184 replies to this topic

[tharpdevenport]

The hover bike chase from Star Wars: Return of the Jedi" -- didn't look all that great when it was in theaters, still doesn't look good.

Some are :okay", while others scenes are worse. Still, it was epic for it's time.

As much as I love "Star Trek: Generations", the saucer and planet it's heading down to, still look fake. And some of the close ups during the crashing, make it obvious it's a big prop.

And in "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan", the way people disentigrate from a "kill" setting on the phasers, still looks a little fake. Miles better than in TOS. And certainlky, even though over a decade earlier, better than some of the early TNG scenes where people would litterally come to a stand still, and have this unnatural disappearance. At least in TWoK and TSFS (the only two Trek films I can think of that had moving people disentergrating) they were in motion when it, as it would be in real life situations.

Some of those shots in the Earth's air of the Bird of Prey, in "Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home" look fake.


As cool as it was, and still is, the T-1000 from "Terminator 2" in liquid morphing form still looks a little fake and computer generated.


The less said about the horrible, clay animation looking shark from "Jaws 3", the better. In fact, let's keep pretending the film never existed. Come to think of it, I can't name a single bad special effects shot in the first film. Another reason it's near perfection.

[Drax]

Independence Day has mostly phenomenal special effects that wowed audiences at the time and still hold up today. However, there are a few shots that are remarkably dated now, particularly during the city destruction sequence where some of the shots of people running from the fireball look composited in simply because of the low angle they're shot from. These days, there'd be much better integration. Otherwise, I can't tell what's practical or computer generated most of the time, which showed dedicated craftsmanship from the filmmakers with the technology they had.

[Koray Savas]

The Fifth Element was way ahead of its time. The CGI there holds up better than Jurassic Park.

[Drax]

The Fifth Element was way ahead of its time. The CGI there holds up better than Jurassic Park.

Agreed. I don't care much for the film, but it's visually arresting.

[Koray Savas]

Serra was a huge part of my childhood with this and Goldeneye. I'm there with ya.

As for the hover cars, I think that's where it stands up most. Those things look real. The film's slightly dated with some of the exterior ship shots. Then there's some tiny CGI manipulation with the warriors, but everything else is more or less costumes and make-up. Those are probably even more impressive.

[Charlie Brigden]

I hate the film, but I agree the effects are good, the CG in particular.

THE ABYSS falters a bit at the end, but the miniature work and the pseudopod are still incredible, more so than T2 I think.

[Chaac]

The Abyss has got beautiful fx. Wonderful film as well.

[Quint]

It's a cracking good movie. Just a shame it's about thirty mins too long.

[Stefancos]

This thread is not about what film has bad effects!

[Josh500]

Jurassic Park! The Dino's still look great. But the computer Lex uses near the end on the film uses an OS that now looks clumsy and silly.

Agreed!

Funny that Jurassic Park was mentioned - I was only thinking the other day about how well it's ageing. Why? Because I've been watching Twin Peaks recently and just about everything about that production in terribly dated - from clothes fashions, to hairstyles - it's all so nineties. At first it I found it really distracting, until I settled into and accepted the charm it actually added. That show ran from '90-'91. Jurassic Park came along a mere two years later, but you wouldn't know it.

JP's wardrobe and hairstyles are completely era-neutral. There is nothing in the film which tells you it was made in 1993 apart from a few shots of old computer hardware. Everything else (including the special effects) have held up extremely well, which is an overlooked quality the film has, in my mind, and I absolutely believe that these things were by Spielberg's design.

Jurassic Park may well become every bit the timeless adventure for the ages, as did Raiders before it.

Agreed!

While I agree that the animatronic dinos and the characters themselves don't look dated at all, the CGI dinos look pretty bad to me. The scene when Grant and friends first see a dinosaur almost looks like a modern day computer game. However, when it comes to the animatronics I'm not sure I've ever seen such a compelling SFX creature. It's even better than the 2005 King Kong dinosaurs.

I think you are spending way too many hours playing computer games!

[Ricard]

Thread cleaned and reopened. Please stay on topic.

[Stefancos]

Were there any film prior to Kubrick's 2001 that showed space ships and space travel in a way that it still looks somewhat good or believable today?

[Chaac]

No that I know of. There might some long forgotten Soviet or Eastern European production that could qualify, but I'd have to see them.

[Ricard]

The hover bike chase from Star Wars: Return of the Jedi" -- didn't look all that great when it was in theaters, still doesn't look good.

That scene looked AMAZING when it was first released in theaters. And that's not only my opinion, it was the general consensus at that time. Too bad there are so many things that the internet can't prove. I would provide scans of Starlog issues of the era if I had the time.

[Jason LeBlanc]

I always thought the speeder bike chase looked great

The worst special effects in the OT are certain shots of the snowspeeder and rancor scenes where the matting wasn't done right, the emperor's slugs, and jabba the hutt.

All the model work is great, especially ROTJ

Something I thought looked fine as a kid but recently though looked dated was the Dagobah sets - to me now they look so obviously shot on a sound stage

[E.T. & Elliott]

I think it always looked awesome, too. Consider how that scene was photographed and assembled at the time, then consider how it would be done these days. Strike that, don't think of such things.

[Koray Savas]

These days it would look like the jungle chase.

[indy4]

Something I thought looked fine as a kid but recently though looked dated was the Dagobah sets - to me now they look so obviously shot on a sound stage

I like it when these larger than life slightly cheesy epics look like they were shot on an artificial set. I dunno why. Makes it seem like an opera. I love the sets on Hook for this reason.

[E.T. & Elliott]

I think the issue you have with Dagobah may be due to visual alterations. It's brighter and more colorful now, which would probably bring out the more soundstagey artificial appearance? It used to look great.

[Jason LeBlanc]

I think the issue you have with Dagobah may be due to visual alterations. It's brighter and more colorful now, which would probably bring out the more soundstagey artificial appearance? It used to look great.

OMG you're probably right!

[Wojo]

Do you think people in 1933 thought that King Kong looked the most awesomely real thing they had ever seen? Or did it look like a stop motion toy?

Going back to The Last Crusade, I always noticed how you could kinda see the effect of Colonel Vogel waving his hand at the giant screen as the zeppelin took off.

[indy4]

Do you think people in 1933 thought that King Kong looked the most awesomely real thing they had ever seen? Or did it look like a stop motion toy?

Probably both. You can admit that an effect is the most realistic one so far whilst still being able to tell it's fake.

[Datameister]

TOD and TLC both have their fair share of horrible VFX, particularly TLC. Fortunately, they've also got some real gems (e.g., the mine car chase and Donovan's death). Raiders is a little less polarized...there aren't many shots that look really bad or really good, probably because the film was less ambitious with its visual effects. Probably the most convincing, un-dated visual effect in that film is the death of Dietrich, which is delightfully gruesome and very convincing.

EDIT: I saw a bit of LOTR on TV the other day, and some of the shots of Gollum were looking much more dated than I expected. Some of the shots are great, but others (especially full-body shots) really looked very much like early-2000s mocap CGI.

[KK.]

EDIT: I saw a bit of LOTR on TV the other day, and some of the shots of Gollum were looking much more dated than I expected. Some of the shots are great, but others (especially full-body shots) really looked very much like early-2000s mocap CGI.

Gollum in FOTR certainly has quite an outdated look to him. But Gollum in the other two films still continue to blow me away and impress. That is some fine motion capture work!

[Quint]

It's been a little while but I reckon if I watched the hover bike chase in RotJ I'd still be pretty impressed.

[Stefancos]

Always looked great to me.

[Sandor]

The problem with the speeder bike chase is the matte-lines, the same problem that plagued that Rancor. Even in 1983 matte-lines were destracting and 'that looks fake!' has been a common reaction, much like people react to mediocre CGI effects these days (Sound Of Thunder anyone?).



That said; the speeder bike chase has always been a brilliantly staged sequence and got a positive response nonetheless.

[Stefancos]

That pic shows no matte lines

[Alexcremers]

Trees! In Star Wars! Trees!


And those horrible anti-Star Wars green camouflage costumes! There's just way too many familiar Earth references.

[Sandor]

That pic shows no matte lines

It's obviously a blue-screen created effect, but the pic was more of a reminder of how great the sequence is staged.

[Quint]

Trees! In Star Wars! Trees!
There's just way too many familiar Earth references.

Problem?

[Sandor]

Trees! In Star Wars! Trees!
There's just way too many familiar Earth references.

Problem?

Yeah, familiar surroundings like forests, deserts, ice, etc. made the original Star Wars films great. It used the reality we know, tweaked it a bit, and that made the Star Wars universe believable and real.

The total CGI enviroments - including digital trees - of the prequels sadly did the exact opposite.

Trees are part of the essence of what made the original films work in the first place. Funny that out of all people, Alex doesn't see that...

[Quint]

Indeed. The shots of Artoo and 3PO in the desert are iconic.

[Stefancos]

Be carefull Alex. Ricard loves ROTJ and considers it the best of the Star Wars Films...

[Wojo]

Trees! In Star Wars! Trees!


And those horrible anti-Star Wars green camouflage costumes! There's just way too many familiar Earth references.

Star Wars has had trees since day one.

Endor speeder bike chase minus trees = Tatooine podracing

[Quint]

I'm in the camp that says RotJ was a rousing and thoroughly satisfying finale to a splendid adventure trilogy. If I'd saw it back in '83 I'd have left the theatre with a great big grin on my face.

[Ricard]

Be carefull Alex. Ricard loves ROTJ and considers it the best of the Star Wars Films...

C'mon Stefan

[Wojo]

Camp? Let's make s'mores.

[Ricard]

I'm in the camp that says RotJ was a rousing and thoroughly satisfying finale to a splendid adventure trilogy. If I'd saw it back in '83 I'd have left the theatre with a great big grin on my face.

Yes

[Stefancos]

It's great entertainment!