Emraan Hashmi Quotes

When you take something that's inert, and through motion, give it life, make it appear to be alive, living, breathing thinking and having emotions, that's animation. But when you take something that's live-action, and move a part of it, that's a special effect.

3D is quite a lot more advanced in animated movies; for live-action movies we're just taking baby steps, we're just in the beginning.

If you need to do a movie where you have an army of 10,000 soldiers, that's a very difficult thing to shoot for real. It's very expensive, but as computer graphics techniques make that cheaper, it'll be more possible to make pictures on an epic scale, which we haven't really seen since the '50s and '60s.

The nature of motion capture is only going to work for certain films. It's not going to put any other type of movies out of business.

Obviously, CGI in the last ten years has gone through such leaps and bounds that today, people are looking for these kinds of movies to wow audiences with technology.

Polar Express is not an attempt to do animation. It is a technology-based film.

You've seen how they make movies like Star Wars and stuff. They're never really there. They're in front of a green screen just pretending to be jumping around.

I'm of a generation of director that came up understanding special effects.

I believe in 3D for certain kinds of films. I certainly believe in using 3D for all things in animation because animation has such clarity and so much depth of focus. It worked great with 'Avatar' because 70 percent of that film is animated.

I've done some effects shots. I've done some compositing. And in 'Just Like Heaven' did a lot of, like, motion control and things like that. But never done, like, computer-generated imagery in action.

Maybe 'Vicky Cristina Barcelona' didn't have a lot of visual effects in it, but most movies have some sort of visual effects.

Doing 3D on 'Hugo' was a big learning curve for me, but fun!

When I was younger, I was hopefully going to do animation and special effects.

I'd be really interested in making a dramatic, low key 3D film.

The learning curve is 'The Hobbit' is being shot in 3D.

I'm not a big fan of visual effects.

Clearly, if we'd had the kind of computer graphics capability then that we have now, the Star Gate sequence would be much more complex than flat planes of light and color.

It's quite amazing what 3D is doing to movies. Just simple things like a paper plane flying at you or flower petals fluttering about are wonderful.

Acting on a blue screen is awful.

I wouldn't want to do a whole movie with effects.

Special effects are characters. Special effects are essential elements. Just because you can't see them doesn't mean they aren't there.

But I do believe that there's going to be a time where all movies are going to be made in 3D and it's just going to be a given, and that is going to be an exciting time.

Critics in particular treat CGI as a virus that's infecting film.

If you imagine yourself as a craftsman at ILM, you spend your days tumbling buses and animating shards of glass. You're doing a lot of visual effects work.

I did what we call dry for wet effects, some of the miniatures work and two animation sequences.