Feels like the scene doesn't quite work in the finished movie anyway, but yeah it 100% needed to go.
Sam Raimi is a very accomplished director so you don't notice this unless you look, but the CGI buildings in the movie are actually _much worse_ than the ones in the recent PS4 game. It highlights the adage that there's no such thing as bad CGI, just bad filmmaking.
(On the other hand, my daughter pointed out to me that whenever anything exciting happens, every woman screams and no men do and it is impossible to unsee once you notice it.)
> Sam Raimi is a very accomplished director so you don't notice this unless you look, but the CGI buildings in the movie are actually _much worse_ than the ones in the recent PS4 game. It highlights the adage that there's no such thing as bad CGI, just bad filmmaking.
I think the better question to ask is: What CGI effects from 20 years ago can't be achieved in real time today?
Finding Nemo was almost 20 years ago and as I recall, Pixar did a lot of work to reproduce the look of marine animals that have translucent layers to their skin. Seems like a level of detail that real-time engines might not bother with.
But yeah, the Mandalorian used real-time rendering in-camera for a ton of its scenes. They fudged it a bit by using wide apertures so the backgrounds were a bit soft, but it obviously worked very well.
Human skin is translucent too. Real time Sub-surface scattering has existed for years and is now to making it into games. There's an excellent writeup here:
Sam Raimi is a very accomplished director so you don't notice this unless you look, but the CGI buildings in the movie are actually _much worse_ than the ones in the recent PS4 game. It highlights the adage that there's no such thing as bad CGI, just bad filmmaking.
(On the other hand, my daughter pointed out to me that whenever anything exciting happens, every woman screams and no men do and it is impossible to unsee once you notice it.)