This afternoon Apple posted the new HD trailer for Roland Emmerich’s new Film 2012, an “epic adventure about a global cataclysm that brings an end to the world and tells of the heroic struggle of the survivors”. It amazes me how terrible the effects look in this thing. It’s so bad in fact, that I’ve come up with a new theory. Whenever you attempt a realistic effect, i.e. recreate something that we could actually see in real life, it cannot and will not ever look believable.

Just watch the trailer for yourself. Can you even find a single effects shot that looks like anything other than a video game? Of course not. Know why that is? The film has a $200 million budget, so it can’t be a lack of resources.

The problem is that the film deals with real things and disasters that we’re all two familiar with. We’ve all seen car crashes before. Many of us have lived through earthquakes, tornadoes, floods, and other natural disasters. Sadly, we’re even all far too familiar with the way a skyscraper collapses because of the events of 9/11. If an effects shot isn’t completely perfect; if anything is off even the slightest bit, it’s going to destroy the illusion and do so in a painfully obvious way.

Conversely, take a moment and try to remember the last truly believable effect you saw in a film. I bet it was something that you had no real life reference to compare it to. Hell, take a look at some of the bigger releases from this summer. We don’t have photon torpedoes, lasers, or giant starships in the real world, so we completely buy the effects in Star Trek. Likewise, we can’t ‘disapparate /apparate’ or fire off spells with magic wands in real life, so we’ll likely completely buy the effects in Harry Potter next month.

It’s really amazing when you think about it. The more grounded an effects shot is in reality, the harder it seems to become to pull off.

My name is Christopher Schnese
and this has been my reel perspective

Related Posts

No related posts.