My recent favorite was "The 300". Is it that style of photography?
No, but my GF thought it would have been a better overall result if it has been. I can see the point -- while the interiors were lit really well, the outdoor scenes needed some help
I saw one odd Imax 3D glitch; in one shot, Beowulf's cloak seems to push back *into* the stone floor he's lying on. There were also some story goofs, including the buildup of the rival character played by John Malkovich -- only to waste him without point.
Beyond that, the CGI was breathtaking, especially the body hair -- even that little hint of peach fuzz on the end of the king's nose was perfect.
As for the "uncanny valley"*, the faces still aren't quite there -- the "Polar Express" effect is still in full force (though at least in Beowulf, everybody doesn't look like they are healing up from two black eyes). don't work -- but from the neck down, I was completely buying the realism.
* -- The "
uncanny valley" is the strange effect where people can be comfortable with artificial characters (robots or CGI animated) that look cartoony -- but as they become more realistic, there comes a point where we stop looking at them as "animated characters" and instead look at them as actual people -- at which point small flaws suddenly become huge. Because humans are so attuned to faces, we naturally exaggerate flaws on what we take to be a human face -- but can easily tolerate and even expect them when we look at it as a stylization (cartoon or caricature) of a face instead of a real one.
