In my personal opinion, the best Neutrona Beam shot in any Ghostbuster movie is the wide long shot of the small as ants GB’s shooting down at Mr Stay Puft. The beams look pretty flawless in that entire section of the movie.
It’s interesting to me that in Afterlife they were able to replicate the purple energy beams that we see get released after the ECU explosion in the first film but they couldn’t get the Neutrona beams looking quite right.
Don’t get me wrong. They don’t look awful. They are acceptable. They are more consistent. I
But there is just something about the beams in that part of the ‘84 movie that haven’t been surpassed. The thickness, the rubbery nature. To me those shots show the concept of “rubberized light” perfectly.
In CG the beams somehow seem more “clean”. They don’t feel as dangerous or as wild. Does anyone else feel this?
It’s not about “CGI sucks practical effects rule!” (Use the best technique available) but I just genuinely feel the best beam shots are still on the optical compositing side of things. Which is interesting.
It’s interesting to me that in Afterlife they were able to replicate the purple energy beams that we see get released after the ECU explosion in the first film but they couldn’t get the Neutrona beams looking quite right.
Don’t get me wrong. They don’t look awful. They are acceptable. They are more consistent. I
But there is just something about the beams in that part of the ‘84 movie that haven’t been surpassed. The thickness, the rubbery nature. To me those shots show the concept of “rubberized light” perfectly.
In CG the beams somehow seem more “clean”. They don’t feel as dangerous or as wild. Does anyone else feel this?
It’s not about “CGI sucks practical effects rule!” (Use the best technique available) but I just genuinely feel the best beam shots are still on the optical compositing side of things. Which is interesting.
Statistics: Posted by RichardLess — May 7th, 2024, 12:56 pm