Overdrive: The Constant Use of Digital Effects in The Movies
There is one thing that movies have always had in common. You may think actors or great performances, but this is not necessarily the case. The answer lies in the thing that does exactly that; lies. Special effects (SFX) have been wowing audiences for well over a century.One of the pioneers of cinema, Georges Méliès (1861–1938), a stage magician turned filmmaker is generally considered the father of special effects. Effects work has come a long ways since the early days of silent black and white films. Special effects in more recent years has been subdivided into two main categories: Practical effects and digital effects. Both have their benefits, but in the ensuing decades the scales perhaps have tipped in favor of one over the other.
Digital effects have received a hefty amount of criticism over years, especially when they began to be more utilized in the early 21st century. A worry some viewers feel is there is are ethical concerns regarding the use of digital applications in motion pictures. In other words, it has become easy to fake or replicate sounds and images.Is it good for the public’s self esteem to unrealistically manipulate the physical appearance of actors? Does the use of digital technology simply overwhelm the audience? To perhaps come to a conclusion regarding these questions we have to examine some of the more technicals aspects of this concept.
Practical effects put simply are any special tricks you would see in movies that are actually physically made or done. Make-up, prosthetics, pyrotechnics, or using wires to make someone appear to fly are examples. Digital, simply put, is any effect that is created by using computers or other such technology. Green screens, digitally created creatures such as dragons, and large panoramic city scapes are examples.Digital effects have contributed a lot to the art of movie magic, but with every pro of course, comes a con. It has become the opinion of some filmmakers and members of the movie going public that digital effects have become overused. An article from The New York Times eloquently states some of these concerns. Also as the technology has improved, it has become far more difficult for the viewers to decipher what is real or and what is not and it may even be a bit distracting.
Thankfully there as been a resurgence in practical effects in recent years. The director Christopher Nolan, has become an outspoken advocate of practical effects. He is best known for The Dark Knight Trilogy, Inception, Interstellar, and Dunkirk. In all of these films, Nolan has used the practical method extensively. Perhaps the winds of change are happening. An article from www.rocketstock.com, features a video that explains the effects techniques of Director Nolan and is a good overview if you wish to delve more into the works of this particular auteur.
In the end, I and not condoning using purely the practical method. Digital has many wonderful benefits and has the made the impossible possible in so many ways. However, like most things, I feel there should always be a balance. In terms of the ethical questions regarding the use of this technology and how it affects the audience is that audiences must realize they are watching a work of fiction. For the most part, what happens in the movies is not real life, and as long as the viewer is aware of this, then there really is not much of an ethical concern.The reality for filmmakers is that it takes whatever must be done to get the aesthetic look they desire. If they did not do this they would not be making a very good product, and the last thing they would want to do is disappoint their customers. As long as viewers continue to be more literate about this type of media, then no harm is being done and we all can continue to grab a box of popcorn and enjoy our favorite stories.
