Just like in the WwD boards: I am not asking which animal you liked best. I'm asking which CG or animatronic model was your favourite. Which looked, moved, the most lifelike? Which had the best skin pattern? Or which animatronic would you take home (if it was still intact, that is)? Or which one was the worst, in your opinion?
I liked the Ambulocetus, Andresarchus, Calicotherium, Entelodon, and Smilodon. As for the anamatronic to take home-probably Andresarchus because how realistic and freightening and large it was (to scale I think). Must of CGI was good (better than WWD) I can't really think of the best CGI model used.
Best CGI: Embolotherium and Paraceratherium. They looked incredibly lifelike for some reason, with a distinct elephant/rhino-like hide.
Worst CGI: Formicium giganteum. Gotta cut them some slack, though- arthropods are a bitch to get right in CGI. Other than that I think Gastornis, Doedicurus and Hyaenodon looked a bit too CGI in some shots. Really interesting creatures, though.
Best animatronic: Ambulocetus.
Worst animatronic: Smilodon. This was the only time something in the series actually looked downright fake; in one shot Halftooth's tongue looked like red plastic. The Andrewsarchus looked a bit clumsy, probably because the head was so big and heavy to operate. I also didn't really like the mammoths, and the Australopithecus were too inexpressive.
Take home: the Phorusrhacos head. These birds rule.
Yeah those 3 creatures did look a little too computer-generated but at other times they looked very realistic. As for the Andrewsarchus I didn't think it was clumsy. The Australopithecus did look a little inexpressive.
Worst animatronic: Smilodon. This was the only time something in the series actually looked downright fake; in one shot Halftooth's tongue looked like red plastic
Yeah, you're totally right on that. It bothered me too. And not only his tongue, but his skin on his face looked too "solid" like it was made of hard plastic. This is the problem with the Gastornis too. Its face just looked too... solid.
As for the best animatronic, I'd also say Ambulocetus. It looked and even moved lifelike. The Andrewsarchus looked good too. But there was one tiny thing that bugged me about it. The problem here, thought, was not with the animatronic model, but the fact that you didn't see the shadow of the whole animal in some shots, only the head's shadow. This can be best seen (or not seen) in the book, when the animal is eating the turtle. You see the shadow of the head but not that of the torso... and one thing, you see a part of the puppeteer's shoe. Oh, and I guess the turtle model wasn't so good either. Its shell bended like it was made of rubber. Same with the dead Embolotheruim baby. It looked an awful lot like rubber.
I still can't decide which CG model was the best, though. But that Indricothere one did look good. And there is one shot in which the mammoths looked so real. Very real.
As for the worst: in some shots, the Basilosaurus looked too much like being CG. Like it was in some sort of video game. But there are more like this, for example those Megaloceros' didn't look so authentic - mostly because the antlers kept passing through eachother.
reply share
Hey, did anybody see the sea scorpion in the first episode of "Chased by Sea Monsters"? That was so life-like i could have had it for dinner....yeah i love sea food!!! :-)
Having re-watched this for the bajillionth time, I'm inclined to add Australopithecus to the list of less-successful CGI critters. I think they're only about a handful of shots where they didn't look blatantly like computer effects. It didn't help that they barely even resembled their animatronic counterparts, which also deserve a mention for being so utterly stiff.
Not that the people-in-suits versions seen in Walking with Cavemen are any better.