Ikr!

Couldn't agree more.

Exactly

Absolutely

you are a 100% correct

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.

@@StanKelley Holy crap, are you ME!?! ;-)

I think some are bad but for the time its great. However, the skeleton one in the end was actually pretty great

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

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.

I guess it's up to preference because i'd rather pick the smoothed ones. It just looks better imo

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.

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

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

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?

Yeah, adding frames like this just makes it more noticeable..

I would take this over the CGI of the 2000 remake any day. While unnatural it still seems really alive. The new CGI remake was flat and dull and nowhere near as creepy. Maybe unnatural but still alive looking is a perfect combo

Let's see the AI touch-up

​@@001variation I believe you're looking at (ghost animator) David Anderson, Willis Cook and Ray harryhausen AI touch up. 😅

Yeah I’m not sure why everyone’s takeaway seems to be that there’s some sort of superiority in the lower-framerate footage. If this footage was filled with 120 *meaningful* frames per second, 120 unique frames of fluid movement from the figure, I think it would look much better. However, taking the original and just putting it at 120 frames per second is like playing Nintendo 64 on a 4k TV-the more advanced technology is not leveraged, and the so the output is worse.

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

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.

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

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..

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.

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 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

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 👍🏿 🍿🥤🎬🎥😎😍.

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

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.

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

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!

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

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 UKposts 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.

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_ 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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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?

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.

It's really about to bring a whole smile to my face as I play Skyrim again...

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.

Indeed it is. It terrified me as ask kid and it didn't change to much viewing it now

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

I was thinking the same thing.

I think it's a fricking disaster. Motion-smoothing Harryhausen is as stupid as colorizing a classic B&W Hollywood movie.

Smoothing the Colossus worked nicely, it adds to the sense if size and mass, but the others didn't seem to help a great deal, and the harpies suddenly looked like they were CGI on a separate plate floating above the action. Terrible! Even the skeletons looked slightly less "real" after treatment, their background fringing and colouration not quite matching the film frame. :-(

Additionally when the smoothing overlaps camera movement instead of just the animation. The natural tracking of the camera designed to accentuate action and energy is lost.

I thought uncanny valley had to do with cgi and humans. Doesn't really work the same with statues and Harpy's does it?

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 🙄

And he did all of that without a computer.

@@Skelly5962 Incredible really

Yes - total legend.

@@Skelly5962 oh look someone complaining about CGI , there's a surprise. Can't we just have both?

The Shiva statue in Sinbad I consider his most epic creation...

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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 🤷🏿‍♂️.

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

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.

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

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 👍☺️❤️

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!!!!!

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!

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.

I still have yet to see a piece of media at all in general that doesn't look immensely better in a higher framerate.

@@851852093114208513 To each their own, of course. We usually assume higher framerates for movies is "bad" because it suddenly feels surreal, smoother or "more real" than reality, and the Uncanny Valley kicks in, though it can work depending on the intention, as a purposefully low frame rate can too, seen here and in Into The Spider-Verse. Generally, it all depends on the original intention. Games for example need higher framerates both for player performance and function of the inner workings, so it makes sense, while films are usually shot and presented in 24/25p as more of a "legacy" feature, since we've grown accustomed to it from the earliest movies. It's also why we can easily differentiate movies from broadcast TV imagery or sitcoms, soap operas etc. If everything is brought to the same higher frame rate, things can get muddy haha

@@851852093114208513 while that may be the case to you I highly suggest you look into what goes into stop motion and what increasing the frame rate would entail

Good luck actually explaining why, though. Lol. People who argue against well known science (24p fans) always make me laugh. 60 FPS is objectively more realistic, and everyone knows it when they watch sports games. I'm looking forward to the cost cutting measure (yep, look it up) that was 24 fps being finally left behind someday. We have 4k and soon to be 8k yet we are stuck with a framerate that was the lowest it could possibly be without looking bad to save money on very expensive film in the early 1900s. It's extremely hard to actually defend 24p since you're arguing against science, yet millions of people act like they can do it but nobody ever tries. Saying that it looks more natural doesn't cut it when all you have to do to disprove that is watch a sports game in 60 FPS.

@@awesomeferret I’m just going to say try making a 5 second stop motion animation at 60 fps or look up what actually goes into stop motion, and the reason its still used it it can make movement look unnatural or uncanny you can tell its off but you don’t know why, or its also used to make movement more abrupt or faster paced, the reason its still around is the simple when you think of having to draw every single frame by hand Like everything its a tool and you don’t always want smooth movement

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.

.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,.. 👍

Stop motion is a really impressive art form of giving weight behind a 6-inch figure

@@snowthelegowolf4230 and the gravity of how much time it took to get three seconds of footage, like the stop motion animation/claymation of James and the Giant Peach, just a couple seconds took weeks to get.

Normal cinema was (or is?) 24 fps, works fine. Some movies were shot at 60 fps. Although it should look better. It sometimes looks weird. Especially action scenes.

Agreed on that! The mind accepts that it's vfx and lets the filmmaking do the rest of the storytelling.

​@@shermano1aiI was thinking the same thing. The viewer's imagination is filling in the gaps, kind of like in cartoons with limited animation frames. It's an effect that works. Those same animations look less realistic when the movements are smoothed out with the method used here.

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.

I agree

Very true

Totally agreed

It also seems to add a bit more weight to it

It also helps the brain to separate the movie from reality, so you can get immersed more easily, it doesn't look like an actor on a set play fighting with a plastic toy.

Shop Smart.. Shop S MART. YOU GOT THAT!