It’s been almost 20 years since the Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest hit theaters, and yet Davy Jones’s slimy, tentacled face still looks better than many modern CGI characters. Why? This is a question that many have asked us. Why does this character still look so good? Why modern characters don’t hold up even when technology clearly has advanced? Why?
And, indeed. Why does the captain of the Flying Dutchman still reign supreme in the world of CGI characters? The short answer seems to be a series of smart decisions stacked one on top of the other. Here are a few of them for you to think about for your next idea.
A CHARACTER THAT JUSTIFIES CGI
Davy Jones is a character that makes sense as a CGI creation. This is something CGY pointed out in their analysis and we completely agree. Jones’ design includes a beard of 46 tentacles, each moving independently, which would’ve been a nightmare to achieve with animatronics or prosthetics. And this wasn’t done just because it looks cool. Au contraire—it’s integral to the narrative. They play the organ, hide the key to the Dead Man’s Chest, kill people and even give important cues about how Jones feels.
Now compare that to other CGI-heavy characters like Azog from The Hobbit or even Thanos. Both have few unique traits beyond their height that require them to be CGI. After all, the Lord of the Rings (LOTR) franchise is known for its clever tricks to create the illusion of size. Techniques like forced perspective convinced us that hobbits and dwarves were smaller than humans—without relying on CGI. So, why not do the same with Azog? I mean, the Uruk-hai in the original trilogy were brought to life with makeup and they’re still fan favorites.
More often than not, for a main character like that, a blend of both make-up and CGI creates the perfect balance for selling the illusion to audiences. Though, we must admit, this also comes with its own challenges, as seen with the extensive enhancements needed for Red Skull in Captain America.
And this isn’t just about fully CG characters. Even replacing a limb, like a robotic arm, deserves the same scrutiny. Ask yourself: What does it bring to the narrative? Can the character do something extraordinary with it or does it add to the story thematically? In the end, if a feature isn’t inherently tied to CGI, like a tentacled beard with narrative importance, why go through all the trouble?
HALF-HUMAN, HALF-SEA MONSTER
Humans are wired to recognize imperfections in other humans. If a CGI character isn’t perfect, our brains pick up on it instantly. This is when you fall into the “uncanny valley”. In this case, Davy Jones’s design is great because it walks the line between human and sea creature.
His eyes, eyebrows and mouth remain human, allowing for nuanced expressions and it lets the audience connect with him. But a tentacled beard? We don’t know how it looks like in real life. Never seen one. So, we have no way to compare it to something else. This means it’s easier for us to accept it as a character that actually exists and is not digitally created. He's human enough to empathize with, alien enough to accept it as a “real” character.
MOTION CAPTURE AS A FOUNDATION
Motion capture (mocap) technology allowed Bill Nighy’s performance to shine through. Acting alongside his co-stars in a gray suit, Nighy delivered an emotional and quirky portrayal that animators used as the foundation for Davy Jones. But mocap isn’t a magic fix. The animation team still had to completely replace the actor with a fully CG character, as explained in Pirates of the Caribbean 2’s bonus feature, “Meet Davy Jones: Anatomy of a Legend”.
“We made the decision on this film to cast actors, to play the parts and they’re in the shots playing the characters, and we’re gonna put our CG versions on top of them”, Hall Hickel, ILM animation director.
To match Nighy’s performance, the animators created over 700 shapes in the CG face—from blinking eyes to raising cheeks. And that’s without factoring in the tentacles. Each one was simulated separately, with meticulous attention paid to how they moved, writhed and collided with one another. The goal was to ensure realism—they couldn’t pass through each other or behave like frictionless objects. Instead, the tentacles had to feel sticky, almost like pasta, with a subtle resistance in their motion.
Still, some tentacles had to be hand-animated for specific, “directable” shots—like the moment they reveal the key to the Dead Man’s Chest.
“And then the other part of it is, we’re trying to translate all of that onto a character that has an octopus on his face”, Geoff Campbell, digital model supervisor.
Did you know? They put makeup around Bill Nighy’s eyes just in case CGI couldn’t pull it off. Turns out, they didn’t need it—those eyes are 100% CG!THE SKIN DILEMMA
Skin is one of the toughest challenges for CGI artists. Why? Because real skin has subsurface scattering—light penetrates and bounces around beneath the surface, creating a soft, translucent effect. Think about how light shines through your ears or when you see a glow inside your mouth. It’s subtle, but in visual effects, it’s a nightmare to replicate. And in 2006, asking a computer to do this was like asking for a miracle. Fail to do this correctly and your character can look rubbery—and this applies to both CGI and prosthetics.
But ILM had more than one trick up their sleeve to overcome these challenges:
Little skin
Reflective surfaces
Lighting choices
BLENDING PRACTICAL EFFECTS AND CGI
Blending practical effects with CGI is always a smart move. Even if it’s not with the creature itself, it can be done with sets, costumes or other elements to create a more grounded visual experience. In Pirates of the Caribbean, practical effects played a crucial role in grounding the film’s visuals. Real ships, costumes and on-location environments gave the audience tangible elements to connect with.
Take Jurassic Park as another example. The T-Rex still holds up today because the filmmakers blended animatronics with CGI—yes, a decision more driven by the limitations of the era but one that turned out to be a sweet spot. For close-ups, they used an animatronic made by no others than Stan Winston, switching to CGI for full-body shots. Again, by giving viewers a “ground truth”—something real to anchor the illusion—the CGI felt more believable.
Now compare that to modern blockbusters where entire environments, characters and even suits are rendered digitally. While impressive, they can sometimes lack the authenticity that come from combining real and digital elements.
This is why we’re seeing more films return to using animatronics. It’s not because CGI has ruined movies, but because the blend of both worlds seems to truly sells the illusion.
FINAL THOUGHTS
All in all, Davy Jones’s success boils down to one thing: thoughtful choices. From his design to his integration with practical effects, every decision was made to serve the character and the story.
For filmmakers today, the lesson is clear: use the right tool for the job. CGI isn’t the answer to everything (and neither is AI). Today, as filmmakers, we have more tools than ever to craft the best illusions. But we have to learn how to use them wisely. So, choose the methods that serve your story, timeline, and budget. If in doubt, send us a probe!