This makes me appreciate the original even MORE. It’s so beautifully done. It really doesn’t need to be made smoother. It actually looks best in its original format.
I agree. Frankly, the effects look actually fake with the smoother motion. This is the reason why computer graphics can't make things look scary, because everything is too polished and smooth. The ED-209 sequence in RoboCop was terrifying because of the stop-motion effects, especially when paired with Basil Poledouris's clanking music. While there are a few exceptions of good CG effects being quite terrifying (10 Cloverfield Lane, 2005's War of the Worlds), it's still not as convincing as actual special effects when it was all done with the camera, models, and matte paintings.
Imagine all the work that must have went into this. I saw this movie when I was a kid and thought it was the best movie I had ever seen. It still holds up really well.
I remember watching this as a kid, I didn’t think it could get any better. This was one of the ones that blew your mind as a kid because he loves spooky stuff and then to see the skeletons come to life was amazing. This is just enhancing the heck out of it and it’s glorious.
I'm 69 years old and first saw Jason and the Argonauts when I was a little kid and I thought it was the greatest thing I'd ever seen. I guess that I might be just an old guy, but Ray Harryhausen was the man. Nothing needs to be changed and why would you?
I remember a documentary years and years ago, where Ray H. intentionally made the Bronze statue move kinda herky jerky to show that he was in fact made of metal. Both look great, but I prefer the original tbh.
I agree. Smoothing makes it look like a dude in a suit. The jerky movements for the statue makes sense. I think the smoothing works great for the other parts.
He wouldastill have liked this option though, i am sure. It does convince me the most effective effects mix the pratical and digital, these minitures had weight, CGI often doesnt.
The original bronze statue was intentionally made to have stilted animation in order to simulate metal having a tough time deforming in order to move. Ray even expressed his frustration with executives that couldn't understand this.
No way! The charm and allure of the original is the mesmerizing animation. Giving it the 'smooth' look makes it look like any new COMPUTER effect. Which has no 'magic' to it. It's best to leave it like it is. You wouldn't want to re-paint the Mona Lisa? Same thing here.
I feel the same way about colorizing movies. Just don’t. It’s as cringeworthy as taking old animated movies and redoing them with CGI, just because you can. Wait a minute. Disney is doing that. 🙁👎
I think the appeal of the original is just how 'jerky' the movements of things are. Its that unnatural jerkiness that makes the monsters that much more terrifying
That’s exactly what I thought. The mechanical movements reminds me of antique terminators. But the bigger question is how this video was recommended to me...
I know this was supposed to show how video software technology can improve stuff, but damn this just made appreciate the original more. I can't imagine how much insane work and effort they had to put into this
Something curious....I actually saw the original footage as appearing more "real" than the higher frame rate. The figures seemed more solid and had apparent mass...and genuinely seem more convincing. These higher frame rates and extreme definitions may be a mistake...Is lack of motion blur to blame? I do know that I feel the cinema projections of most of the Marvel films look great on the big screen. But when these same films are on a 4K television, everything looks plastic-like, phony, and not convincing at all. I hate 4k. They need to put a resolution dial on these tvs.
Yeah, usually these things look better with the original FPS because of the way the animators intended it to look. In this case I can barely see the difference. Edit: after watching in higher video quality, I can say I think the original is better.
@@Novusod Yeah my understanding was when it came to the Greek action film craze it was clash of titans for the best movie but Jason and the argonauts for special effects.
I remember seeing it on the "Big Screen", paying something like $1.50 to get into the matinee. Man that was impressive Ray Harryhausen was the George Lucius of his time. All the classics "had to have Harry" doing the stop animation. It was brutal work, time consuming, but when they finished, you really knew in your heart that colossus was coming for you. It was going to come out of the screen and get you. If it was Harryhausen you made sure to take your crap before going into the theater.
Not only the movie itself but most theatres of that day were large gold leaf ornate interiors with a huge balcony. An organ player played a large pipe organ before and after the shows. The seats were red velvet and there were box seats up along the sides. There were cartoons first before the main show and an intermission to hit the can and buy more stuff from the concessions. The sound systems were surround sound and loud. A 10 cent bus ride got your there. A whole day of adventure for young kids.
@@bobwallace9814 We didn't have the organ, and we had a good sound system it wasn't surround sound yet; The THX sound hadn't made it to us. but the rest yes, they were built as "stages" and the screens could be lowered and tied in place, and you could actually walk behind the screen on the stage. Those were they days, 10 cent boxes of candies. Juju bees were the best, they lasted the longest.
In my animation class my professor used this movie as an example of good animation even when frames are limited. Then he found a shot from a stop motion movie that's godaweful simply because someone who wasn't good at animation worked on the shot. It is amazing!
Yeah they had to build like a 100ft statue out of iron, not only that but they had to mold it to look like humanoid. And to move that thing, holy shit idk how they pulled that off, maybe with helicopters idk
There's a certain charm to these stop animation effects that hold up well to this day. Must have been mind-blowing to see this in the cinema back in the day.
Je suis absolument fasciné par la qualité de ces animations qui encore aujourd'hui ont gardé toute leur magie. J'ai vu Jason et les Argonautes quand j'étais enfant, les années 70 pour être précis, et je me souviens encore de ma terreur lorsque les squelettes sortent de terre.
I’m glad someone said it, because i was thinking that very thing myself. The only difference i could see, especially with the skeletons, was that their movements were faster with the higher frame rate. I’ve always liked liked Ray Harryhausen’s work, always
Looks worse overall cause looks even more fake. Like bad 3D models overlaid because you can see where the green screened out the monsters and people more.
Loved the original jerkiness of Talos, I thought it suited someone who may not have moved for decades, not sure on his feet. All the Ray HH films still fill me with wonder, there is something mythic about them that a lot of modern films, with better special effects just don't have, they seem, 'over-real'.
True. However, when I look at the comparison, I can easily see the age of the movie and to see the smoother stopmotion makes it seem like the original work was way ahead of its time in the visual effects aspect. It gives it another vibe that is also interesting.
I’m 68 and this movie still holds my attention. So well done. This movie played on Philadelphia tv stations, it seemed like once a month when I was a little kid! Which was fine with me.
I think this is important to know: The jerkiness of the original animation is not caused by low framerate; after all the framerate of the animation is the same as of the live action footage. It is actually caused by lack of motion blurr - it's just series of photographs of static objects. So if you want the animation to appear smoother and more lifelike, what you need is to add a little bit of motion blurr, appropriate to te speed of depicted movements. This is, afaik, what they did way later in Ghostbusters, when they were able to actually move the animated objects a little bit during the time of exposure of each frame.
The animation is NOT the same framerate. Look at the shot in the boat and go frame by frame, you can see that they're different framerates. The reason it still looks like it does is because it interpolated between frames that look the same. So still every 2nd frame or whatever is mostly the same as the one before.
Yeah, the staccato movement of the stop motion makes it feel like there's an unnatural force imposing itself on the natural world in a violent fashion, and the smoother animation just makes it look like an awkward metal man who hasn't moved in a while so he's a bit stuff and needs some time to loosen up... Which really takes the edge off of it.
Wow, these clips bring back such great memories. It would play late into the night and mom would have already told us to turn the tv off in our bedroom. We'd turn it down so low you could barely hear it and always watch this until the end. This was in the '70s and early '80s when it was rerun a lot. More impressive when you realize we had to be up and out of the house by 5:08 a.m. the next morning. But it was worth it! lol
For me, it is the higher frame rate that makes them seem uncanny. That’s the case for me with all media with a higher frame rate that aren’t TH-cam videos of modern people talking about random stuff. I think my eyes are too used to the old frame rate.
It's interesting how much the "smoothing" takes away from that sense of weight in the original. Goes to show how much effort and intention went into making those effects feel like they belonged in the world.
I think it really helps in some scenes like the skeletons fighting. The others make it really obvious how out of place the effects are, by taking the jarring stop motion out. You can tell how "cutout" the creatures are when it's so smooth like that and when the creatures have that very jittery movement its hard to focus on them. If you could play with the interpolation to make it less smooth during the really "cutout" moments it would look great. I still think the skeleton fighting scene looks MUCH better with this smoothing.
That's what happens when people are allowed to create something to the highest quality and integrity capable. It's something all groups workin on endeavors need to understand. Your work will be diminished the minute you are forced to compromise a lot and make major concessions in your craft.
Even long after I forgot the name of the movie, I still had so much footage stuck in my head, particularly the skeletons and of course Gorgon who terrified the shot out of me. This movie is such a treat to 8-12 year old boys.
It’s not ahead of its time at all. In fact it’s within its time. Blade Runner, 2001, Avatar, Inception. Those films are ahead of their time, and pushed boundaries
the jerky stop motion is a huge part of the charm and depth of the characters. they are all much more menacing in the original, especially the bronze giant and skeletons. they just felt other-worldly and trigger the uncanny valley enough to make you uneasy just looking at them. and all these years later, this still holds up incredibly well. it gives me just the same feeling now at 35 as it did when i was 6. i love it
Yeah, the reference points for the interpolation are still jerky stop-motion references, so the interpolated animation feels a bit off. But it works really well for the skeleton fight.
@@HappyBeezerStudios Yeah, the effectiveness of the interpolation is really a testament to the quality of the original animation, looks far better than the attempts making anime and cartoons smoother.
As someone who just watched for the first time at 30 years old- just know you're not blinded by nostalgia, it totally holds up even to someone with an outside perspective.
Nooo, it's perfect just the way they filmed it. That's, how I and everybody that went to the theatre, remembers it.We knew it wasn't really real but the delayed stop-action, made it all, that more creepy and added the right nuance and campiness to it!... 😉👌
Look closely at the skeleton sword fight -- the sword swings are perfectly synced with the swings of the actors. What they accomplished in this one shot back in 1963 with no computers, CGI, roto-scoping, etc is mind blowing.
In an interview Ray H explained that the actors and scene had already been filmed and he had to match the motion of the actors. In most films it was done in reverse because of the long lead time needed for the stop motion effects.
@@glenchapman3899 That's still how it's done today, even with CGI. Any kind of special effect, whether it be stop motion or CG, is done "in post." That is, post-filming of actors, scenery, etc. The main reason of course is that FX artists can use the footage for reference when setting up their own shots. It would be virtually impossible to shoot the effects first and then try to shoot an actor syncing to the effects, because neither party has anything to go on. My OP was referring to how, in a time when compositing tools consisted largely of, "OK how do we do this?," the FX shots were overlayed on the actor footage in perfect sync.
@@sixstanger00 Though it was more common to not integrate the footage with stop motion. The times it was tried it usually looked all wrong. With exception of RH. Even Willis Obrien, who taught RH the trade preferred to back project the stop motion for that reason.
You should see the effects in The Thing, the original. Not the prequel. Or check out The Fly with Jeff Goldblum. Really good practical effects and some stop motion here and there.
It looks amazing smoother. Really can appreciate how ahead of its time this was. Reminds me of certain portraits hanging in the gallery. Some of them are so sharp and clear, they look like photographs 😳
Can we just appreciate how minimal the change is with the skeletons when it’s 8x smoother, that hard work really shows in this 60 years later!!!ray harryhausen was a legend
I watched this over and over with my young son, many years ago, and we were both thrilled by it, and it still works. Dont mess with things that dont need anything.
Though even old CGI has its charm, seeing the brilliance and ingenuity that has to go into the tricks used to pull off what they did back in the day. LOTR developer diaries is certainly an interesting watch in that subject.
The fact that someone stood there and put heart and soul into manually moving the figures in a way that felt right to their eye for every single frame is whole different thing to scripting some movements in a piece of software and wandering off for a frappucino while it renders.
It was _amazing_ special effects for that time! I watched this when I was about five and was so terrified by the skeletons fighting, especially, that I remember it clearly today. I haven’t seen it since, so I’ll have to watch it with my husband now, fifty years later, to see how it compares to my memory!
I think the original animation should be kept for just the statue. It's made entirely out of metal with no actual moving parts like joints or hinges, the jerkiness makes sense for it.
this was one of my favorites, growing up. The smoothness looks very nice and it feels like that smoothness is how I saw it when I was younger. Doesn't make too big of a difference but I admire the effort here!
As a whole we all got used to shitty 24 fps for "cinematic reasons of immersion" when the human eye is so much better.. even cheap walmart TVs are 120hz. Movie business is lazy
Something about the harpies made me think of those old '90s-era FMV light-gun arcade games. I guess it's the same idea of them trying to get live actors to react to animated monsters they're planning to add in later. Whatever the reason, a bullet counter on the side of the screen and a score tally at the top would fit right in.
That's because motion smoothing technology is not creating frames as if it were shot at a higher framerate--it is artificially smoothing the lower framerate. Motion smoothing is hideous.
Can we take a moment to respect the hard work that went in to these old special effects? Can you imagine seeing it in the theater and watching a GIANT STATUE come to life? Must have been amazing.
Oh it was! Talos stayed in my brain for a LONG time after seeing it as a kid in the theater. I can still always call up the screech of metal in my mind when I think of the scene. Brilliantly done. His ankle leaking and him falling over was burned into my brain.
Terrifying. For my five year old self it was utterly terrifying. I screamed in the theater and then had nightmares for weeks after. So, I guess that means the special effects were quite effective and my folks were idiots.
Still is. Practical effects and physical objects look better than CGI to me, and I'm not knocking the talent required to make good CGI. I just prefer practical effects.
It was amazing indeed!; I was 9 years old when my father left me ALONE at the cinema while he was at the pool salon and bar with his friends; it was in 73, at a small-town theater where they exhibited double features of older movies or new b movies, many times one of them was a kung fu and the other a Hollywood produced one; that night I had to sleep with my older sister because that damn statue scared the soul out of my body! lolol. I watched, as a child, alone, movies like Dog Day Afternoon, Westworld, Planet of the Apes, The Crimson Pirate, with Burt Lancaster (one of my favorite movies ever, I have it in DVD!), Seven Samurai, The Way of the Dragon, Fist of Fury and many more. You can NOT leave a child one minute alone these days...those were the times!!!
I like to think that Ray Harryhausen would approve. Honestly, just shows how elegant Ray's choices were in the original stop motion version. The 8x version is much like an animation in-between for the artist's true intention. Nice work. Cheers! ✨
You can't improve on the perfection of Ray Harryhausen. His work is timeless. The fight scene with the skeletons is still regarded as some of the best stop motion in any movie.
My Dad was a cinematography prof for a while, and he loved Harryhausen. He took me to see Jason sometime in the early 70's, and at one point he set up a primitive stop motion animation studio for my sister and I to use. Also taught us ho to edit / splice film.
Is your Father still alive? I always wondered what the creator of such special effects opinion of AI/Neural Network enhanced Framerates would be. Do they approve? If they had the tools back then, would they have done a better job? And if possible some kind of Frame by Frame analysis describing the original fottage and its errors/limitations and what the enhanced version fixed/made worse. I would appreciate anyones input ofc!
@@G4m3G3ni3 Inserting my personal opinion as someone in the industry today (for what it's worth), I imagine they would've absolutely loved it if it was indeed available to them. They were basically just people trying to get by with the tools and techniques they had on hand at the time. (That said, I would love to hear their own insights and perspectives on it.)
CG isn't real, these Harryhausen originals were actual real solid things. The difference is lost on these modern days. I'll keep the handcraft, personally.
@@MSTL144 real doesn't mean better. Just keep that in mind? Sure everyone may want practical effects but if it looks terrible or low budget than what's the point? Time and effort wasted with no pay off. Same goes for cg
It's because he was an artist, with the eye to see how things could be, should be and would be, and then made it happen. He was supposed to be bastard to work for in his exactness, but when it was all finished everyone felt the joy and pride of doing something that has held up to this day.
@@eyellgeteven9928 Anyone who wanted to be a animation master, studied his movies. Like that is some punishment, "Thank you sir, may I have another movie.".
Ray Harryhausen was a legend. He'd go off for months at a time and hide himself in a room to animate all of this stuff. The dedication is almost supernatural.
He would even unplug his phone so he wouldn't be disturbed. Can't say as I blame him, some of these sequences are very complex and gotta be done right the first time.
I think one thing this video overlooks is that the smoothing out of things takes away all of the charm of the original. For its time it was a fantastic effect. Stop motion was not new, but they did it so well. As a kid this blew me away, especially the skeletons.
.a while back I found on Ebay the (Holy Grail )Argosy magazine Mar. 1959 that had Ray Harryhausen article "Monsters Are My Business" I first saw that back then as my dad subscribed to it. I did 3D animation in my life ..retired now. Many as myself forever looked to find that old magazine...I lucked out !! Problem back in 1959...seeing how it was done..this 7 year old was crushed because it was not real... :-)
Jesus loves y’all! God bless y’all! God loves you and is your protector and healer. Praise be to Jesus!!! “God is our refuge and strength, an ever-present help in trouble.” Psalm 46:1.
As said by Kyle P, I don’t think it’s a statement that it would be better being smoother. However, we might be wrong. Regardless I agree that it loses it’s charm and becomes something else - that I think the creators/animators didn’t intend for. They worked with this stop motion medium, being a bit choppy. So they used that in their rhythm, in favour for their work. They leaned on the scary part, whereas that gets lost in the smoothened version. That’s what many lacks to realise and acknowledge today: the respect of the creators! The know the tone they set, the heart in which they create these things. Nowadays everyone thinks they can do everything, because they have access to technology creating them. The result becomes superficial, whereas this? This original strikes in chords,.. 👍
I feel like the originals have a better feel to them, like my brain is filling the frame gaps making it feel realer and less cropped in. A higher frame rate makes it feel easier for my brain to parse the edits making it feel more CGI.
I'm 62 and recall being transfixed watching this as a kid. The way Talos leaned back after stepping off the pedestal added so much realism to his menace. One could feel the massive weight he supported through this simple action.
I'm 26 now, remember watching this with my dad when I was maybe 6-7, and Jesus did Talos scare the living crap outta me 😅 The way he moved,the sound's his movement made..I still can't watch this movie without getting a shiver running up me spine when I see him. You can just tell the love and attention to detail that Harryhausen put into his movies.
The original has a natural jerkiness to the movement which makes sense with the statue and skeletons, the higher frame rate looks like its slowed down and stiffened, like a smooth action purposely made stiff. Where as the original its feels like the statue is naturallly creaky.
The smoothed up version looks like I’m watching a news report of a school play. Older movies (and new ones) work so much better at the slower frame rates. Modern TV’s that adjust the rate like this for “better” sports viewing make most films unwatchable. I always turn the “smoothing / frame rate feature off” no film should look like a live news reel.
Ray Harryhausen was a genius. He was digital before any body knew what digital was. Todays FX are all motion blur so they can cut costs and maximize profits. This guy was the master. I'm 52 years old and his work is still hair raising to me. Too many FX people put them selves and their "skill " first. This guy put the work first.
Here here! Well said! I was _just_ saying to my son-in-law (as I watch Godzilla vs Gigan for the umpteenth time) that as fun and cool as the new Godzilla movies are with their shiny special effects, they're not nearly as rewatchable as the old, 'guy-in-a-suit' movies are. There's a charm and and sense of craft that's missing nowadays.
I remember watching this movie for the first time when I was a little kid, and it was absolute MAGIC! It definitely played a part in my growing up to love all things fantasy and science fiction, including well made movies. What Ray Harryhausen did for this movie was just stunning for the time, and it's still very watchable today!
It gives a horror vibe while the smoother one a more friendly impression/more sane character. Maybe the last one works better for children programs/friendly scenes
It’s because the special effects in movies are overdone. When you need to rely on real models, you have an easier time staying in the story and convincing yourself that what your seeing is real. Even the dinosaurs in the original Jurassic Park movie, because they didn’t often fill the screen with digitized dinosaurs, the movie could trick your mind into thinking there was really a dinosaur there. When you load the screen up with too much digitization, your mind, whether it’s in story mode or not, starts to call BS.
@@frederickdefeo3768 exactly, thats why the original lotr trilogy looked way better since it was made 95% with real props, except for the balrog and gollum. The hobbit looked just unreal and bullshitty cgi, except maybe for smaug.
There's a fundamental concept in filmmaking & storytelling in general that took me forrrrever to properly appreciate which is also likely **beyond** antiquated to the status quo of film production sensibilities: LESS IS MORE!!! It's not some fix-all Golden Rule or something, but the fact that you reeeeeally have to keep your eyes peeled now for examples of films that make use of the inherent virtues that idea has in abundance which can easily be the difference between a goodgreatmasterpiece-level film/filmmaker....
I don't know, guys- the higher frame rate to me makes the animation appear sped-up and weird, where the original 24 frames slows it down and makes it feel, strangely, more natural- and I think that shows when it does get the extra frames because Haryhausen's work is still phenomenal no matter how you do it.
The higher frame rate appeared better and more natural to me, specially when the figures movements are slower (like when Talos moves his head to look down on Hercules), although it didn't actually improve much on the effect. Anyway, I watched that movie when I was a teenager and its amazing to see how the figure designs holds up. Same for the animation, even though it definitely doesn't look natural for today's standards.
Thank you, that was fun! Loved the original, and your updated go looks great too. Definitely better in many ways, yet I am sure all fans would agree you have some brilliant original material - however flawed - to work with. Brilliant.
This smoothing effect always give me this uncanny feeling. There is something wrong in the way it smooths the frames - makes things too even, and gets lost on key frames.
Yeah it's interpolation, so it's trying to automatically create or "paint" in-between frames that don't exist. Guessing what would be there. That's why it'll often feel even worse than material natively made in 60fps, like video games.
@@christopherstein2024 Not at all. Look at the fragments Akira or Little Mermaid which were animated in 60fps and they lack this uncanny feel. Look at most modern video games where at least 60fps is standard. That is the issue with frame interpolation being applied across the board - it kills the momentum, evens the tempo of animation even in places where it is not needed, because it is incapable of distinguishing between key frames.
I haven't seen the original, and I thought the animation for the statues was a massive improvement. I know others are complimenting the charm of the jerkiness, but for me, without having the context of the full movie, it just seemed as a downside that was improved upon by the smooth FPS. Perhaps I'd appreciate it more having seen the movie, but I speak as somebody who hasn't seen this film. Is it 100% Perfect? No, but I view it less janky and jerky than the original.
I noticed it on the flying creatures, I don’t know much about the technology used but it looked like they cgi them. Something was just wrong about the way it looked.
I think the stop motion for the bronze statue and the skeletons work very well and gives them a creepiness that we wouldn't normally feel if they flowed smoothly. These things aren't supposed to be alive. But it works for the scene where the harpies are attacking because they are alive and smooth movement looks natural. By the way, the first time a child watches the statue turn its head to look at the human, the child almost always gives a little jump.
Exactly; it recalls the reason that humans find arachnid and other arthropods' movements so uncanny and grotesque: their movement is literally _hydraulic_ rather than musculoskeletal. Harryhausen's animations often have that quality, which lends itself tremendously to the effectiveness of the scenes.
Harryhausen was such a master that framerate doesn't really change the effect he has on the story telling. On the bronze golem and the skeletons, the slight herki-jerkiness of it just fits the scene. And the harpies are only slightly smoother.
Dune 2021 had some of that epic feel to it, though movie making has changed to more close-ups and less long hold wide angle shots like the older epics like Ben Hur, Zulu, or Jason and the Argonauts. Back then, they'd stay on those shots of large groups of people doing exciting things for a long time, which makes the scope seem much larger in scale, but nowadays it's a quick wide angle to set the scene then straight in to quick edit close-ups of the overpaid actors - the studios want to get their money's worth by using the actors in as many close and detailed shots as they can.
No matter the framerate, stop motion animation allays has a "jitter", because while you can easily fake the trajectory of movements, changing the velocity in a smooth manner is colossal task to do manually. But that is what gives stop motion its characteristic look, so I doubt that filmmakers would even want to correct that.
I'm convinced a lot of modern film makers are just repeating techniques they like, but don't understand why they like them or how/why the techniques work.
I know that was a quote, but you just put into words the jumble of impressions and feelings I have inside me about ultra realistic imagery on screen. I could never arrange it into communicable terms. Thanks for sharing this quote.
Cool, I'm not crazy! I thought it looked worse too. Somehow smoothing made it look less real instead of more. However, could a smoother modern stop motion attempt with more detailed models, better lighting, and minimal vfx for icing work?. Unfortunately cost is probably going to prohibitive.
@@jonnyyen7169 the movement looks kinda robotic when you fill the missing frames in, especially on the statue, so it could be improved, if it was made with a higher fps in mind from the start. They did a surprisingly good job with the lighting on the dolls/models considering it's an old movie, but still some compositing here looks visibly fake, cause the colors are more washed out/brighter on the background or foreground. This is because they used rear projection here, so yeah, it could be improved by using a more modern green screening solution. Just look at the little guy in Tool's Parabola from around 2002 - he moves rather smoothly, and he blends with the background well (though in this particular case the model could've been shot on set, and there's clearly some CG used in the video).
@@piobu5357 well, maybe some young filmmakers who are sick of overblown modern CGI will try to bring it back with modern technology. I've noticed that whenever a young movie reactor sees good stop motion they usually like it.
I prefer the "jerkiness" of the original. It reinforces the fact that these objects are not "alive", but merely animated, like a marionette. In the movie, the Talas statue does not become a living being, but a magically animated supernatural object.
Years ago a building I used to visit had an elevator that used to make weird scrapping noises when you went up. Every time I heard that scrap, my mind jumped straight to this very scene.
Watching on the big screen, the controlled jerkiness of Harryhausen's animations made them seem truly fantastical and really scary. It's an integral part of the experience and smoothing it away actually spoils the effect.
It's not the frame rate that makes the original footage look janky, but the lack of motion blur. Robert Rodriguez mentioned on one of the Spy Kids commentaries that while the skeletons they were fighting were CGI, he turned off motion blur in rendering to give it the Harryhausen stop motion look. This is why Phil Tippet invented Go Motion for The Empire Strikes Back which moved the puppet a bit while the shutter was open to create blur.
@@wellesradio Rodriguez used to do featurettes called "10-Minute Film School" where he'd offer up practical tips to aspiring filmmakers and his commentaries were really informative. The saddest irony was listening to him and Frank Miller on the Sin City commentary discussing Brittany Murphy's Shelly character and mentioning they had big plans for her in the sequel. The first film had come out in 2005 and I was watching the commentary in 2009. Next morning, I go to work and learn that she had died the day before. The sequel didn't come out until 2014 and they had to use other stories as well as recast Michael Clark Duncan's Manute with Dennis Haysbert; Jamie Chung replaced the retired-from-acting Devon Aoki; Josh Brolin took over the role of Dwight from Clive Owen, but it made sense cuz it was a prequel story and Owen's Dwight spoke of having a new face.
That's no concidence. I think this is _the_ go-to movie for the raw potential of this kind of art. Everywhere else, and everywhere since, stop-motion was used in short clips in live-action film. Here, it carries entire scenes, and manages to do so without breaking the audience's immersion (well, for the most part). Plus it doesn't hurt that it's all in support of a fantastic epic.
I prefer the old one, but the smoother one manages to keep it quite jerky so I think if you remade it you could convince a younger audience to watch it still, but not lose too much of the jerkiness
When i was a kid, in the early 2000s, the stop motion monsters were kinda more scary than normally. I believe its because stop motion like this was not so common.
Totally agree. They cant move like a normal human if they are missing litteraly everything that makes them human so magic moves them in a way that is in-human
I remember back in the day when there were only three channels on the television and you only got to see this movie once a year and looked forward to it. Pretty much like The Wizard of Oz.
I have produced a couple of TV commercials that have included stop-motion animation. It took us a week to get 7 seconds of film. So it never fails when I see this Harryhausen masterpiece I am in total awe. I bow down to the master of the technique! 🎬🧡
Old school stop motion is not for the faint hearted. The creators of South Park found that out as they made the first pilot ep from construction paper.
The work of a master, I am sure he would have used CGI if he had it but this was the state of the art at the time and he was a master of it. The amount of work required to film this scene with the skeletons is unimaginable now.
This makes me appreciate the original even MORE. It’s so beautifully done. It really doesn’t need to be made smoother. It actually looks best in its original format.
The original certainly looks good. I remember watching this in the 60's when I was a little kid. Scared the bejeepers out of me.
I agree. Frankly, the effects look actually fake with the smoother motion. This is the reason why computer graphics can't make things look scary, because everything is too polished and smooth. The ED-209 sequence in RoboCop was terrifying because of the stop-motion effects, especially when paired with Basil Poledouris's clanking music. While there are a few exceptions of good CG effects being quite terrifying (10 Cloverfield Lane, 2005's War of the Worlds), it's still not as convincing as actual special effects when it was all done with the camera, models, and matte paintings.
The 'smoother' parts jumped out of the film like they were overlaid on top of the background like an old video game.
Imagine all the work that must have went into this. I saw this movie when I was a kid and thought it was the best movie I had ever seen. It still holds up really well.
💯
The original of the statue works so well because that’s how I’d imagine a bronze statue to move like.
Ikr!
Couldn't agree more.
Exactly
Absolutely
you are a 100% correct
Makes you realize just how impressive this movie was when it came out. It's really not bad even on original form
Yep.
I remember watching this as a kid, I didn’t think it could get any better. This was one of the ones that blew your mind as a kid because he loves spooky stuff and then to see the skeletons come to life was amazing. This is just enhancing the heck out of it and it’s glorious.
@@AAAFilm-yt7gx Yep I was 10 in 1963, nothing better than this for a Saturday morning at the movies. Unless it was Annette- be still my heart.
I think some are bad but for the time its great. However, the skeleton one in the end was actually pretty great
maybe if the right foot wasnt so stiff it would have been awesome as well for the giant
I'm 69 years old and first saw Jason and the Argonauts when I was a little kid and I thought it was the greatest thing I'd ever seen. I guess that I might be just an old guy, but Ray Harryhausen was the man. Nothing needs to be changed and why would you?
No saying that need to be changed, but is very interesting to see how it looks with more frame rate. Don't you agree?
Nice age
Because I’m curious to see the changes, nothing wrong with that?
Nice
N i c e
I remember a documentary years and years ago, where Ray H. intentionally made the Bronze statue move kinda herky jerky to show that he was in fact made of metal. Both look great, but I prefer the original tbh.
Agreed!
I agree. Smoothing makes it look like a dude in a suit. The jerky movements for the statue makes sense. I think the smoothing works great for the other parts.
I agree, prefer the original
Same!
He wouldastill have liked this option though, i am sure.
It does convince me the most effective effects mix the pratical and digital, these minitures had weight, CGI often doesnt.
The Skeletons looked better, but there's something about the jerkiness of the bronze statue in the original framerate that made it more menacing.
Because it emphasized its nature an an unnaturally mobile construct?
Id have to agree with that.
@@lyokianhitchhiker because it seems to be in another time zone there's a desirable strange effect.
Exactly what I thought. I preferred the 8x skeleton but the original statue.
Uncanny valley. A rare case such trope works in it’s favor
The original bronze statue was intentionally made to have stilted animation in order to simulate metal having a tough time deforming in order to move. Ray even expressed his frustration with executives that couldn't understand this.
if metal deforms it hardens and eventually breaks. the executives were right
@@Blox117 yea and irl statues don’t come alive.
Its not about stiffness but smoothness
Ps it still looks stiff
I dunno, the Terminators move around just fine
@@Dilaudid281 terminators have joints
No way! The charm and allure of the original is the mesmerizing animation. Giving it the 'smooth' look makes it look like any new COMPUTER effect. Which has no 'magic' to it. It's best to leave it like it is. You wouldn't want to re-paint the Mona Lisa? Same thing here.
It looks like how they move in Spy Kids 2
I feel the same way about colorizing movies. Just don’t. It’s as cringeworthy as taking old animated movies and redoing them with CGI, just because you can. Wait a minute. Disney is doing that. 🙁👎
The smoother effects kind of look neat, but, at the same time, it makes the creatures look more like they aren't actually there.
Cool not alone in thinking that
I agree.
It literally looks the exact same to me but as the title says "smoother" it still looks clunky but a little smoother.
So does the original tho, its just more even movement
Yeah the smoother version looks a lot more fake despite being smoother, probably because it's AI
I think the appeal of the original is just how 'jerky' the movements of things are. Its that unnatural jerkiness that makes the monsters that much more terrifying
Exactly that sir!
Plus it makes a lot more sense for monsters like the Colossus to be stiff moving, as he's made of metal.
That’s exactly what I thought. The mechanical movements reminds me of antique terminators. But the bigger question is how this video was recommended to me...
The only one improved is the skeleton fight imo
i find both versions creepy for different reasons..
I'm glad the "it must have been the wind" line started with this classic
It's really about to bring a whole smile to my face as I play Skyrim again...
The statue says TALOS like what
For the Empire! For the peace of the Kingdom!
Used again in another classic film, "Enter Laughing".
@@safwanshuhaib9968nothing new under the sun. One might dare say that Tiber Septim never would have become TALOS without the Numidium.
I bet this blew peoples minds back in the 60s. It actually holds up pretty well I think
I was a preteen when this came out and it was scary as hell. Kids had nightmares from this. 😲
@@stephenschroeder6567some Stop-Motion animation can be quite scary in a way as it feels unnatural and/or uncanny
It holds up far better than CGI, that's for sure.
I know this was supposed to show how video software technology can improve stuff, but damn this just made appreciate the original more. I can't imagine how much insane work and effort they had to put into this
Improve is a bit strong, the retouched version looks faker than the original.
Are you sure that was the point? I thought the point was to show how the original is better and freakier
Something curious....I actually saw the original footage as appearing more "real" than the higher frame rate. The figures seemed more solid and had apparent mass...and genuinely seem more convincing.
These higher frame rates and extreme definitions may be a mistake...Is lack of motion blur to blame?
I do know that I feel the cinema projections of most of the Marvel films look great on the big screen. But when these same films are on a 4K television, everything looks plastic-like, phony, and not convincing at all. I hate 4k.
They need to put a resolution dial on these tvs.
Totally agree
Yeah, usually these things look better with the original FPS because of the way the animators intended it to look. In this case I can barely see the difference.
Edit: after watching in higher video quality, I can say I think the original is better.
the skeleton movement was actually pretty good in both original and 8X
I remember reading somewhere that the skeleton fight scene took like 3 months to complete
both look the same
Jason and the Argonauts (original) had some top notch special effects for the day.
@@Novusod Yeah my understanding was when it came to the Greek action film craze it was clash of titans for the best movie but Jason and the argonauts for special effects.
Hell yeah it is harry is amazing at this stuff
The original shots of that statue still hold up. I can only imagine how impressive that was back then.
I remember seeing it on the "Big Screen", paying something like $1.50 to get into the matinee. Man that was impressive Ray Harryhausen was the George Lucius of his time. All the classics "had to have Harry" doing the stop animation. It was brutal work, time consuming, but when they finished, you really knew in your heart that colossus was coming for you. It was going to come out of the screen and get you. If it was Harryhausen you made sure to take your crap before going into the theater.
Not only the movie itself but most theatres of that day were large gold leaf ornate interiors with a huge balcony. An organ player played a large pipe organ before and after the shows. The seats were red velvet and there were box seats up along the sides. There were cartoons first before the main show and an intermission to hit the can and buy more stuff from the concessions. The sound systems were surround sound and loud. A 10 cent bus ride got your there. A whole day of adventure for young kids.
@@bobwallace9814 We didn't have the organ, and we had a good sound system it wasn't surround sound yet; The THX sound hadn't made it to us. but the rest yes, they were built as "stages" and the screens could be lowered and tied in place, and you could actually walk behind the screen on the stage. Those were they days, 10 cent boxes of candies. Juju bees were the best, they lasted the longest.
In my animation class my professor used this movie as an example of good animation even when frames are limited. Then he found a shot from a stop motion movie that's godaweful simply because someone who wasn't good at animation worked on the shot. It is amazing!
Idk, i don't like it but for those poor fictional effects it works good
No wonder why people in 1963 were amazed from this movie. It’s amazing and it fits the story too well.
The slightly unnatural movement of the monsters is what makes them so great and distinct.
Totally agree
Agreed.
The smooth version loses all sense of menace, at least for me.
Don’t like the smooth version at all the original one the shuttery movement of them and an unreal nature and a real weight to them
Exactly that was the magic of stop motion
Trying to imagine the effort and time that went into making the original. Damn!
Yeah they had to build like a 100ft statue out of iron, not only that but they had to mold it to look like humanoid. And to move that thing, holy shit idk how they pulled that off, maybe with helicopters idk
yeah that why it still holding its value till this day. when most of new movies in this day...well.........trash.
lol I just watched your video about dave mustaine's 22 guitar techniques
@@jakabok226 you know it's just a miniature they compose into the shot right?
@@lenonel3286 you know he's probably joking right?
There's a certain charm to these stop animation effects that hold up well to this day. Must have been mind-blowing to see this in the cinema back in the day.
Yeah. They outdid even CGI up until fairly recently.
It was.
Yep, it was (:
I'll add another "it was". Really scary!
It's mind blowing seeing it today
Je suis absolument fasciné par la qualité de ces animations qui encore aujourd'hui ont gardé toute leur magie. J'ai vu Jason et les Argonautes quand j'étais enfant, les années 70 pour être précis, et je me souviens encore de ma terreur lorsque les squelettes sortent de terre.
It is a testament to Harryhausen's genius that the higher frame rate really doesn't make the animation look any better.
true!! i take the original. i see very little difference.
Exactly. The only slight improvements are the gargoyles and the skeletons when they are fighting, but it's minimal at best.
I’m glad someone said it, because i was thinking that very thing myself. The only difference i could see, especially with the skeletons, was that their movements were faster with the higher frame rate. I’ve always liked liked Ray Harryhausen’s work, always
Agree.
Looks worse overall cause looks even more fake. Like bad 3D models overlaid because you can see where the green screened out the monsters and people more.
Funnily enough it’s the slightly jerky animation that gives its the terrifyingly timeless appeal
Particularly the skeletons.
Loved the original jerkiness of Talos, I thought it suited someone who may not have moved for decades, not sure on his feet. All the Ray HH films still fill me with wonder, there is something mythic about them that a lot of modern films, with better special effects just don't have, they seem, 'over-real'.
True.
However, when I look at the comparison, I can easily see the age of the movie and to see the smoother stopmotion makes it seem like the original work was way ahead of its time in the visual effects aspect. It gives it another vibe that is also interesting.
Same with the original terminator movie
Agreed, it feels so much more menacing that way
Blows my mind that they achieved this in 400AD, just crazy.
I would be impressed too...as 400AD was after the fall of the ROMAN Western Empire.
....more like 1200BC
It must have been the wind
@@brokeandtired yeah, duh. It was a period piece. Like Mad Men to us.
Saying this happened in 400AD is like saying the Middle ages happened in 2020
I’m 68 and this movie still holds my attention. So well done. This movie played on Philadelphia tv stations, it seemed like once a month when I was a little kid! Which was fine with me.
I think this is important to know: The jerkiness of the original animation is not caused by low framerate; after all the framerate of the animation is the same as of the live action footage. It is actually caused by lack of motion blurr - it's just series of photographs of static objects. So if you want the animation to appear smoother and more lifelike, what you need is to add a little bit of motion blurr, appropriate to te speed of depicted movements. This is, afaik, what they did way later in Ghostbusters, when they were able to actually move the animated objects a little bit during the time of exposure of each frame.
ED-209 in RoboCop used some motion blur as well.
@@j0anr0ch That was the first time I ever noticed them trying to add motion blur to stop motion. Wasn't perfect, but still looked really good
It sounds similar to the smears in 2D animation
Alien³ was animated in Go-motion, but everyone confused it for shitty CGI.
The animation is NOT the same framerate. Look at the shot in the boat and go frame by frame, you can see that they're different framerates. The reason it still looks like it does is because it interpolated between frames that look the same. So still every 2nd frame or whatever is mostly the same as the one before.
The jerky movements give a creepy and supernatural feel to the 'monsters" in this movie
It’s probably the Uncanny Valley effect.
Yeah, the staccato movement of the stop motion makes it feel like there's an unnatural force imposing itself on the natural world in a violent fashion, and the smoother animation just makes it look like an awkward metal man who hasn't moved in a while so he's a bit stuff and needs some time to loosen up... Which really takes the edge off of it.
I agree. Like they are forced to move in a world that is supernatural to them ( the skeletons)
Exactly, this isn’t an improvement, it’s a slap in the face to artistic intent
That’s the magic 🪄 of special effects lol 😂 it is so life like 👍🏿 🍿🥤🎬🎥😎😍.
The second that statue turns his head is terrifying at any speed.
Especially with the creeking sound effect!
Yeah I forgot how creepy that one scene is. Wtf happened to movies these days lmao
Yeah, that head turn awakened some long-repressed terror, yikes.
Yessssssss this is pure horror
@@stonewallperformance the really brutal brass music that kicks in when he turns is what really gets me
Wow, these clips bring back such great memories. It would play late into the night and mom would have already told us to turn the tv off in our bedroom. We'd turn it down so low you could barely hear it and always watch this until the end. This was in the '70s and early '80s when it was rerun a lot. More impressive when you realize we had to be up and out of the house by 5:08 a.m. the next morning. But it was worth it! lol
I think the jerkiness adds something of the uncanny valley to them. It makes them scarier and is more atmospheric. This film is so good
Absolutely true
Oh enough of this stupid god damn word. 'Atmosphere' this and atmoshit that, it's honestly grating. Come up with a different word for fucks sake.
Jason and the Argonauts is a masterpiece. Along with Seventh Voyage of Sinbad and Clash of the Titans it’s one of Harryhausen’s best films.
For me, it is the higher frame rate that makes them seem uncanny. That’s the case for me with all media with a higher frame rate that aren’t TH-cam videos of modern people talking about random stuff. I think my eyes are too used to the old frame rate.
I first saw Jason and the Argonaunts when I was 3. Was fascinated about ancient civilizations, legends, and history ever since. I'm 35 now.
My God, the special effects of this movie are incredible for being from '63
The soundtrack as well. The use of atonal effects is really effective.
"Must have been the wind"
Screeeeech BWWUAAA BWUAAAA
nah fuck that.
Hola, Piña 😬👌
@@Massivecarcrash Don't forget the percussions with the skeletons
Estás en todos los canales, piña
Jesus loves you!
It's interesting how much the "smoothing" takes away from that sense of weight in the original. Goes to show how much effort and intention went into making those effects feel like they belonged in the world.
Agreed, the original is better.
Yeah just smoothing something doesn't make it better. It would need extra keyframes to actually look good in 60fps.
no it doesnt dawg 😭 bro js saying stuff
@@kaaos_1 I mean, obviously it's subjective, but I stand by my original comment.
I think it really helps in some scenes like the skeletons fighting. The others make it really obvious how out of place the effects are, by taking the jarring stop motion out. You can tell how "cutout" the creatures are when it's so smooth like that and when the creatures have that very jittery movement its hard to focus on them. If you could play with the interpolation to make it less smooth during the really "cutout" moments it would look great. I still think the skeleton fighting scene looks MUCH better with this smoothing.
I did a big double take at 0:39😂.
No waaay 😭
That moment when Talos turns his head to look at Hercules is one of cinemas great sphincter-loosening moments at any frame rate.
Indeed it is. It terrified me as ask kid and it didn't change to much viewing it now
For a movie from 1963, this is still unbelievably far ahead of its time and so well done
unreal to think about. we can't even use a 10-15 year old device without getting frustrated. and they did all of thie shit in 1963!
That's what happens when people are allowed to create something to the highest quality and integrity capable. It's something all groups workin on endeavors need to understand. Your work will be diminished the minute you are forced to compromise a lot and make major concessions in your craft.
It's still one of the best stop motion sequences of all time
Even long after I forgot the name of the movie, I still had so much footage stuck in my head, particularly the skeletons and of course Gorgon who terrified the shot out of me. This movie is such a treat to 8-12 year old boys.
It’s not ahead of its time at all. In fact it’s within its time.
Blade Runner, 2001, Avatar, Inception. Those films are ahead of their time, and pushed boundaries
the jerky stop motion is a huge part of the charm and depth of the characters. they are all much more menacing in the original, especially the bronze giant and skeletons. they just felt other-worldly and trigger the uncanny valley enough to make you uneasy just looking at them. and all these years later, this still holds up incredibly well. it gives me just the same feeling now at 35 as it did when i was 6. i love it
Yeah, the reference points for the interpolation are still jerky stop-motion references, so the interpolated animation feels a bit off.
But it works really well for the skeleton fight.
Came to say this!!
@@HappyBeezerStudios Yeah, the effectiveness of the interpolation is really a testament to the quality of the original animation, looks far better than the attempts making anime and cartoons smoother.
As someone who just watched for the first time at 30 years old- just know you're not blinded by nostalgia, it totally holds up even to someone with an outside perspective.
Nooo, it's perfect just the way they filmed it. That's, how I and everybody that went to the theatre, remembers it.We knew it wasn't really real but the delayed stop-action, made it all, that more creepy and added the right nuance and campiness to it!... 😉👌
Look closely at the skeleton sword fight -- the sword swings are perfectly synced with the swings of the actors. What they accomplished in this one shot back in 1963 with no computers, CGI, roto-scoping, etc is mind blowing.
In an interview Ray H explained that the actors and scene had already been filmed and he had to match the motion of the actors. In most films it was done in reverse because of the long lead time needed for the stop motion effects.
@@glenchapman3899 That's still how it's done today, even with CGI. Any kind of special effect, whether it be stop motion or CG, is done "in post." That is, post-filming of actors, scenery, etc.
The main reason of course is that FX artists can use the footage for reference when setting up their own shots. It would be virtually impossible to shoot the effects first and then try to shoot an actor syncing to the effects, because neither party has anything to go on.
My OP was referring to how, in a time when compositing tools consisted largely of, "OK how do we do this?," the FX shots were overlayed on the actor footage in perfect sync.
@@sixstanger00 Though it was more common to not integrate the footage with stop motion. The times it was tried it usually looked all wrong. With exception of RH. Even Willis Obrien, who taught RH the trade preferred to back project the stop motion for that reason.
This gives me so much respect for the people who accomplished this back then.
Person, it was one man that did the special effects, Mr. Ray Harryhausen.
You should see the effects in The Thing, the original. Not the prequel. Or check out The Fly with Jeff Goldblum. Really good practical effects and some stop motion here and there.
It looks amazing smoother. Really can appreciate how ahead of its time this was. Reminds me of certain portraits hanging in the gallery. Some of them are so sharp and clear, they look like photographs 😳
Totally agree. I wish I could fight skeletons and stuff.
@@Deadma6 I'm used to the original, but can appreciate innovation and change. If we saw these things in real life they would all move smooth 🤷🏿♂️.
Can we just appreciate how minimal the change is with the skeletons when it’s 8x smoother, that hard work really shows in this 60 years later!!!ray harryhausen was a legend
I really can barely tell a difference.
I was going to say the same. The original is still impressive. The amount of detail in the movement you almost forget it’s stop motion.
666th upvote. Hail Satan.
ALWAYS original over these socalled improvements.
Just look at how the first 3 Star wars movies were 'improved'. 🤣🤣🤣
I watched both the original and x8 and I thought I was still watching the original and they just reused a scene, it really shows how good it is
I watched this over and over with my young son, many years ago, and we were both thrilled by it, and it still works. Dont mess with things that dont need anything.
It’s amazing how they were able to do this all before CGI. There’s something really special about stop motion
Though even old CGI has its charm, seeing the brilliance and ingenuity that has to go into the tricks used to pull off what they did back in the day.
LOTR developer diaries is certainly an interesting watch in that subject.
The fact that someone stood there and put heart and soul into manually moving the figures in a way that felt right to their eye for every single frame is whole different thing to scripting some movements in a piece of software and wandering off for a frappucino while it renders.
It was _amazing_ special effects for that time! I watched this when I was about five and was so terrified by the skeletons fighting, especially, that I remember it clearly today.
I haven’t seen it since, so I’ll have to watch it with my husband now, fifty years later, to see how it compares to my memory!
The low frames make it look more scary, somehow
@@PutItAway101 Animations on software can also be hand moved to each individual frame. That’s not with motion capture or scripting.
The effects have aged incredibly well
I think the original animation should be kept for just the statue. It's made entirely out of metal with no actual moving parts like joints or hinges, the jerkiness makes sense for it.
Defo. I also think the jerkiness also conveys the sense of sheer weight.
@@moviearchaeologist9655 I think the mass should lend to it being less jerky, due to conservation of momentum and all.
this was one of my favorites, growing up. The smoothness looks very nice and it feels like that smoothness is how I saw it when I was younger. Doesn't make too big of a difference but I admire the effort here!
Proof that an active understanding of the rules of animation is more important than frames per second. Ray Harryhausen was really a great.
Harryhausen was a giant of cinema. Such an incredible innovator, these movies were nothing without him.
Also anyone who knows jack about stop motion in this era, knows the main issue wasn't the lack of frames, it was the lack of motion blur..
@@Deadener Motion blur? With 3D figures? How would you achieve that?
@@hutchmusician You wouldn't but if you do this today in CGI you add motion blurred at render, it makes everything look more realistic.
BUT DOOD BIGGER NOOMBER MEAN IT MORE GOOD, DOOD!!!!
Choppy slow motion isn’t always bad, sometime it helps make something feel eerie and inhuman. (Evil dead and evil dead 2 are main examples)
Shop Smart..
Shop S MART.
YOU GOT THAT!
I don’t know why, but by making it smoother, it almost makes it like one of those cheesy 3D animation attempts that fails to make it realistic.
It's a prime example of the Uncanny Valley.
As a whole we all got used to shitty 24 fps for "cinematic reasons of immersion" when the human eye is so much better.. even cheap walmart TVs are 120hz. Movie business is lazy
Something about the harpies made me think of those old '90s-era FMV light-gun arcade games. I guess it's the same idea of them trying to get live actors to react to animated monsters they're planning to add in later.
Whatever the reason, a bullet counter on the side of the screen and a score tally at the top would fit right in.
Could you imagine if Ray Harryhausen were to use todays CGI and AI techniques. The man was a genius with a limited resource. Great video.
Very interesting how the original versions feel somewhat heavier, more impressive, threatening, strong, dynamic, and even more natural!
Even the live action feels better at 24fps, curious
That's because motion smoothing technology is not creating frames as if it were shot at a higher framerate--it is artificially smoothing the lower framerate. Motion smoothing is hideous.
@@prancey227 How does it do that if not by inserting transitional frames?
maybe on the statues, but as for the gorgoyles and skeletons it is much smoother (the feeling too).
Nope, they feel worse.
I remember watching this movie as a kid. A fantastic memory! ✔
Me too....
I had nightmares as a child after seeing the statue scene.
i watch this in class highschool mid 90s
Jason and the Argonauts, Clash of the Titans... Great stuff.
I agree 👍☺️❤️
Can we take a moment to respect the hard work that went in to these old special effects? Can you imagine seeing it in the theater and watching a GIANT STATUE come to life? Must have been amazing.
Oh it was! Talos stayed in my brain for a LONG time after seeing it as a kid in the theater. I can still always call up the screech of metal in my mind when I think of the scene. Brilliantly done. His ankle leaking and him falling over was burned into my brain.
Terrifying. For my five year old self it was utterly terrifying. I screamed in the theater and then had nightmares for weeks after. So, I guess that means the special effects were quite effective and my folks were idiots.
Still is. Practical effects and physical objects look better than CGI to me, and I'm not knocking the talent required to make good CGI. I just prefer practical effects.
It was amazing indeed!; I was 9 years old when my father left me ALONE at the cinema while he was at the pool salon and bar with his friends; it was in 73, at a small-town theater where they exhibited double features of older movies or new b movies, many times one of them was a kung fu and the other a Hollywood produced one; that night I had to sleep with my older sister because that damn statue scared the soul out of my body! lolol. I watched, as a child, alone, movies like Dog Day Afternoon, Westworld, Planet of the Apes, The Crimson Pirate, with Burt Lancaster (one of my favorite movies ever, I have it in DVD!), Seven Samurai, The Way of the Dragon, Fist of Fury and many more. You can NOT leave a child one minute alone these days...those were the times!!!
@@luishernandez5732 Indeed they were! All those terrific Saturday matinee movies!
I like to think that Ray Harryhausen would approve. Honestly, just shows how elegant Ray's choices were in the original stop motion version. The 8x version is much like an animation in-between for the artist's true intention. Nice work. Cheers! ✨
You can't improve on the perfection of Ray Harryhausen. His work is timeless. The fight scene with the skeletons is still regarded as some of the best stop motion in any movie.
Absolutely! The difference is almost imperceptible.
Let sleeping dogs lie. Or rather, let reanimated skellys look how they were meant to, at the time.
It's becoming a lost art, and Harryhausen was the best
100%,agree.No negotiation!
Bullshit. I'd like to see it at 288 fps and it would look also great.
Ray Harry Hausen was and still is a genius for his time. When they would show his movies when I was growing up it was my favorite form of cinema.
For a movie made 58 years ago ,the effects are awesome
58 (.ish). either that or I'm younger than I thought I was.
It came out in 1963.
Honestly looks better than most CG crap today
@@martinzwaan2721 yes you are correct
@@AA-db9cb uhm, no. Lmao
My Dad was a cinematography prof for a while, and he loved Harryhausen. He took me to see Jason sometime in the early 70's, and at one point he set up a primitive stop motion animation studio for my sister and I to use. Also taught us ho to edit / splice film.
Ray was the best.
nice
Is your Father still alive? I always wondered what the creator of such special effects opinion of AI/Neural Network enhanced Framerates would be. Do they approve? If they had the tools back then, would they have done a better job? And if possible some kind of Frame by Frame analysis describing the original fottage and its errors/limitations and what the enhanced version fixed/made worse.
I would appreciate anyones input ofc!
@@G4m3G3ni3 Inserting my personal opinion as someone in the industry today (for what it's worth), I imagine they would've absolutely loved it if it was indeed available to them. They were basically just people trying to get by with the tools and techniques they had on hand at the time. (That said, I would love to hear their own insights and perspectives on it.)
I loved my dad, who of course was the best dad ever. That said, your old man sounds awesome.
Pretty amazing! I haven't seen this film in nearly 60 years, but I still remember the skeletons!
The old one looks more like it’s breaking the laws of space and time to come after you, and therefore more scary.
Agreed, the "jerkiness" was part off the character. It added to the magic.
@@TinTeddyVideos I find it is quite the opposite. Give me CG any day
Yes!
CG isn't real, these Harryhausen originals were actual real solid things. The difference is lost on these modern days. I'll keep the handcraft, personally.
@@MSTL144 real doesn't mean better. Just keep that in mind? Sure everyone may want practical effects but if it looks terrible or low budget than what's the point? Time and effort wasted with no pay off. Same goes for cg
Ok but it's wild how good ray harryhousens animation was to begin with
Agreed the best never to be forgotten
It's because he was an artist, with the eye to see how things could be, should be and would be, and then made it happen. He was supposed to be bastard to work for in his exactness, but when it was all finished everyone felt the joy and pride of doing something that has held up to this day.
He was the absolute master.
@@eyellgeteven9928 Anyone who wanted to be a animation master, studied his movies. Like that is some punishment, "Thank you sir, may I have another movie.".
@@bobh.6108 Haha, no doubt.
Ray Harryhausen was a legend. He'd go off for months at a time and hide himself in a room to animate all of this stuff. The dedication is almost supernatural.
They wanted them to do
Jurassic Park
and wouldn't even think about making a "how to" YT video for views and sponsorship...
He would even unplug his phone so he wouldn't be disturbed. Can't say as I blame him, some of these sequences are very complex and gotta be done right the first time.
IT IS SUPERNATURAL!! He used Alchemy to bring the clay to LIFE!!! ……..the best!!!!!
This showcases how so far ahead of his time Ray Harryhausen was, which is why his movies are so widely loved to this day.
Can you imagine moving the doll a thousand times to create a 10 second scene?! These guys were gods!
yes, thats how stopmotion works
*All hail Robot Chicken!*
I hear you. Lots of tedious effort to make these movies happen.
@@zacharyrollick6169 Exactly my thought
10 seconds that we still watch 50 years later.
And it's actually better than some CGI now.
I think one thing this video overlooks is that the smoothing out of things takes away all of the charm of the original. For its time it was a fantastic effect. Stop motion was not new, but they did it so well. As a kid this blew me away, especially the skeletons.
.a while back I found on Ebay the (Holy Grail )Argosy magazine Mar. 1959 that had Ray Harryhausen article "Monsters Are My Business" I first saw that back then as my dad subscribed to it. I did 3D animation in my life ..retired now. Many as myself forever looked to find that old magazine...I lucked out !! Problem back in 1959...seeing how it was done..this 7 year old was crushed because it was not real... :-)
Jesus loves y’all! God bless y’all! God loves you and is your protector and healer. Praise be to Jesus!!! “God is our refuge and strength, an ever-present help in trouble.” Psalm 46:1.
As said by Kyle P, I don’t think it’s a statement that it would be better being smoother. However, we might be wrong. Regardless I agree that it loses it’s charm and becomes something else - that I think the creators/animators didn’t intend for. They worked with this stop motion medium, being a bit choppy. So they used that in their rhythm, in favour for their work. They leaned on the scary part, whereas that gets lost in the smoothened version.
That’s what many lacks to realise and acknowledge today: the respect of the creators! The know the tone they set, the heart in which they create these things. Nowadays everyone thinks they can do everything, because they have access to technology creating them. The result becomes superficial, whereas this? This original strikes in chords,.. 👍
The way Harryhausen was able to blend his miniature work with the live action footage is genius. It is perfect as is.
He perfected the art of Dynamation, it's why I loved studying his work on University! He was a revolutionary animator!
I feel like the originals have a better feel to them, like my brain is filling the frame gaps making it feel realer and less cropped in.
A higher frame rate makes it feel easier for my brain to parse the edits making it feel more CGI.
I'm 62 and recall being transfixed watching this as a kid. The way Talos leaned back after stepping off the pedestal added so much realism to his menace. One could feel the massive weight he supported through this simple action.
The vast majority of people who make movies now-days don’t put this much love or care into production.
I'm 26 now, remember watching this with my dad when I was maybe 6-7, and Jesus did Talos scare the living crap outta me 😅
The way he moved,the sound's his movement made..I still can't watch this movie without getting a shiver running up me spine when I see him.
You can just tell the love and attention to detail that Harryhausen put into his movies.
This is one of those rare time when I have to say the original actually looks and feels better...
Except the flying ones
@@Yasviele sort of. That brought another problem by making them look cgi and not well blended to the frame
The original has a natural jerkiness to the movement which makes sense with the statue and skeletons, the higher frame rate looks like its slowed down and stiffened, like a smooth action purposely made stiff. Where as the original its feels like the statue is naturallly creaky.
The smoothed up version looks like I’m watching a news report of a school play. Older movies (and new ones) work so much better at the slower frame rates. Modern TV’s that adjust the rate like this for “better” sports viewing make most films unwatchable. I always turn the “smoothing / frame rate feature off” no film should look like a live news reel.
Agreed.
Ray Harryhausen was a genius. He was digital before any body knew what digital was. Todays FX are all motion blur so they can cut costs and maximize profits. This guy was the master. I'm 52 years old and his work is still hair raising to me.
Too many FX people put them selves and their "skill " first. This guy put the work first.
That's it! No motion blur. There are some moments where the animations really pop on the screen and feel solid.
Here here! Well said!
I was _just_ saying to my son-in-law (as I watch Godzilla vs Gigan for the umpteenth time) that as fun and cool as the new Godzilla movies are with their shiny special effects, they're not nearly as rewatchable as the old, 'guy-in-a-suit' movies are. There's a charm and and sense of craft that's missing nowadays.
I remember watching this movie for the first time when I was a little kid, and it was absolute MAGIC! It definitely played a part in my growing up to love all things fantasy and science fiction, including well made movies. What Ray Harryhausen did for this movie was just stunning for the time, and it's still very watchable today!
The stuttering animation makes it look more real and more outworldly at the same time.
I know it’s a paradox but that’s how I feel it !
It’s called strobing.
It gives a horror vibe while the smoother one a more friendly impression/more sane character.
Maybe the last one works better for children programs/friendly scenes
I agree. I really liked the strobing as a kid, before I had the vocabulary to describe what I was seeing. It's "unreal" as opposed to "less real".
@@roddmatsui3554
Thank you for the precision (english is not my first language 😅) !
easy to say with nostalgia glasses
Blows my mind how well done stop motion can still look "better",more interesting/ visually engaging, than alot of the cg we get today.
It’s because the special effects in movies are overdone. When you need to rely on real models, you have an easier time staying in the story and convincing yourself that what your seeing is real. Even the dinosaurs in the original Jurassic Park movie, because they didn’t often fill the screen with digitized dinosaurs, the movie could trick your mind into thinking there was really a dinosaur there. When you load the screen up with too much digitization, your mind, whether it’s in story mode or not, starts to call BS.
@@frederickdefeo3768 I agree 100%
@@frederickdefeo3768 exactly, thats why the original lotr trilogy looked way better since it was made 95% with real props, except for the balrog and gollum. The hobbit looked just unreal and bullshitty cgi, except maybe for smaug.
There's a fundamental concept in filmmaking & storytelling in general that took me forrrrever to properly appreciate which is also likely **beyond** antiquated to the status quo of film production sensibilities: LESS IS MORE!!! It's not some fix-all Golden Rule or something, but the fact that you reeeeeally have to keep your eyes peeled now for examples of films that make use of the inherent virtues that idea has in abundance which can easily be the difference between a goodgreatmasterpiece-level film/filmmaker....
I agree. Stop-motion and 120 fps looks real than cgi
I don't know, guys- the higher frame rate to me makes the animation appear sped-up and weird, where the original 24 frames slows it down and makes it feel, strangely, more natural- and I think that shows when it does get the extra frames because Haryhausen's work is still phenomenal no matter how you do it.
I agree with you. The original 24fps looks better. I thought the same thing.
The stop motion they did really was just that damn well done. It's amazing how well it holds up.
The higher frame rate appeared better and more natural to me, specially when the figures movements are slower (like when Talos moves his head to look down on Hercules), although it didn't actually improve much on the effect. Anyway, I watched that movie when I was a teenager and its amazing to see how the figure designs holds up. Same for the animation, even though it definitely doesn't look natural for today's standards.
Actually, to me it looked like some of the faster frames looked like CGI.
The faster frame rate gave it a more Soap Opera Effect, looks like it was shot on video.. The jaggy motion of 24fps gives it its menacing charm..
Thank you, that was fun! Loved the original, and your updated go looks great too. Definitely better in many ways, yet I am sure all fans would agree you have some brilliant original material - however flawed - to work with. Brilliant.
This smoothing effect always give me this uncanny feeling. There is something wrong in the way it smooths the frames - makes things too even, and gets lost on key frames.
Yeah it's interpolation, so it's trying to automatically create or "paint" in-between frames that don't exist. Guessing what would be there. That's why it'll often feel even worse than material natively made in 60fps, like video games.
It's just that just are not used to see it. Especially if you were shown the original right before it will feel out of place.
@@christopherstein2024 Not at all.
Look at the fragments Akira or Little Mermaid which were animated in 60fps and they lack this uncanny feel. Look at most modern video games where at least 60fps is standard.
That is the issue with frame interpolation being applied across the board - it kills the momentum, evens the tempo of animation even in places where it is not needed, because it is incapable of distinguishing between key frames.
I haven't seen the original, and I thought the animation for the statues was a massive improvement. I know others are complimenting the charm of the jerkiness, but for me, without having the context of the full movie, it just seemed as a downside that was improved upon by the smooth FPS. Perhaps I'd appreciate it more having seen the movie, but I speak as somebody who hasn't seen this film. Is it 100% Perfect? No, but I view it less janky and jerky than the original.
I noticed it on the flying creatures, I don’t know much about the technology used but it looked like they cgi them. Something was just wrong about the way it looked.
The main thing that's missing in the animation is motion blur more than frames. Making it smooth and razor sharp just makes it stand out even more.
Should try downsampling the 8x version back to 24FPS with interframe blur to simulate motion blur.
Which is why Tippet pioneered Go-Motion.
@@tgs1766 Go-motion had it's own problems. Works best with linear movements. Looks jerky with movements that had compound curves.
Ah, that explains why the smoothed figures "stick out", or visually "pop"!
@@johnkeck especially the harpies, they were too smooth and ended up looking like cheap CGI to me.
I think the stop motion for the bronze statue and the skeletons work very well and gives them a creepiness that we wouldn't normally feel if they flowed smoothly. These things aren't supposed to be alive.
But it works for the scene where the harpies are attacking because they are alive and smooth movement looks natural.
By the way, the first time a child watches the statue turn its head to look at the human, the child almost always gives a little jump.
Because face of this statue is fkin terrifying!😅
Well, it scared the hell out of me at six years old.
Hercules: "Huh, it must have been the wind..."
Talos: (Creak) "Is that so?"
i actually disagree. the harpy scene smoothed out makes them look even more fake, taking away from the scene
Exactly; it recalls the reason that humans find arachnid and other arthropods' movements so uncanny and grotesque: their movement is literally _hydraulic_ rather than musculoskeletal. Harryhausen's animations often have that quality, which lends itself tremendously to the effectiveness of the scenes.
My papa showed me this when I was very little, we rented it from Hollywood video. It was awesome even though I don't remember much lol
I missed this when I watched this movie in the original, on the big screen in the cinema. Now you have made my memories better))) Thanks a lot)))
Harryhausen was such a master that framerate doesn't really change the effect he has on the story telling. On the bronze golem and the skeletons, the slight herki-jerkiness of it just fits the scene. And the harpies are only slightly smoother.
I agree completely
I agree, the stop motion animation effects actually give it a scary creepiness.
To me the higher framerate makes it look less convincing for some reason.
It gives the human actors the soap-opera effect, but thankfully does little damage to the stop motion.
Man I really miss movies like this. They had such an epic feel to them.
Why do you miss them? Can't you just watch them any time?
@@fighthighlights2201 Sure if you can find them. For me though movies nowadays just don't have the same quality to them.
@@fighthighlights2201 I think that what he means is that there should be more of them.
Dune 2021 had some of that epic feel to it, though movie making has changed to more close-ups and less long hold wide angle shots like the older epics like Ben Hur, Zulu, or Jason and the Argonauts. Back then, they'd stay on those shots of large groups of people doing exciting things for a long time, which makes the scope seem much larger in scale, but nowadays it's a quick wide angle to set the scene then straight in to quick edit close-ups of the overpaid actors - the studios want to get their money's worth by using the actors in as many close and detailed shots as they can.
@@justinkashtock333 That was a very good acessment of what's happening.
No matter the framerate, stop motion animation allays has a "jitter", because while you can easily fake the trajectory of movements, changing the velocity in a smooth manner is colossal task to do manually. But that is what gives stop motion its characteristic look, so I doubt that filmmakers would even want to correct that.
It's missing motion blur...
Such a great movie - loved the enhancement you did.
If you make fantasy too real, I think, it loses the quality of a nightmare.. of a dream
-Ray Harryhausen
just what came to mind when I was watching, Ray was never going after make believe, but rather creating a fantasy
I'm convinced a lot of modern film makers are just repeating techniques they like, but don't understand why they like them or how/why the techniques work.
I know that was a quote, but you just put into words the jumble of impressions and feelings I have inside me about ultra realistic imagery on screen. I could never arrange it into communicable terms. Thanks for sharing this quote.
That’s just justifying crappy sfx.
My god that is a perfect sentence to create suspension of disbelief.
For some reason the originals make the monsters “pop” a little more on screen in a cool and almost disturbing way. I kind of like it more haha.
yeah, they look like toys when you speed them up, and compositing, and the way they move still looks unnatural enough, that it doesn't solve anything.
@@piobu5357 The increased frames actually make them look silly
Cool, I'm not crazy! I thought it looked worse too. Somehow smoothing made it look less real instead of more. However, could a smoother modern stop motion attempt with more detailed models, better lighting, and minimal vfx for icing work?. Unfortunately cost is probably going to prohibitive.
@@jonnyyen7169 the movement looks kinda robotic when you fill the missing frames in, especially on the statue, so it could be improved, if it was made with a higher fps in mind from the start. They did a surprisingly good job with the lighting on the dolls/models considering it's an old movie, but still some compositing here looks visibly fake, cause the colors are more washed out/brighter on the background or foreground. This is because they used rear projection here, so yeah, it could be improved by using a more modern green screening solution.
Just look at the little guy in Tool's Parabola from around 2002 - he moves rather smoothly, and he blends with the background well (though in this particular case the model could've been shot on set, and there's clearly some CG used in the video).
@@piobu5357 well, maybe some young filmmakers who are sick of overblown modern CGI will try to bring it back with modern technology. I've noticed that whenever a young movie reactor sees good stop motion they usually like it.
I like the Stop-Motion effect it somehow makes the monsters more creepy/scary.
Same here. These effects are yet better for the living dead
dude they still make me tremble with fear
I prefer the "jerkiness" of the original. It reinforces the fact that these objects are not "alive", but merely animated, like a marionette. In the movie, the Talas statue does not become a living being, but a magically animated supernatural object.
@@ritparent7239oath, plus the jaggering and juttering make them quick and unpredictable- which is terrifying
This movie must’ve been absolutely mind blowing in 1963 when it came out.
it was :) same as The Valley of Gwangi which i saw at the drive-in as an 8 year old in 1969
When he turns his head it, still gives me chills! This movie was a classic.
Years ago a building I used to visit had an elevator that used to make weird scrapping noises when you went up. Every time I heard that scrap, my mind jumped straight to this very scene.
Well if it was a classic that implies it no longer is a classic so I would say that it is a classic.
@@notinterested8452 I stand corrected.
It was terrifying as a kid.
I agree Jason , and hope you find your Argonauts.
Watching on the big screen, the controlled jerkiness of Harryhausen's animations made them seem truly fantastical and really scary. It's an integral part of the experience and smoothing it away actually spoils the effect.
Its just an experiment, he isn't saying its better.
Its just an example, he isn't saying its better.
@@Sir_Adam Fair comment.
Agreed my friend 🫡
New isn’t always better 😊
I fully agree their largeness & off movements add to film.
It's not the frame rate that makes the original footage look janky, but the lack of motion blur. Robert Rodriguez mentioned on one of the Spy Kids commentaries that while the skeletons they were fighting were CGI, he turned off motion blur in rendering to give it the Harryhausen stop motion look. This is why Phil Tippet invented Go Motion for The Empire Strikes Back which moved the puppet a bit while the shutter was open to create blur.
That is not how Gomotion worked.
That’s how ED-209 worked.
Gomotion is real motion blur.
I’m surprised that somebody actually watched the Spy Kids commentaries. Hell, I’m surprised someone actually got the DVD.
@@wellesradio HAHAHAHA, indigno!
@@wellesradio Rodriguez used to do featurettes called "10-Minute Film School" where he'd offer up practical tips to aspiring filmmakers and his commentaries were really informative.
The saddest irony was listening to him and Frank Miller on the Sin City commentary discussing Brittany Murphy's Shelly character and mentioning they had big plans for her in the sequel. The first film had come out in 2005 and I was watching the commentary in 2009. Next morning, I go to work and learn that she had died the day before.
The sequel didn't come out until 2014 and they had to use other stories as well as recast Michael Clark Duncan's Manute with Dennis Haysbert; Jamie Chung replaced the retired-from-acting Devon Aoki; Josh Brolin took over the role of Dwight from Clive Owen, but it made sense cuz it was a prequel story and Owen's Dwight spoke of having a new face.
@@DirkBelig Rodriguez definitely has that Roger Corman spirit to him. For better _and_ for worse.
I haven't seen this movie since I was a kid. Must be nearly 30 years and it blew me away as a child.
I'm an amateur stop-motion animator and this is what first inspired me as a kid. This scene has probably made animators out of thousands of kids.
Jason and the Argonauts was one of my favorite movies as a kid, and probably did a lot to instill me with my life-long obsession with swords.
link to your work sir
@@jorawarsingh2595 Thanks for your interest. It's th-cam.com/users/furiousgibbon
@@jorawarsingh2595 th-cam.com/video/uJrygEEr-PY/w-d-xo.html
That's no concidence. I think this is _the_ go-to movie for the raw potential of this kind of art. Everywhere else, and everywhere since, stop-motion was used in short clips in live-action film. Here, it carries entire scenes, and manages to do so without breaking the audience's immersion (well, for the most part). Plus it doesn't hurt that it's all in support of a fantastic epic.
Original is much better. It gives the super natural characters a sense that they are not part of a regular world. It fits the mood!
When I saw this in original release as a child I thought just that,👍
Na the smoother version looks better
I prefer the old one, but the smoother one manages to keep it quite jerky so I think if you remade it you could convince a younger audience to watch it still, but not lose too much of the jerkiness
The old looks choppy as hell bunch of boomer
@@hotpopcorncake 🙄
I remember seeing this movie at the cinema when it was released , I think the "stuttered"' animation of the creatures actually made it more scary.
How far long in your years are you, my man?
@@daniellee9328 Im in my 63rd year.
@@gregcrickqld Hey Greg, I took some paper route money about 1967 and watched it 3 times.
Forgot Greg Crick, I'm 65. Good times in America.
Exactly that.
That movement made this such a pleasure to watch.
I love this move. I remember watching it well over 50 years ago. Wish they still made movies like this!!
When i was a kid, in the early 2000s, the stop motion monsters were kinda more scary than normally. I believe its because stop motion like this was not so common.
@PewDie-Ton EX That's called the "uncanny valley".
@@hammersandnails1458 Yeah, didn't VSauce do a really good video about that effect on the human perception?
I liked the skeletons being jerky. I always imagined them to be animated by magic that way. Rather than a living life form moving fluidly.
Totally agree. They cant move like a normal human if they are missing litteraly everything that makes them human so magic moves them in a way that is in-human
No mussels, no organs, they would probably have a jerky movement like they were being pushed by some magical force.
A lot like the Doom Revenants that move and jerk around cause they're basically just animated Skeletons.
Almost 60 years and the visual look is still pleasing.
1:46 is the best part, this part is so good the smoother version that's supposed to be 8x smoother isn't that more smooth
Pleasing? By todays standards it's a borderline parody
I remember watching that as a ten year old in '63....scary as hell
The music really adds to it too
I remember back in the day when there were only three channels on the television and you only got to see this movie once a year and looked forward to it. Pretty much like The Wizard of Oz.
Or sitting up until 2 AM to watch a movie, because...that's...when...it ...was...on.
Jason and the Argonauts, The Wizard of Oz, and Roger's and Hammerstein's Cinderella were the movies shown once a year. I eagerly awaited them all.
I have produced a couple of TV commercials that have included stop-motion animation. It took us a week to get 7 seconds of film. So it never fails when I see this Harryhausen masterpiece I am in total awe. I bow down to the master of the technique! 🎬🧡
This and the original Clash of the Titans are two if my all time favorite films. Love Ray Harryhousen movies.
Old school stop motion is not for the faint hearted. The creators of South Park found that out as they made the first pilot ep from construction paper.
These terrified me as a kid but i was so damn fascinated by stop motion at the time that I couldn’t look away. Thanks for reviving that experience.
The work of a master, I am sure he would have used CGI if he had it but this was the state of the art at the time and he was a master of it. The amount of work required to film this scene with the skeletons is unimaginable now.