Reply to Topic
"Uncanny valley" is
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny_valley
When I first saw FF:TSW (tuned into the middle when it was on cable) I was blown away by how realistic the CGI people were, so much so that it took me a couple of minutes to realize they weren't real. I think the fingers were the first thing I noticed -- they seemed to long. But it didn't "creep me out". But apparently some people were disturbed by it:
Just curious how others felt about the CGI of the movie. Of course, you're welcome to comment on the "acting", plot, etc..
I would give the movie a 2.5/4.0 -- above average and worth a look.
(From wiki)
a hypothesis regarding the field of robotics. The theory holds that when robots and other facsimiles of humans look and act almost like actual humans, it causes a response of revulsion among human observers. The "valley" in question is a dip in a proposed graph of the positivity of human reaction as a function of a robot's lifelikeness.
a hypothesis regarding the field of robotics. The theory holds that when robots and other facsimiles of humans look and act almost like actual humans, it causes a response of revulsion among human observers. The "valley" in question is a dip in a proposed graph of the positivity of human reaction as a function of a robot's lifelikeness.
When I first saw FF:TSW (tuned into the middle when it was on cable) I was blown away by how realistic the CGI people were, so much so that it took me a couple of minutes to realize they weren't real. I think the fingers were the first thing I noticed -- they seemed to long. But it didn't "creep me out". But apparently some people were disturbed by it:
(from wiki)
While the near lifelike appearance of the characters in the film was acknowledged as a technological tour-de-force, some commentators felt the character renderings fell into the trap robotic scientists called the "uncanny valley". This is a point where a robot or animated character becomes very realistic, but subtly different enough from reality to feel "creepy." There was some discussion that the poor box office of the film was due to the audience becoming uncomfortable with the almost, but not quite human appearance of the CGI "actors."
While the near lifelike appearance of the characters in the film was acknowledged as a technological tour-de-force, some commentators felt the character renderings fell into the trap robotic scientists called the "uncanny valley". This is a point where a robot or animated character becomes very realistic, but subtly different enough from reality to feel "creepy." There was some discussion that the poor box office of the film was due to the audience becoming uncomfortable with the almost, but not quite human appearance of the CGI "actors."
I would give the movie a 2.5/4.0 -- above average and worth a look.
) I read somewhere that Jennifer Connelly was used as the model for her.