar to The Thing, which uses entirely practical effects?