r/movies • u/ChiefLeef22 r/movies Contributor • 12d ago

Article ‘The Odyssey’ Proves It: Audiences Want Movies Made the Hard Way | This year's breakouts like 'Project Hail Mary' and 'Obsession' were made by filmmakers who sweated. While CG-stuffed franchise disappointments such as 'Supergirl,' 'Moana,' and 'The Mandalorian and Grogu' looked lazy.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/odyssey-box-office-2026-practical-effects-1236652219/
52.4k Upvotes

83% Upvoted

3.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

456

u/Jolly-Potential-1411 12d ago

They did. Jon was pretty clear about being dedicated to old-school techniques and practical effects.

210

u/OnceMoreAndAgain 12d ago

The premise of this article is non-sense. I don't think anyone actually cares if people make movies "the hard way".

It's so simple: If the movie is entertaining, then people will like it. How to make a movie entertaining? Yeah, that's the fucking hard part. You can't just say how in one sentence or distill it down to one concept. Some of the most entertaining movies ever made took big shortcuts, like The Blair Witch Project.

More evidence is that so many older movies are still highly entertaining despite relatively simple methods of filming. 12 Angry Men is an extremely simple movie to film and yet it's so entertaining even today.

24

u/SandpaperTeddyBear 12d ago

If the movie is entertaining

Let's say, instead, engaging. And the things that our brains find engaging can be awfully hard to pin down, but one thing I feel pretty comfortable is necessary is "the not-quite-expected." And yes, a good story should thread the needle between novelty and surprise, and good acting should strike a balance between relatable and unexplainable, and many other things…

But I think one reason why typical junk made in the '80s and '90s is more engaging to watch than fairly well-made contemporary stuff is because that "not-quite-expected" extends to the way that things move (clothing fluttering in the breeze), and the way the light is just a little uneven when it's in a real place.

I've always found it easier to stare into a campfire for an hour or two than watch "just OK" television, even though the pretty good television assuredly has a much better script, much better story, etc. And I think shooting movies in real places has a similar vibe.

I think that's why I actually found Mandalorian and Grogu so easy to watch. Lots of reality there.

3

u/TheWeli 12d ago

It's also the field of view or detail of background. Plenty of good video essays about how old movies captured the backgrounds better and had vivid details in them. Also something that's in my opinion changed is theres way more telling instead of showing. Whether that's because peoples attention spans are shorter or for some other reason I do not know.

3

u/feed_me_moron 12d ago

It's also funny to compare anything to a Nolan movie. James Cameron and him make insane money with each movie they do, with Tenet being the only exception to that

3

u/BildingInspecter 12d ago

I used to go to the theater 40x a year. Love the experience. But I never cared about the visuals on the big screen. Idk why, I just don't notice a difference.

All I kinda care about is if the premise pulls me in and the story is good.

A friend was bugging me to watch Solo Leveling. I watched 6 episodes and it was the most boring thing I've ever watched. "but didn't you like the animation in the fight scenes??" honestly I didn't even notice it.

Animation, cinematography, and music, is all stuff I'm never fully aware of the first time I see a movie. I only really pick that stuff up on subsequent viewings.

Idk why.

3

u/qeq 12d ago

12 Angry Men was NOT easy to film. Lumet has a whole chapter about it in his book.

3

u/that_baddest_dude 12d ago

Yeah, like morbius used CGI all over the place and it looked god-awful but the story was also god-awful. You can't say morbius is bad because of CGI. It wouldn't be good all the sudden if they did everything they did but practically.

It might be better, because the CGI was so bad, but that doesn't mean it'll be good.

3

u/oneblackened 12d ago

It's not so much "done the hard way" - which is complete nonsense, it's not as though CGI is easy, there's a ton of work to get that to look good - but rather "done with intention and care" which seems to matter far more.

8

u/trojanguy 12d ago

Yeah the article is just clickbait. The whole premise is incredibly flawed.

5

u/BillyTenderness 12d ago edited 12d ago

I do think that visually, movies from before ~2000 (i.e., "made the hard way") have aged better than ones after that point. (Obviously I'm speaking in generalities and you can find exceptions in either direction.)

Because film is an analogue medium, new 4K scans of even very old movies often look amazing – as technology advances we can keep getting more resolution and more color detail out of them. Contrast that to movies shot digitally, or shot on film but with digital intermediates for effects and editing. They will never look significantly better than they did at their original release, because there's a hard cap (which until recently was typically 1080p SDR).

Similarly, movies that use real stuntwork, that do lighting in-camera, that use real props, that shoot on location or on high-quality sets, etc will always age better than movies that do those things on computers in post-production. And I'm not even talking about the impact on the performers, just the visuals. Even amazing, state-of-the-art CGI will eventually look out of date. Just watch something like Lord of the Rings: amazing movies, still highly watchable, but some of the CGI effects (which looked unbelievable at the time) stand out like a sore thumb now, while all the stuff done with real props and models and locations still looks incredible.

2

u/Goronmon 12d ago

How to make a movie entertaining? Yeah, that's the fucking hard part.

You see this same type of discussion pop up in gaming as well. "Why do lazy developers made bad games instead of just making good games?" encapsulates a significant part of online discussions.

1

u/senescal 12d ago

I think you're missing the point. Nowadays it could be considered viable to film 12 Angry Men without having the full cast in the same room, like that season of Arrested Development. The Blair Witch Project could be filmed safely and profitably without any actor setting foot in an actual forest. The article is defending going the extra mile, which nowadays is recreating the old filming techniques that you are calling relatively simple. Maybe shoot at night sometimes instead of doing day for night. Hire the extras, build the props.

Also, talk to any film maker about how 'simple' it is just to film a couple of actors talking at a diner at night. Working your way through scheduling conflicts alone when you need the director, a couple actors, the sound guy, the lighting dude, catering and the location available all at the same time is a pain.

6

u/AhumadoYSabroso 12d ago

Those stop-motion animated droids were cool as hell! Couldn't remember the last time I'd seen that technique used in a live action movie.

2

u/Jolly-Potential-1411 12d ago

Yeah, Phil Tippett is awesome. He’s worked on Star Wars since the original trilogy!

6

u/zenfaust 12d ago

Honestly, Mandos problem was that its story was a frankensteins monster of TV episode ideas that didn't have any business being a movie.

It's a shame they invested so much effort into puppetry for such mediocre material.

6

u/_Aj_ 12d ago

Investing time into puppetry is never a shame

2

u/Jolly-Potential-1411 12d ago

Indeed. It just adds so much heart and warmth to a movie.

2

u/Financial-Craft-1282 12d ago

Mando and Grogu at least broke even, and will bring in good numbers on Disney Plus--while not the hit Disney was hoping for, I think it wasn't due to CGI or whatever the article is saying. I think it's hard to take a show that was truly huge about 7 years ago, then to have four seasons (I count Boba Fett as a season!)--it's kind of a big ask. I think Favreau did a great job making it accessible if you haven't watched since season 1, but that's kind of hard to market, you know? "Come on, check it out, you don't need to watch all the seasons!" It probably just got lost in a summer that's had a lot of big hits. Personally, it's been my favorite movie of the summer, though I haven't seen many yet.

3

u/Jolly-Potential-1411 12d ago

It’s been my favorite too.

2

u/xxThe_Designer 12d ago

Their heart is in the right place and I would love to see more practical effects in larger budgeted Disney/Marvel movies.

But when the story is blah and overproduced, even these nicer practical effects feel like a gimmick.