GeeBax wrote on 8/31/2014, 6:33 PM
I've seen that clip before. Yes, I reckon it is all special effect, all his clips are based on similar styles.

Actually, I don't believe the clip comes from Russia, nor do I believe he is Russian or that the locale is Russian. Looks like Californian hills to me.
ushere wrote on 8/31/2014, 7:12 PM
there are just so many things wrong with the physics of the clip that it makes 'gravity' seem like a documentary...
johnmeyer wrote on 8/31/2014, 7:19 PM
What is a little scary to me, in reading the comments under the video, is that the majority of the people actually think it is real. Even those who seem skeptical don't seem to have enough conviction to state outright that what they just watched is an amazingly well-done (and very funny!) fake.

This is a great time to be a charlatan: people have never before been so gullible.

[edit]P.S. "there are just so many things wrong with the physics of the clip that it makes 'gravity' seem like a documentary..." +1 ... Great way to put it.
Birk Binnard wrote on 8/31/2014, 7:48 PM
Very clever....but...

1. The speaker is speaking American English with a Russian accent; real Russians don't talk like that
2. 4 rotors that size could not lift the device's total weight
3. No rotor wash when it flies through smoke
4, No effect of recoil (this is my favorite thing to look for)
5. No ejected shell casings (my second favorite)
6. No shadow when it flies into car
MTuggy wrote on 8/31/2014, 8:02 PM
Definitely a 3D animation. Take a look at the drone stand in the car segment - looks like its stuck on the video and the shadows are off by a few degrees when compared to his shadow on the ground. It was a lot of work to do this though, especially on the animation piece.
John_Cline wrote on 8/31/2014, 8:13 PM
"That's awesome, look at that guy's head rolling down the hill."

I don't find that the least bit funny.
Gary James wrote on 8/31/2014, 9:21 PM
Things DO blow up like that if they are treated with Tannerite. Tannerite is a binary explosive that is derived by mixing two perfectly safe and legal chemicals. Tannerite is used to make REACTIVE targets; targets that go boom when exposed to the extreme shock of a high velocity bullet.

richard-amirault wrote on 8/31/2014, 9:33 PM
Yes, but adding Tannerite (or placing explosives of any kind) in places that do not normally have them is (in the video sense) a special effect, not reality.

I've seen Tannerite on Nat Geo's Prepper show. You need a high speed round to ignite it. A 22 long rifle round will not work.

RE: recoil ... I was looking for that as well. I saw some recoil, but it did not seem to be enough.

This guy is from Georgia, USA and, yes, the accent is fake. Here is the Wikipedia page on him.
VMP wrote on 8/31/2014, 9:37 PM
The CGI is well composited indeed.

Watch the stand on the ground at mark 4:43, it's floating around due to the original footage not being consistent caused by the camera searching for focus.

Rory Cooper wrote on 9/1/2014, 1:50 AM
Watch the shadow of the quad copter from 2 54 – 2 58 the shadow of an object can’t move faster than the object especially in z space = toward the horizon because then the light source would be between those shadows the same distance away as the distance of the movement.

Even on some video footage of major historical events like on 911 the footage doesn’t look right like an airplane can’t fly into a building then crash on the inside of the building it will crash on the outside of the building.
Myself personally I find it impossible to focus on the emotional content of any video or film and the accuracy of the actual content at the SAME time. I have to switch the audio off and then watch the footage without any emotion to see if it is accurate to reality.
I find the emotional side always overrules your thinking side. as a video editor who edits every day for a living this hasn’t changed over the years.
I wonder do other editors find it the same?
Terje wrote on 9/1/2014, 3:19 PM
Looks like everything is fake. There is no way a quadcopter can withstand the recoil forces of a sub-machine gun like that. No way. It would have to be a lot heavier and have a lot more forward motion (and stability).

There is a (more than one of course) reason drones fire rockets (no recoil),