Because the owners of the cars keep them like that.
I will base my answer on three sources:
Barn Find Hunter series by Hagerty on Youtube. In on of the episodes Tom Cotter visits a collector who have acres of old cars. Because he lives close to LA he have a stash of that he take care of because he rent them. For movies, music videos, events. So I assume ...
In an interview with Collider, Jon Favreau said:
...we don’t do motion capture for performance, because we don’t want
to do it. We don’t want to put markers on animals, we don’t want to
involve live action, live animals in this. In Jungle Book, we didn’t
have to. I think that’s a nice next step for movies, is to leave the
The simple answer is no, it's not motion captured. But there is even confusion about it being considered live-action or animated for award nominations.
Disney’s upcoming Lion King adaptation has reached a slight hurdle. The film, a remake of the 1994 animated classic, is not exactly a “live-action” movie because all of its animals are ...
They clearly acted together...here's one example
Now, it's possible that some scenes (or coverage) were filmed using stand-ins. Morgan Freeman is not a young man and you don't necessarily need him to actually be in shot when all you are doing is actually shooting the back of his head.
Well, it's all CGI.
They used CG dots to create a fly. They tried for real flies, but they had to replace these with CG flies.
They researched about fly's movements, variations in speed and directions etc to make it easier to shot like a real fly.
From this interview with Mat Beck,
fxg: The fly that seems to terrorize Walt and ...
Because the sequences are edited. You may be watching an edit assembled from several takes and entire lines of dialogue may be omitted at the editing stage.
On some shoots, there may only be one camera. This means the scene has to be shot from one angle, performed multiple times, then the reverse shot set up, performed multiple times and an edit assembled, ...