.webp)
The Uncanny Valley...
It’s not a specific place, but you definitely wouldn’t want to hang out there.
So what is it, and why is it so bad? And why does that matter so much to animators and artists? Is it really that big of a deal?
In this blog, we’re going to explore this phenomenon, try to figure it out, and understand what to do– or rather, what not to do– when we visually depict characters.
To start with, this phenomenon is hard to define.
But basically, it refers to an unpleasant emotional reaction to seeing a human-like face that looks almost human, but not quite.
Have you ever seen a lifelike Victorian doll, with its dead haunting eyes, and felt creeped out?
Or watched certain CGI Uncanny Valley animated movies where the characters are rendered in technically very realistic styles, but there was just something about it that put you off?
That’s the Uncanny Valley effect.
In 1970, brilliant Japanese robotics professor Masahiro Mori coined the phrase when he published the eponymous article (titled 不気味の谷 in Energy), where he explained that as robots advanced and became increasingly humanlike in appearance, they look increasingly familiar and charming– right up until a point is reached when suddenly, their lifelike appearance looks eerie and triggers feelings of uneasiness and even revulsion (source).
It’s often represented by this graph
A graphical interpretation of The Uncanny Valley by Wikipedia user Smurrayinchester, based on Masahiro Mori’s studies (Source)
A variant of this graph sheds more light on what it’s talking about:
The most common examples are found in bad CGI, in uncanny valley animation– specifically in characters that are very close to realistic, but somehow faill to convince you that they’re really human.
But it might surprise you to learn that this unpleasant phenomenon isn’t limited to 3D animation video, or even to humanoid faces exclusively, as we’ll explore in this blog.
If you’re still not sure what we’re talking about, all will become clear when you consider the following examples of uncanny valley animation in movies and TV:
The Polar Express, along with Cats (2019), is probably the most famous example of this phenomenon with the general public.
It’s important to understand that it wasn’t that the early CGI animation was bad; it was actually cutting-edge and technically brilliant in execution.
The production used techniques that were way ahead of their time, like motion capture of live actors that was then transposed to virtual CGI characters, with incredible detail and lifelike proportions.
Even the physics was solidly thought out and executed, and the story itself was helmed by Hollywood giant Robert Zemeckis with a generous $170 million budget and starred Tom Hanks.
So what went wrong?
While the movie was broadly well-received, a common criticism was the “zombie-like stares” and “dead, lifeless eyes” of the characters, despite its hyper-realistic visuals.
Or rather, because of its hyper-realistic visuals. And therein lies a clue.
Bonus fact: The “dead, lifeless eyes” is the primary complaint among people who experience this phenomenon.
You probably haven’t heard of Pixar’s early short film Tin Toy, but it makes this list because it was the first time that major animation studios realized that this strange effect was a real thing to worry about (source).
Test audiences loved the animation, but said the baby character was “creepy” and off-putting.
This CGI-rendered feature film triggered this unwanted reaction in audiences not because the CGI was bad (it was brilliant, and holds up even today), but specifically because it was a little too realistic.
Even though it was a movie based on a video game franchise, it still felt too much like watching a video game rather than a real movie– and to be clear, this was not in a good way.
Another movie you probably haven’t heard of, because it was a tremendous flop.
Again, the animation wasn’t terrible, as such. It was fluid, detailed, and colorful– but the human characters fell into that valley of uncanny, where being too detailed and lifelike and realistic made for a horrific experience. Once again, motion capture with live actors was involved.
It didn’t help that the story was a hot mess of lackluster cliches and tropes delivered through almost non-existent storytelling, making it one of Disney’s biggest flops; and indeed, the fourth-largest box office failure in movie history (source).
Bizarrely, the most famous recent example of this effect doesn’t even have people in it– rather, anthropomorphized cats with human features, with the 2019 cinematic disaster Cats.
There’s no dearth of reasons why it failed– But one of the most commonly cited reasons involves the Uncanny Valley effect:
To the studio’s credit, when early test screenings horrified audiences, they scrambled to try and fix the CGI.
But it made very little difference, and Cats goes down in history as one of the worst big-budget flops of all time– and largely (although not exclusively) because of this effect.
Everyone loves to see beloved comic book characters from their childhood brought to stunning life on the big screen.
And while hand-drawn animation was the way to go for many decades, the advent of 3D animation ushered in a whole new world.
But this wasn’t without its struggles. When TinTin was resurrected for the silver screen, the studio went all-out bringing cartoonist Herge’s lush world to cinematic life.
However, this proved to be another example of sliding too far down the spectrum from “stylized art” to “realistic graphics” and falling into this unpleasant experience we’re talking about.
Again, the CGI wasn’t bad, per se– it was actually really good. But it dropped into that death zone of “very realistic” plus “very stylized” that just doesn’t work visually.
With the advent of AI-generated art, anyone can create art by simply typing in the right prompts.
And while this has been great for lowering the barriers for those who want to be creative, it has led to some bizarre results that have come to define AI-generated visuals.
And notably, all of those complaints can be considered “things that define the uncanny valley phenomenon:
Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson was blended into a terrifying scorpion monster in 2001’s The Mummy Returns, leading to one of the earliest and most memorable examples of Uncanny Valley.
Rather than a terrifying part-human part-monster chimera, it looks like a scorpion poorly puppeteering a plastic animatronic mannequin.
Why doesn’t it work? You could ask a hundred people and get a hundred different answers. But the simple fact is, it just didn’t work.
While the phenomenon we’re talking about isn’t the only thing to blame here, it’s one of the biggest factors at play in why this scene just looks off.
Even decades later, people have analyzed this scene, and even tried to fix it. For example, VFX geniuses Corridor Crew’s breakdown of the scene and attempts to fix it here:
When it comes to uncanny valley animation examples, this one’s hanging out near the top of the list.
Here are some dis-honorable mentions that almost make the list, but can be considered borderline exceptions for reasons explained:
Unlike the other entries on this list, I, Robot is a film that could have deliberately used this unpleasant effect in its favor.
Will Smith’s gruff cop character lives in a future world heavily populated by intelligent, but polite and harmless, robots that eerily mimic human beings.
He’s also intensely suspicious of them and openly hates these robots.
Critics derided the bizarre facial appearance of Sonny, the robotic character in question. Even for its time, the special effects were rather mixed.
It can be argued that perhaps this was done on purpose, to make the audience uncomfortable and suspicious of this robot.
But a nonsensical, incoherent plot and the confusing motivations of the lead character mean none of that mattered anyway.
The Lion King remake of 2019 is notable on this list because, unlike most of the other entries, this movie didn’t have people in it– or even badly humanoid / anthropomorphized characters like in the movie Cats.
All the characters were actually hyper-realistic lions and animals, no human features at all.
The visuals of very realistic animals that can talk and sing take your breath away– if only for the wrong reasons.
Similar to the Sonic the Hedgehog movie, this animated film serves as proof that this phenomenon can even affect entirely non-human characters, as strange as that sounds.
And now for some more positive entries.
Here are a few notable times when studios realized their production was veering into the uncanny valley effect and managed to steer the ship from disaster.
What can we learn from these? Let’s dive in.
Few people today know that the original character design of Princess Fiona in Shrek was so lifelike and realistic, that test audiences reacted with revulsion.
It just didn’t work visually– the hyperrealistic human rendered in CGI surrounded by fairytale cartoon characters.
So to fix this, the animators quickly changed her appearance at the last minute to look more cartoony, stylized, and less realistic.
And to their credit, it worked– there were no such complaints with the finished film, which went on to be a massive hit and spurned a franchise.
So here’s one story where this unpleasant phenomenon was avoided!
Similar to Shrek, here’s another notable exception to the entries on this list– a movie where the studio realized they lost their character to this horrific effect, heard the loud criticisms of fans after they saw early test footage– and surprisingly, actually listened.
Here’s what happened.
When the beloved video game character Sonic the Hedgehog was given its big-screen Hollywood CGI-soaked debut, test audiences balked at the early character design choices.
Narrowly avoiding disaster, the studio re-did the character and animation and managed to save Sonic and run fast into box office success.
But what’s interesting to note here, is that the character in question isn’t even human– proving that this effect can even happen with non-human / anthropomorphized animal characters just as easily.
So what went wrong?
And how did they fix it?
The lesson is clear: To avoid this kind of disaster, one surefire way is to go stylized rather than hyper-realistic.
So to sum up, this effect is something that can happen to any visual depiction of a character– whether rendered in CGI or real practical special effects.
Navigating your character design is like walking a creative tightrope—lean too far toward realism, and your character can become unsettling; stray too far into the artificial, and it risks losing emotional impact.
To create believable, engaging characters, animators and designers need to strike the right balance.
But how can you be sure you’re not creating an eerie creepy monstrosity as you work on your latest character? Here’s how:
By following these principles, animators and designers can create engaging, believable characters that connect with audiences—without creeping them out!
So to sum up: yes, the phenomenon is surprisingly hard to define, dealing more with psychology and neurology than animation and art.
Nevertheless, it’s something all artists, filmmakers, and VFX professionals need to watch out for.
And hopefully, this blog post has helped shed some light on this mystery, and given you some good pointers to keep in mind when burning the midnight oil to create your characters.
What do you think? Is there anything we missed? What has been your experience with this eerie phenomenon? Let us know in the comments below!
No Comments Yet
Let us know what you think