Summary
- CGI quality matters more than quantity in films like
Furiosa
and
Fury Road
, as storytelling excellence can overshadow visual effects. - Both movies used a similar amount of CGI shots, but the quality of the CGI varied due to
Furiosa
‘s grade and saturation. - Practical effects in the Mad Max franchise, like real people on moving vehicles, contribute to realistic stunts and believable acting.
After Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga‘s failure at the box office, a group of VFX artists are jumping to its defense. The Mad Max: Fury Road prequel was the most recent movie in the Mad Max franchise and featured an all-star cast led by Anya Taylor-Joy. While it did face a poor box office run that saw it earn just $172 million, it earned acclaim from critics and audiences. The movie earned a 90% Tomatometer score on Rotten Tomatoes and an 89% audience score. Still, many viewers cite its comparatively poor CGI as a reason for its lack of success.
In the latest episode of their “VFX Artists React to Bad & Great CGi” series, the Corridor Crew took to YouTube to compare the visual effects in Mad Max and in Furiosa. Check out their reactions below:
While they acknowledge that it feels “way less gritty and tangible than Fury Road“, they emphasize that both movies used CGI. The saturation and the grade is the most significant difference, but they still describe that Furiosa‘s visual issues are miniscule compared to the excellence of the storytelling, which forced the Corridor Crew to forgive any visual effects issues. While they frowned at the “smoother” effects, one member stated that “the actual movie making is top-notch, and so who
cares?”
Does CGI Usage Actually Matter?
Fury Road and Furiosa Use CGI Equally
The recent and ongoing success of Alien: Romulus has showcased the benefits of utilizing more practical effects, rather than relying on CGI. Romulus’ director has drawn praise for refusing to use any CGI at all, which is something that sets it apart from other Alien releases. Mad Max: Fury Road also relied on realistic effects, though it still used CGI. Many of the action scenes are accomplished by holding real people on poles as they hang outside the moving vehicles, which actually shoot fire and crash into each other.
The impact of practical effects is that it produces more believable acting, realistic stunts, and an honest portrayal of each scene. Tom Cruise has made a living off of practical effects, as he does his own stunts in harrowing situations. The Mad Max franchise is also known for its incredible practical effects, and Furiosa actually does use them extensively. Corridor Crew cited that 2,000 shots in Fury Road and 2,700 shots in Furiosa used CGI. Considering that Furiosa is 2 hours and 28 minutes and Fury Road is 2 hours long, that is fairly equal.
Related
Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga Review – Action Prequel Is A Visual Feast That Adds Exciting Depth To Franchise
Anya Taylor-Joy and Alyla Browne fully embody Furiosa at different stages in the engrossing Mad Max prequel, which fleshes out The Wasteland more.
The reality is not that one used CGI more than the other, but it is instead relating to the quality of the CGI. Furiosa‘s massive budget exceeded Fury Road‘s, as it had between $168 million and $233 million, compared to Fury Road‘s $150 million. With a higher budget, expectations can differ, especially when the Corridor Crew agrees that the prequel’s effects were not quite as believable. Still, the idea of a practical effects difference is inaccurate, as both Fury Road and Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga featured a relatively similar amount of CGI.
Source: Corridor Crew