Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The tech of 'Terminator 2' – an oral history (2017)

vfxblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 100 posts

Re: The tech of 'Terminator 2' – an oral history (2017)

#61

Post by mrandish »

whartung wrote: post #58
macote wrote: post #26

It's worth mentionning that Softimage was used for Terminator 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Softimage_(company) https://www.fxguide.com/quicktakes/remembering-softimage/

The T2 nuclear destruction of LA was done by Electric Image. Small software house doing 3D rendering on the Mac.

The nuking of Los Angeles was a combination of physical models and 3D rendered shots. This close integration between physical models and 3D as well as using procedural techniques for the detonation was quite novel at the time. It was enabled by a new feature called "Mr. Nitro" written by Mark Granger, co-founder of Electric Image. The requirements of that groundbreaking sequence very much drove the features of Mr. Nitro, which was later released as part of Electric Image. EI 3D went on to render many shots for Star Wars: Phantom Menace, Star Trek: The Next Generation, Titanic, Men In Black, etc.

More info and images of both the physical and Mac rendered 3D models of Los Angeles being nuked: https://nccasymposium.bournemouth.ac.uk/2005/mscca/DIGGINS_h... While SGI's PR teams and ability to loan pricey workstations dominated the "3D in Hollywood" narrative for much of the 90s, in reality a lot of amazing work was being done on Macs and Video Toaster-equipped Amigas throughout the 90s. ILM's "Rebel Unit" initially started using Macs for 3D pre-visualization on Star Wars, but the renderings were so good literally hundreds of Mac rendered shots were used in Phantom Menace (although a contract ensured only SGI was credited at the end of the film).

Re: The tech of 'Terminator 2' – an oral history (2017)

#62

Post by sparky_z »

xnx wrote: post #11

Can anyone confirm that the helicopter flying over the underpass was actual flying and not VFX or a chopper on a trailer? There are claims that the stunt pilot flew under (twice!), but it seems like no amount of skill could avoid weird uncontrollable effects from rotor wash.

It's confirmed in the DVD commentary. The stunt pilot had to do it at a high enough speed that it would "outrun" the rotor wash.

Re: The tech of 'Terminator 2' – an oral history (2017)

#63

Post by dhosek »

markus_zhang wrote: post #27
jmyeet wrote: post #4

I'm not sure that anyone under the age of 45-50 can truly appreciate just how big of a deal Terminator 2 was and how big movie releases can be. Like, nothing in the MCU era or the Star Wars prequels and sequels comes remotely close. Yes, they gross a lot of money but in terms of cultural significance, I've seen nothing close. At the time I lived in a city when the local movie theaters would typically run major releas…

My initiation was the first Alien movie on VCR. I watched it maybe in 1990 or 1991, but definitely before I reach 10 years old. It was also the first movie that I watched. The movie scared the shit out of me for months afterwards. When looking back, all these movies (Alien, Terminator 2, and Jurassic park) were very well done. They never tried to achieve anything that was out of reach back then, and story-wise they w…

What I’m impressed by of late is that a lot of contemporary horror films (thinking of Weapons, Backrooms, Obsession) rely much more on a creepy mood than on gore to do their thing (which is not to say that they lack gore, but they don’t rely on it to the extent that horror films of the ’80s through '10s did (the Saw films probably being the apex of the splattercore aesthetic).

Re: The tech of 'Terminator 2' – an oral history (2017)

#64

Post by dhosek »

_trampeltier wrote: post #53
markus_zhang wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also I think we are pretty close to the year 2027 which was supposed to be the year that humans defeat Skynet. Time flies.

Who knows, maybe Trump can help.

But who exactly will he be helping?

Re: The tech of 'Terminator 2' – an oral history (2017)

#66

Post by jonhohle »

skullone wrote: post #3
ortusdux wrote: post #2

Amazing writeup! I'll add that the custom squibs they made for the liquid metal bullet impacts are still one of the best practical effects ever. https://www.reddit.com/r/nextfuckinglevel/comments/v6qjaj/bu...

Holy shit. I thought the bullet splashes were CGI. I'm even more impressed that they were real practical effects, that is indeed nextfuckinglevel

Believe it or not, there is 6 minutes of onscreen CGI in T2 and only 6 minutes of onscreen CGI in Jurassic Park. The 80s and 90s were magical with practical effects. So many things were difficult to imagine how they were pulled off.

In the last 20 years, everything’s just CGI. Movies like Mad Max: Fury Road and Fall Guy are few and far between.

Re: The tech of 'Terminator 2' – an oral history (2017)

#67

Post by bensyverson »

jonhohle wrote: post #66
skullone wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Holy shit. I thought the bullet splashes were CGI. I'm even more impressed that they were real practical effects, that is indeed nextfuckinglevel

Believe it or not, there is 6 minutes of onscreen CGI in T2 and only 6 minutes of onscreen CGI in Jurassic Park. The 80s and 90s were magical with practical effects. So many things were difficult to imagine how they were pulled off. In the last 20 years, everything’s just CGI. Movies like Mad Max: Fury Road and Fall Guy are few and far between.

My friend, there are over 2000 VFX shots in Fury Road, and at least 600 in The Fall Guy.

I get that people are tired of CGI, but it’s a tool that is used in virtually every film that reaches theaters, for reasons as prosaic as matching skies between shots.

Re: The tech of 'Terminator 2' – an oral history (2017)

#68

Post by jonhohle »

xnx wrote: post #11

Can anyone confirm that the helicopter flying over the underpass was actual flying and not VFX or a chopper on a trailer? There are claims that the stunt pilot flew under (twice!), but it seems like no amount of skill could avoid weird uncontrollable effects from rotor wash.

I’m pretty sure the PPV feature the back in 1992 said it was real, and if not that, one of the documentaries on the Laserdiscs or DVDs. Nearly everything, besides the T-1000 morphing was practical. They blew up the front face of a building, jumped a motorcycles (with rigging), jumped through candy glass, and much more.

Re: The tech of 'Terminator 2' – an oral history (2017)

#69

Post by s1artibartfast »

whartung wrote: post #60
jmyeet wrote: post #4

I'm not sure that anyone under the age of 45-50 can truly appreciate just how big of a deal Terminator 2 was and how big movie releases can be. Like, nothing in the MCU era or the Star Wars prequels and sequels comes remotely close. Yes, they gross a lot of money but in terms of cultural significance, I've seen nothing close. At the time I lived in a city when the local movie theaters would typically run major releas…

What’s interesting to me is how today, something like Avatar 3 has seemingly no traction or notable impact. Perhaps it’s generational. It clearly did well in the box office, so somebody went out and saw it. But nobody I know directly, indirectly, or remotely has seen it. It got zero chatter in any of the places that I frequent, and that includes some SF themed communities. Big picture. Lots of tech, very expensive, C…

Mostly becasue the plot of avatar 2 and 3 were trash, recycling the same cliches over and over not only between films but within them.

Re: The tech of 'Terminator 2' – an oral history (2017)

#70

Post by neckro23 »

ymolodtsov wrote: post #43
whycome wrote: post #24

The 4K remaster of this is back in theatres next month for “Judgment Day” and the 35th anniversary. https://www.fathomentertainment.com/news/fathom-entertainmen...

The preview they released is so smudged though, like they tried to denoize it.

The 4k remasters of the classic Cameron films look awful. It's like someone cranked the denoise filter up to 200 and left it there.
Post reply on HN