And it's not exactly difficult to set up the proportions more or less properly, it's really a very basic mock-up mesh there. As most are, in fact.
Mostly what an0n said. I've done stuff on software that was new back in the Win95 days that looks indistinguishable from stuff done now (or better, in at least one case. Procedural-tex sphere RDS starscapes kick any modern plugin's ass any time of the week). A lot less is manual now, and that's a good thing, but that's almost all that's changed. Radiosity, bones, particles- all of these can be broken down to very simple things that can actually be done, or at least faked convincingly, on any rig, provided you have the time. There is no "new technology" in 3D, just making the old technology simpler from the production end of things. But since us 3D modeler types are nothing if not bone idle, it'd be hard to know that just looking at the results you can see.
Incidentially, it's also not hard to set up a model such as this for realistic animation- even without the shortcut of motion-capture tech. Hell, you can see all the components of what would be necessary right now, they just have never really been put together. The reason you don't see it often has a lot more to do with the way pro animation houses like ILM and the like price-gouge than any serious technical problems- if you're a movie studio, you do not want to ask for anything that'll take 'em more than maybe a coupla days to do, you'll lose almost your entire profit. Those guys are disgusting, the way they rip people off. I so want to be like them.
Also, it'll never be used for simulating actors, for the simple reason that actors, like any red-blooded American, are lawsuit-happy to the point of the ridiculous. If "Spike TV" can be successfully sued for copyright infringement on Spike Lee's name, imagine what'd happen with unauthorized use of someone's face.
