Fair enough, I agree with the sentiment, especially about the lighting, colour grading, shots and similar details that form the overall "feel" of the movie.
With my comment I was referring to some things that end up being indistinguishable even if insane number of hours were put into it being photorealistic. For example, take a shot where background is heavily blurred. Maybe those assets took a lot to render, compute, used fancy hair simulations and had a lot of details, but they were very far in the distance and camera choice made them indistinguishable from a static background. This is what I am wondering - where is the balance of not doing things that are bound to not be noticed by anyone.
With my comment I was referring to some things that end up being indistinguishable even if insane number of hours were put into it being photorealistic. For example, take a shot where background is heavily blurred. Maybe those assets took a lot to render, compute, used fancy hair simulations and had a lot of details, but they were very far in the distance and camera choice made them indistinguishable from a static background. This is what I am wondering - where is the balance of not doing things that are bound to not be noticed by anyone.